and head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> coming up on "washington journal," the history and current state of u.s.-china relations with author and editor of foreign affairs daniel kurtz-phelan. and new information about the origins of the covid-19 virus and the possibility that it started with a leak at a chinese facility, talk with independent reporter jimmy tobias. "washington journal" starts now. ♪ host: good morning. it is monday, march 13, 2023. three hours of "washington journal" ahead for you this morning. we kick off a weeklong series on china's growing geopolitical

influence in the world. we will begin with a question on president biden's handling on china. let us know if you approve or disapprove of the way the biden administration has responded to the various challenges from a rising china. if you approve, democrats, (202) 748-8000. if you disapprove, (202) 748-8001. send us a text this morning, (202) 748-8003. you can catch up with us on social media. twitter, @cspanwj. and on facebook. a very good monday morning to you. you can start calling in now. it is a question of the biden administration's handling of china. here is a clip from last week, a hearing on worldwide threats that america is facing. it was the director of national intelligence who was asked about the threats posed by china to

the united states. [video clip] >> people's republic of china increasingly challenging the u.s. economically, technologically, politically, and militarily, remains our unparalleled priority. chinese communist party under president xi jinping will continue levers to achieve xi's vision of making china a major power on the world stage. the ccp is convinced it can only fulfill xi's vision at the expense of u.s. power and influence, and it will use all government tools to get neighbors to acquiesce to preferences. last october, president xi secured his third five-year term as china's leader of the party congress, and as we meet today, chinese national legislature is in session formally appointing xi and confirming his choice to

lead the prc's state council and leaders of military legislative and judicial branches. after decades of serving, he controls key leverage of power, significant influence over issues. he has surrounded himself with like-minded loyalists at the apex of the party standing committee. the highest decision-making body. during his third term, they will put together an attempt to press taiwan on unification, undercut u.s. influence which they perceive as a threat, drive wedges between washington and its allies and partners. you may have seen xi's recent criticism during his speech on monday is what he referred to as america's suppression of china, showing his long-standing disgust of u.s. goals and the belief that the u.s. wants to contain china.

he speaks with direct criticism, more than we have seen to his date, showing growing presses and some -- pessimism about the worries about the trajectory of china's economic elements and indigenous technology and innovations, challenges he plans on the united states. he wants to message his populace and regional actors that the u.s. bears responsibility for any coming increase in tensions, despite public and directly getting political rhetoric, we prevent a spiraling of tensions and preserve stability in the relationship with the united states. host: that from thursday on capitol hill, a house hearing on the worldwide threats facing the united states, director of national intelligence there talking about xi jinping's gaining his third term as president. that is news from last week.

three ways it played out, one from a domestic and american news source, one international, and then a chinese news source. this is the headline from cnbc last week, xi gains unprecedented third term as president thomas saying he consolidated his control of the ruling party by filling the highest circle of leadership with his loyalists. al jazeera, international news versn on this story, xi bows -- vows to protect china economically and its security, the most powerful presence since mao zedong, saying economy and security are indivisible. we will take you to china daily, the english language version of the newspaper owned by the chinese communist party and by their propaganda ministry, one of the headlines, the rest of

the globe looks to china for growth and stability, up from there to the lead story at the top of the page, new leadership navigates nation on the right course and advisors to pool their wisdom for national rejuvenation, sub headline, senior officials have strong expertise, rich experience at the local level according to analysts at the china daily. one more headline from the china daily, they did an entire half page on highlights of foreign congratulations, messages xi received on his election as chinese president. we will show you more of that, but we want to hear from you this morning. our question as we open what will be a weeklong discussion about china in our 8:00 a.m. our segment each day this week, from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., focusing on china. the question we start with this morning, we want to know what you think of the biden

administration's handling of china. if you approve, it is (202) 748-8000. if you disapprove, it is (202) 748-8001. the associated press asking this question among a series of questions of approval and disapproval ratings when it comes to president biden. 58% from a poll on february 16 through 20, 50 8% disapprove, tied with 58% who disapprove of the way president biden is handling immigration, higher than the 51% overall who disapprove of the way he handles foreign policy in general. that is from the associated press poll from last month. we want to hear from you. phone lines are open. approval, disapproval, whatever you want to choose. you can also text (202) 748-8003 .

we will begin with jackie in virginia. good morning. your thoughts on how the biden administration is handling the u.s. relationship with china? caller: what do you mean handling? he is profiting. host: so you called in on the disapprove line? caller: i did. host: what specifically are you concerned about? is there a specific incident you want to talk about? caller: no, it is just in general. i think everybody can see that he is profiting. he is not handling. he is worsening. host: ok, that is jackie in virginia. this is rod in indiana. good morning. caller: good morning, john. host: go ahead, sir. caller: yeah, i disapprove, but i disapprove most things of the ndaa administration of the biden

administration. -- i disapprove of most things from the biden administration. but he is being controlled pretty much, and china has roots so deep in this country. the other thing, a lot of that is due to c-span, the farmland that china has. with the united states. what is going on for the most part, all we can do is just toe for the best. just got off work about half an hour ago, just go to work and keep plugging away and hope for the best. host: where do you work overnight? what kind of work do you do overnight? caller: i am a machinist. host: what do you make? caller: car parts.

mainly, i work making parts for transmissions for cars and trucks. host: when it comes to car parts and where we get our supplies for car parts or machinery in general -- caller: yes, a great amount of that comes from china. i mean, oddly enough, even a lot of junk steel will come from china. things like bearings they go in your real -- wheel. a barge full of bearings coming over. is first manufactured parts, china has a lot of companies in this country, too. just things like a company not too far away from me that makes the automobile windshields. write down from where i live, i have a paper company that a lot

of people don't know about. host: you said a lot of people don't know about the paper company, but do you think the threat of the dependence on china for supply chain and for these raw materials, do you think that is at least being recognized these days? caller: sure. i think everyone realizes it, especially people who work in manufacturing at all. you have a economy -- dichotomy now. you see a lot of the talking heads that have never really worked a manual labor job. a lot of these people that went through college and never even worked a job in a restaurant or babysitting or anything like that, and that is what is really sad. the backbone of this country as the men and women that get up every day or night, go to work

to keep making everything that keeps the world going. we're the ones that get the shaft because we are paying our taxes and we see all the people that are taking more and more money out of the system, constantly. and then you have got this administration here that, one of their big focuses is put more and more money into the oddball programs, the stuff that the average person that gets up every day and goes to work just shakes their head. but what can you do? i mean, the united states is still the greatest country to wake up in. no matter how bad it gets, i am waking up in the united states of america. host: thanks for the call from indiana, thanks for calling us after working overnight. this is holly in warren, michigan, on the line for those

who say they approve of the way the biden administration has handled its relationship with china. host: hello. host: go ahead. caller: hi, i wish people would realize this is not a political situation that we are in. we are in a global situation. this is a new world order, and bill gates is behind it, george soros. how come nobody ever talks about these kind of issues? host: a giant worldwide conspiracy theory, holly? that is what you want to talk about? caller: no, it is not a conspiracy theory. if you look up a lot of what is going on, this is a global agenda. it is a great reset. charles schwab has written a great book about it, pretty much a playbook from since this has all started, and he is following display. just like agenda 21.

host: right, that is holly in wish again -- in michigan. this is paulette in winston-salem, north carolina. go ahead. caller: hello. i disapprove of biden's job between china and the u.s. i am really disappointed in the way he is handling everything with them, everything from china making drugs, sending them through mexico to our young people, young, old. laced with fentanyl, and it is killing off our americans. and he is doing nothing about it . and with the crisis at the

border, that should not be. also, them purchasing our land near our military bases. this is a crying shame. they -- this should never be allowed to happen. host: this is fred from facebook this money, asking, is the biden administration handling china or is china handling the biden administration? darren says disapprove, the administration lacks the diplomatic prowess to broker peace deals. following thabraham accords, the important see of this foreign-policy policy has led to the afghanistan debacle and russian invasion of ukraine. joe biden's presidency will be written in the annals of time as perhaps a worse foreign policy regime in history. this one says many will try to pose as china experts in this matter. our current foreign policy, the

view from 40,000 feet, we have a leader with 50 plus years experience in foreign affairs and you can trustee is acting on our behalf rather than his personal behalf -- you can trust he is acting on our behalf rather than his personal behalf. another call. good morning. caller: yes, here's the deal. i approve of the way joe biden is handling stuff, because if you remember, when that iraqi war started, george bush -- i mean, bush went over and borrowed money for us to go over to iraq to fight. we did not have the money. now i don't know if we ever paid china back or what. but biden is trying to straighten up stuff with trump, the must trump made in there, bush made in there. we did not have a dime to go over and fight iraq. and if it wasn't for china

giving us the money to go over and fight, we supposed to get the money back from the iraqi oil situation. i do not know what happened to the money that iraq paid us back for the oil, but we owe china too much money to argue with them. just like human beings, when you borrow money, you got to pay it back. and we have not paid china back yet. host: that was bill in west virginia. one of the folks rode in on facebook made reference to the deal between iran and saudi arabia that was brokered by china, the hill newspaper with a story on that, an agreement struck by iran and saudi arabia friday to reestablish relations, shifting concerns back to the state of the u.s. role in the middle east, especially since the deal was brokered by washington's made adversary, china. there were four days of talks

with security officials in beijing, easing tensions between middle is powers after seven years of hostilities. both iran and saudi arabia announced they will resume their diplomatic relations and open up emphases once again in the respective nations within two months, according to that joint statement and china playing a key role in brokering that deal. a call from indiana was talking about the supply chain issues, raw material coming from china, the worldwide threat hearing last week held both in the house and the senate, more from that hearing with senator angus king, the independent from maine who was talking to the director of national intelligence admiral haynes about the supply chain issue. [video clip] >> china is on track to control 625% of the lithium-ion battery market -- 65% of the lithium-ion

battery market, pharmaceutical ingredients, and their global share across all manufacturing of solar panels is 80%, turning to 90%. this is important information for us in terms of informing us about the dangers dependency we have developed in a lot of areas. semiconductors is one we have talked about. but it suggests to me that this issue of dependency is something that really has to have some serious policy examination. would you concur? >> yes, absolutely. i think one of the things we're really trying to expose here is the fact that it is not just simply about china trying to create indigenous supply chains but to actually control world supply chains. >> that seems to be an elaborate policy, does it not? >> exactly. >> also about actions in africa and south america where they are trying to corner the market on various commodities. >> you can see it not only in

their decisions about what they are purchasing and how they are managing it, but also the laws that they pass they give them the capability, for example, in real-world elements to turn the dial on their export/import policy so they can create that pressure. >> do you think we learn from your its dependency on russian gas, that this is a similar thing we need to address as a matter policy? host: senator angus king and director of national intelligence avril haines. we are talking about the biden administration's handling of china. if you approve, (202) 748-8000. if you disapprove (202) , 748-8001. more news on the international front when it comes to china's relations with other countries, this exclusive from reuters today. chinese president xi jinping lance to travel to russia to meet the vladimir putin as soon as next week -- plans to travel

to russia to meet with vladimir putin as soon as next week. this comes as china has been offering to broker a peace deal in ukraine, and effort met with skepticism in the west given beijing cost diplomatic support for russia. the regime visit had been agreed to but the kremlin chief gave no date for the visit. wall street journal reported last month that the visit to moscow will come in april or early may, but now seems like it could come as soon as next week. when it comes to china and russian relationships, the editorial board of the washington post today on the issue of china possibly sending arms to russia, calling it beijing's long-term interests depending on the west. here is how they end that editorial, moscow's disasters unprovoked division has exposed mr. putin's regime for what it is, to radical, correct -- corrupt, bogged down in a were

within adversity with one third of its population and a 10th of its domestic product. did mr. xi imagine mr. putin would be a fermentable counterweight to the united states? russia has become an albatross to china, doubling down by arming the kremlin's in up forces would only taint china standing in the world. back to your phone calls. approve or disapprove of the biden administration's handling of china? a call from maryland, good morning. caller: yes, hello. you agree with almost everything that joe biden is doing. he is building us up. you know, he has built nato up. i am comparing it, i worked 30 years done at bethlehem steel. i remember when ronald reagan negotiated with the japanese,

you know, with japanese steel. we wanted ronald reagan to invoke tariffs on the japanese so we could keep our jobs here in the united states, but he went along with the japanese and a lot of americans that laid-off. ronald reagan, he had 3 million or 4 million immigrants coming into the country, he just said they were legal. but don't nobody bring up all this stuff. but joe biden is doing an excellent job with china. he is not getting us into any trouble with china. richard nixon did deals with china. everybody did deals with china. china holds the world's economy in their hands. and we are second. he is doing a -- a good job. host: how do you think that issue will be remembered?

the spy balloon issue? caller: there was general jack king on another show that said we had spy balloons with drought -- when donald trump was in office. but she tried to whitewash it, and general told her, don't whitewash this, because donald trump, they did not say anything when donald trump had balloons flying into this country. so he shot down a balloon, what is a balloon? he protected us. donald trump did not protect us from the virus. donald trump led 6 million people die. he said to let people inject themselves with bleach, and nobody said anything about it. host: in california, henry is up early, modesto, california. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: there is a lot of history here that people need to realize and they need to stop

fighting against each other here in this country, because this is a very major situation that we are in with china. china is intentionally doing a lot of major, major moves in central america, south america, and with russia and all these things here and we have to definitely be grateful that we have president biden right now because of the experience he has. it will be slow going. as americans, we need to get ourselves back together and pull our heads out of you know what, because this stuff is going to come up upon us. it is like world war ii. everybody knew what was going on with the other countries. i will keep this short, but everybody knew what was going on with all the other countries, but we took one way to stay away, stay out of it, but we have to come strong together right now. and joe biden is just about almost perfect to be there because of his experience and his attitude. i don't know, his temperament.

he has got a lot on his plate he would so we have to think about beyond joe biden. we have got to get our country together because china is not fooling with us. they want to start a new global currency. it is not about a new world order, this is always a world order. little fish trying to the big fish, bigger fish, little fish spirit we have to get ourselves together as americans, that is important, and we are lucky to have joe biden. we need to get serious about this as americans or we're going to end up like the other big powers, england, the dutch, you know. we have to handle things seriously as opposed to just trying to be against somebody or another. host: that is henry in modesto, california. part of that statement, china's influence in central america and south america. a headline on that front from fox news, trying to flex its muscle and latin america, the

latest security challenge to the united states. china has ramped up its economic ties across latin america, china's rising influence in the region that has washington increasingly concerned, the growing threat china poses to the u.s. has moved ever forward, they say, in the american consciousness, as defense officials and lawmakers monitor emerging trends from beijing's burgeoning relationships worldwide. china's quiet expansion in the southern hemisphere has increasingly got the attention of u.s. defense officials and lawmakers, they note, including florida republican congresswoman maria elvira salazar, and growing security threats emerging from latin america. that story from fox news. this is bradley in north richland hills, texas. good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. i am calling in regards -- in regards of the disapproval line because, as far as china goes,

their aggressiveness and unwillingness to cooperate on a code of inspections, they should be removed from the united nations and russia should be, too, because they war crimes they have committed. there should be a naval blockade put in place, along with the sanctions, against russia. host: when you say were crimes, what do you mean, bradley? caller: the war within ukraine, the killing of innocent civilians. as far as russia goes. both countries should be removed from the united nations or they should not be allowed to have votes on the united nations. both china and russia. host: bradley in north richland hills, texas. (202) 748-8000 if you approve of the biden administration's handling of china. (202) 748-8001 if you disapprove. jason and wake forest, north carolina. caller: good morning.

i am not sure what there is to approve of. they own him. what kind of a question is this? do you approve of joe biden's handling of china? joe biden is china. he is not an american, he is a traitor. someone said donald trump killed 6 million people, this is exactly what everyone in this country hits the -- hates the media, because you just let people say tings like that. do you know how embarrassing this is for the country to let him say that? host: next call is kathleen. good morning. caller: good morning. i go with biden and harris. they build the bridges and highways. they are fixing all the septic sewers that need fixing. they trying to pull the united states back together and not

terrace apart -- not tear us apart. because if you don't live here, it is different than where anybody else live. host: what are your thoughts on the u.s.-china relationship? caller: china relationship i think is like the united states and russia, like dictators -- when they took roe v. wade, we have not been down this road. it is said that people have died because people don't believe covid is still here. host: that is kathleen in mississippi. on the issue of covid, covid and its origins came about that hearing last week with dni director, director of national intelligence.

senator marco rubio asked her about it last wednesday. [video clip] >> the fbi has concluded what on the origins of covid? >> mr. vice chairman, as the committee knows, the fbi has long assessed, going back to the summer of 2021, that the origin of the pandemic was likely a lab incident in wuhan. >> director, i know there is a difference of opinion among the different agencies, the fbi has that assessment -- what is preventing the other agencies from reaching the same assessment? is it basically the lack of a smoking gun? will we not be able to say that we believe that the lab origins is the likeliest outcome, unless somehow we can provide a smoking gun proof that that is what happened? >> thank you, sir. you are right, basically there is a broad consensus in the intelligence community that the outbreak is not the result of a bioweapon or genetic engineering. there isn't consensus on is

whether or not it is a lab leak, essentially as director wray indicated, or natural exposure to an infected animal, the two operating theories. what would change essentially elements perspectives would be additional information, and we have been trying to collect additional information. i think you are right that china has not fully cooperated, and we do think that is a key, critical cap that would help us to understand what exactly happened. >> i would point out that it is true that the lab leak, we do not have a smoking gun, a guy calling another guy saying we had a lab leak, we also had a smoking gun that it was a naturally occurring event, the easiest to prove. come out with a press conference and show us the bad or whatever it is and show us that this is the one and here's the fires that came from that animal. host: that from last wednesday on capitol hill. this issue of covid and its origins, a lot more on that this

morning on the "washington journal." 9:00 a.m. eastern, we will be joined by jimmy tobias, an independent reporter. this is his piece that got a lot of attention in january from the nation, unredacted nih emails show efforts to rule out the lab origin of covid in early 2020. top scientists told anthony chow -- anthony fauci they were concerned that it was potentially engineered. we will talk about what happens next in those unredacted emails at 9:00 a.m. eastern with jimmy tobias. next, back to your phone calls as we asked about the biden administration's handling of china, approve or disapprove. if you approve, (202) 748-8000. if you disapprove (202) , 748-8001. let's go to the west coast in oregon, mark, good morning. go ahead. caller: ok, hey, joe biden, he

is a failure. all the callers calling in saying he has got experience, well, the one guy was talking about his experience and he has been wrong on every foreign policy there is, it is pretty obvious. let me tell you, everybody says we owe all this money to china, well, they owe us like $70 trillion for covid. we do not owe china a dime. host: ron in amsterdam, new york. caller: i do approve of what biden is doing. he has got south korea and japan holding a summit next week, i believe to start working closer together. he has got the submarine deal going with australia. they will be getting some nuclear submarines.

he is trying to keep china in check, that is what i believe. and between china and russia hitting closer, now we got italy, they want to join nato. so you got that happening. things going to get bigger. i think we are starting to pull, they did before in world war ii, sides are starting to be drawn, i think. host: i believe italy is already part of nato. caller: nato, well, i guess the new government is pro-nato, where the other government wasn't. host: gotcha. that is ron in amsterdam, new york. there was the submarine issue engined -- mentioned, certainly something we have talked about on this program before, did a segment on a couple months ago. i believe i hosted that. headline recently, biden to host australia and britain to reveal details of the submarine attack

to counter china. president joe biden will meet the leaders in san diego to announce a way forward for australia to receive nuclear powered submarines in this biggest ever defense project, that from last week, just a couple days ago. the three countries announced a so-called plan in 2021, efforts to counter china in the indo pacific region. this is teresa in birmingham, alabama. you are next. caller: you know the whole thing with china, it started with nafta. the china problem isn't a problem that the americans created with nafta -- is a problem the americans created with nafta, and they obviously didn't expect china to do what they did, which is grow their economy. now they are in the competition

with the u.s. now because the u.s. allow all these manufacturing jobs, these corporations, to go over there for people labor. now it has backfired. they got a problem now because now russia, china, and iran are banding together, and all these other countries are asking to join brics. and if you -- and if u.s. blew up that pipeline and germany, that is really going to remove whatever credibility the united states has. so i think the american people need to start looking at nafta and what nafta not only did to the u.s., what it did to mexican citizens, it was a trade deal that did not benefit the united states. host: this is ricky in muskegon, michigan. caller: joe biden doing a good job. with china, this virus probably

did come from china, but it could have been an american who brought it over here to the united states. because they go back and forth. i just say joe biden is doing a good job, but they need to lose donald trump. donald trump needs to be lost. because they were with china and putin. host: staying in michigan, battle creek, this is darrell. caller: good morning. i am not happy with how he is handling china, and we just got a battery plant in marshall, which is next to battle creek, that the chinese are building with the americans. guess what is right next door in battle creek, the federal center, so they are less than 10

miles away from our federal center. thank you. host: this is roy in sun city, california. caller: good morning. i am wholeheartedly supportive of president biden. what we have to understand is that our system of capitalism, because all the way back to nixon. china has one billion people, we have 230 million. so they have more labor and more everything. when we realize that we can sew shoes, cars, for that one billion people, we all ran over there to make some money. ok, so now we are paying the price. that is as simple as it is. they figured it out, and now we have to pay. host: we ask you about the biden

administration's handling of china, asking if you approve or disapprove. go ahead and keep calling in. if you approve (202) 748-8000. ,if you disapprove (202) , 748-8001. a couple other stories to keep you on top of, the headline across the top of the wall street journal today, u.s. takes steps to stem the bank fallout appeared u.s. regulators taking control of a second bank on sunday, announcing emergency measures to ease fears that depositors might pull their money from smaller lenders after the collapse late last week of silicon valley bank. measures include guaranteeing all deposits, designed to shore up wavering confidence in the banking system. they were jointly announced sunday night by the treasury department, federal reserve, and federal deposit insurance corporation. treasury officials say they will not constitute a bank bailout because the stock and bond holders would not be protected

by the move at the banks. that is the latest on that front. back here in washington, this from the white house yesterday, front page of today's washington post, biden administration will approve one of the largest oil developments ever on federal land today, according to three people familiar with the decision who spoke under anonymity. it comes a day after the biden administration announced sweeping protections for more than 16 million acres of land and water in alaska, opponents hoped biden would print -- reject the project on alaska's north slope, but facing the prospect of having the decision overturned in court, the administration last to let the oil company expand in alaska, the largest expanse on federal lands. it shrinks the project from the

five pads originally proposed by conocophillips and allows the company officials to use an area large enough for them to move forward to start with a construction project within days. back to your phone calls, talking about china-u.s. relations, the biden administration's handling of the threats posed by china. this is john in decatur, texas. caller: good morning, and thank you for having me. biden has not done a good job since day one. i feel like a lot of people have called in, and he is pretty much in bed with china, i believe. it is incredible what has happened, the inventive -- like the environmentalists, what about what happened in idaho, that dark cloud? he never showed up. he doesn't care about the united states, and that is a problem. i do not think it is him doing anything. i think it is obama and his wife running everything. i do not think he can tie his own shoelaces.

host: this is cornell in englewood, new jersey. caller: good morning. i have been on there and said this a million times, our votes is probably the most important thing, but the second thing is how we spend our money. every time you go in these stores and see a product made in china, we're financing china. we have to totally get out of china. i know it sounds like this would you call that, when you're too conservative, but that is what we need. the reason i say that is because if we get out of china, and i have said this before, we build plants in new jersey or mexico, we get rid of two problems, get rid of the emigrant problem and get rid of the china problem. but every time you go to one of these big stores in every product in their is made in china, it is not in a fitting us. you -- it is not benefitting us.

the more important thing right now is how you spend your money because you only get to vote once a year or whatever. but you go into these stores and you find only chinese products, there is a problem. host: that call from englewood, new jersey, chinese products. a lot of discussion in circles appear on capitol hill about the tiktok social app, here's a headline, democrats, run on tiktok ban, reflecting a willingness to challenge china. tiktok came up in that hearing last week on national security threats worldwide, and senator marco rubio as the fbi director about the concerns posed by the social media platform. [video clip] >> to the chinese government lose ownership of bytedance, u.s., could they use tiktok to

control data, if so? >> yes. >> could they use it to control the software on millions of devices? >> yes. >> could they use it to drive narratives like to divide americans against each other? say china wants to invade taiwan, to make sure americans are seeing videos arguing why taiwan belongs to china and why the u.s. should not intervene? >> yes, and a point on that last one, we're not sure we would see many of the outward signs of it happening if it was happening. i think the most fundamental piece that cuts across every one of those risks and threats you mentioned that americans need to understand is something that is sacred in our country, the difference between the private sector and the public sectors, that is a line that is nonexistent the way the ccp operates. >> do you think the way tiktok

operates in china versus the u.s., for example, kids in the u.s. being encouraged to choke themselves up and kids die, and in china, they are encouraged to focus on math and science and billing the country, is that an example of two different versions of tiktok, one poisoning our society and the other showing positive values, is that the potential of how tiktok could be used to damage our country? >> i think those are among many telling indicators we should be looking at when assessing the national security concerns this poses. host: that was last week on capitol hill. about 15 minutes left on this segment, your thoughts on the biden administration's handling of china. if you approve, (202) 748-8000. if you disapprove (202) , 748-8001. duke in south carolina. caller: thank you for c-span. president biden is seen across the entire world as weak.

he basically is destroying our country. china is building their military you got hereon and you got all the money going to ukraine -- you got iran and all the money going to ukraine with missiles and supplies. just horrible what this man is doing to our country. he is a nice guy, reminds me of a used car salesman. he should retire and go off into the sunset. we need some good strong leadership in washington. the entire cabinet is a sham, and this country is going really downhill quick. two more years, i hate to see what it is going to be. as far as the deficit, just spend, spend, spend, no accountability. these democrats, i mean, we are all americans, but these people are out of their mind. they are worried about agendas, ideology, and all these things that everyday americans do not really want to hear.

it is just a shame. i have been in this country for 62 years, and to see go downhill so fast in two years under this administration is just mind-boggling. thank you for taking my call. host: lillian here in washington, d.c., good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i tell you, with china, the problems we need to get rid of in this country is the immigration, illegal immigration in this country, while china is in bed with the south and central american countries. and i find it very ironic that here in this country, across this nation of the united states, that only people that the chinese businesses will hire are the south and central americans. so what is really going on with

the relationship between the chinese and the south and central americans? the chinese are gaining ground in the south and central american countries, so they are all in bed together to doom this country. i say get rid of the illegal immigration in this country and become independent from china. host: george in palm harbor, florida. you are next. go ahead, sir. caller: i approve of president biden. i don't know why the american people -- many people do not understand. don't forget, if we put putin down on the global world, there will be peace. there will be a boost from

accounts -- host: we're talking about china this morning. this is don in washington state. good morning. are you with us? here are your comments from social media. jody from facebook saying, better than starting a losing trade were like the former guy did, i know farmers who lost all their soybean crop in 2018 from how trump handled china. we are making microchips here in the united states, and thanks to joe for that. this from maria, disapprove and disappointed, especially the fact that they never had any curiosity to determine if the lab leak was deliberate or accidental. based on the evidence, it seemed deliberate, and it may have been in cahoots are somewhat responsible with a gain of function research. we will talk more about the origins of covid later in our 9:00 our.

another one, how would the u.s. wrecked to a military buildup by china or russia along our borders? a couple articles on the military front, this from the front page of the wall street journal. beijing builds power and strategic -- in strategic waters. beijing is becoming the dominant force in these thousand -- in the south china sea. trillions of dollars of trade past each year, advancing step by step over the past debate -- decade, moves that may be below the threshold of provoking conflict, china changed the geography and balance of power in the area. china, taiwan, and southeast nate -- asian nations, it has turned reefs into artificial islands and then military bases with missiles on them, and then with airstrips, a problem for u.s. navy ships. you can read more of that on the wall street journal. a headline on the military front

, pentagon is playing catch up in china when it comes to hypersonic missiles. you can read that in the washington times. this is jane out of decatur, georgia. caller: good morning. i think what we have to understand as americans, when we say china, we need to consistently say the communist party. nothing happens in china without the communist party, so we'd need to use them interchangeably. i have studied china for the last seven years, read eight books. china wants to rule the world. they want to use their dollar and replace it. china, venezuela, russia, and saudi arabia want to dominate, with china, the world economy. so our enemy is the communist party. once americans understand that is who we are fighting against, maybe we can come together. all of this bitterness, our

approval with the president, we have to take action. china controls africa. china controls jamaica, that whole area. and if we do not look out, they are going to be controlling georgia and washington, d.c. thank you for hearing me. host: talking about the chinese communist party, it is run by this man, xi jinping, recently winning his third term, unprecedented third term. looking at the rest of the chinese communist party, here is a list with pictures of them. this is the person at the top, just elected to the premier position, then there is vice premier's and state counselors and leaders of the 26 visions -- ministerial level central government agencies. this is all from china daily, and newspaper we do not subscribe to packets dropped at our front door every day and the

front door of news organizations in this building, several of them here at the foot of capitol hill. this is china daily, the english language version of the newspaper that is run out of the chinese propaganda ministry. china daily is the name of that. joseph in point pleasant beach, new jersey. caller: good morning. i called you up a couple weeks ago, don't know if you remember me. but i disapprove of what the president is doing because he is not doing anything. china is giving money to his so-called think tank or whatever he calls it in washington. china is donating money to the biden center. why is china allowed to give money to lobbyist in this country? china is playing on our biggest weakness and biggest threats, capitalism and making money. is china going to give back to americans, they kid -- care more

about money. he is corrupt, his son is corrupt. that is pretty clear. i do not know why people are just blind. if this was president trump, they would have had it marked up already. and then there was some stupid campaign thing in new york city, my old hometown, and while the district attorney is letting people commit crimes all over the place. biden is taking money, his family is, from the chinese communist party, and nobody has a problem with that. it amazes me. host: on the pen biden center, if you don't remember the story from january, millions donated to the university running the center, the university taking $14 million from unnamed contributors living in china and hong kong since 2021. edward in florida, good morning.

caller: greetings from sunny florida. the chinese have been at war with the united states since the korean war. the korean war, the chinese contributed to the deaths of 34,000 american soldiers. in vietnam, the chinese supplied the north vietnamese with arms, contributing to the deaths of 58,000 american service people. they have unleashed undisciplined warfare on the united states in the form of the military virus from wuhan, killing one million american citizens. and now they are killing the youth of america with fentanyl

coming through the open gates of the southern border. the only way for us to defeat the chinese and their undisciplined warfare is to stop buying chinese products now. like forest gump said, that is all i have to say about that. host: how confident are you that americans can do that, wean themselves off of chinese products? we lost edward. a couple minutes left here to get your thoughts in. if you approve, (202) 748-8000. if you disapprove, (202) 748-8001. a programming note today, we will be airing former president donald trump's remarks on education, that taking place in iowa, a key state i the 2024

every presidential campaign. the president talking about education policy in davenport, iowa. live coverage at 7:15 p.m. eastern time here on c-span, and you can also watch on c-span.org and the free c-span now video app. a couple more calls. liz in south carolina. caller: good morning, sir. yes, when donald trump got in, they started claiming racist, racist, and that never was what donald trump was about. he was a great businessman that got in. he started turning this country around. host: any thoughts on china? caller: yeah, my thought on china is president trump did not take any crap off of them. and now look at them with biden, starting to fall.

we are in for a serious ride, folks, and you better change your voting pattern or we are going to start seeing chinese statues all around in our cities, and try to take them and break them down -- you won't do it. thank you. host: our last caller in this first segment of the "washington journal." stick around, plenty more to talk about, and china will be our focus this morning, the 8:00 a.m. hour each morning this week on the "washington journal." a new series examining china's growing military, economic, geopolitical influence. we will be joined by daniel kurtz-phelan, editor of foreign affairs, for today's discussion on china. later today, independent investigative your list to me tobias will join us to talk about his reporting about the origins of the covid-19 virus. plenty more to talk about.

we will be right back. ♪ >> be up to date, you can find about books on c-span now, our free mobile app or wherever you get your cast -- your podcasts. >> listening to programs on c-span through c fan radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker, play c-span radio app listen to "washington journal" daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern with important congressional hearings and other public affairs events and weekdays at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. eastern, cap washington today for a fast-paced report on the stories of the day and listen to c-span any time. tell your smart speaker, play

c-span radio app. c-span, powered by cable. >> preorder your copy of the congressional directory for the 118 congress, it's her access to the federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member, important information on congressional committees, the president cabinet, federal agencies and state governors and scanned the code at the right to get your copy for early spring delivery. is $29.95 plus shipping and handling. you can also find it at c-span shop upward -- >> c-span shop.org is c-span's online stores you can browse through our latest collection. there is something every c-span fan and every purchase help support our nonprofit operations. shop now or anytime at c-span

shop.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: a new series this week focused on china and the threat that china poses economically, militarily, geopolitically and that's happening each day this week in the 8:00 a.m. eastern hour on "washington journal." we have the editor of foreign affairs and the author of the 2018 book, the china mission. good morning to you. guest: thanks for having me. host: there was a senate hearing last week on national security threats the u.s. is facing around the world. where does china's ambitions rank in your mind in terms of the biggest threat facing the united states. guest: what you have heard from administration official and military officials and this goes back to the previous administrations involvement is that even while we face a more acute threat and urgent threat

from russia and the war in ukraine, china really is the long-term and most challenging issue that u.s. foreign policy faces. in the pentagon, the call is the pacing threat, meaning the thing that will drive us forward and defining our concern when it comes to foreign policy and national security. whether you're looking at the economic challenge or the geopolitical or military one, china is the thing that has become to preoccupy foreign policymakers and will continue to for the foreseeable future. host: does china see us as a pacing threat in their minds? guest: this has been true for chinese policymakers for decades. if you go back 50 years, there was a moment when the united states and china both saw the soviet union as the bigger threat. when nixon opened china, that was the defining threat for both of us and that allowed this new

stage in foreign policy in the u.s.-china relationship. what you have seen in the last couple of decades he really was the realization that among tiny than the united states would challenge their interests. this is true of global dominance in lots of ways. in the past decade or so, you have seen increasing focus on this from american policymakers. the obama administration was talking about the pivot and donald trump of course put this in much more memorable terms in his focus on china and the biden administration has continued that with china becoming the central issue in american foreign policy. the chinese for some time put this in slightly softer terms you saw the chinese president in

the last few days, when he started to talk about u.s. efforts to encircle or contain china. you've seen an escalation of rhetoric on both sides which is sending the relationship into a new phase that's still unsettled and undefined and scary for many reasons. host: xi jinping got the unprecedented third term. how and why did he come to power as president and we're he came up? >> this is the important part of the story. there is focus on g ching ping tung the extent that in personal ways really changed china's role and their political system for the leaders before him, there was enormous and chinese politics that she only stayed in power for two terms. that was true in the role of president but the more important role of general secretary of the chinese communist party.

you had a commitment to succession among chinese leaders and the collective approach to leadership as you saw in the response to the overwhelming dominant role that mao had on the system. it was not seen as china's role in the world but geez in paying and prayer -- in previous governments use a more collective approach and slightly less focused on this one dominant figure. he said from the time he came into power a decade ago and for his first two terms to reverse that and give himself overwhelming control of the state so a lot of this is bureaucratic changes that are hard to follow from the outside for people not steeped in this stuff but in all kinds of ways, he gave himself more control over the chinese military and economic policy and the political system and what has

happened over the last few months with the party congress last fall and the national people's congress last week on me give himself officially a third term vote as general secretary of the chinese party and as president and this is a symbolic step in many ways but shows the extent to which he has his own personal stamp on the chinese political system and so much of what we see seems to be emanating from this one dominant figure. the record of what's happening with vladimir putin and the war in ukraine in some ways is a demonstration of how dangerous it is when you have one person with unchecked power. don't know what kind of information he might be getting from those around him. we get into really scary territory.

this really is about this dominant figure of the zhejiang ping and it took americans a little while to focus on him. there is a view he might be a continuation of previous chinese leadership style when he came into power and i'll think anyone expected that he would go for this unprecedented third term and now that he is starting on this new phase, we are grappling with a new set of challenges and relationships. host: u.s.-china relationships are the subject of this hour of "washington journal." if you want to join the conversation, you can do so on the phone lines as follows -- we told our viewers about the reuters reporting that xi

jinping is now expected to meet with vladimir putin in russia at perhaps as early as next week. what are you watching for? guest: china has been performing this somewhat delicate dance since the beginning of the war. you saw before the war happened and talking about a low -- a no limits partnership to the china-russia relationship. china is uncomfortable and does not want to come out and oppose vladimir putin. his challenge to the u.s. is in chinese interest but china has been cautious at moments about its level of support rhetorical and material for the russian war in ukraine. this is in part about lots of other parts of the world where china has other interests.

you have seen china inching closer to the line when it comes to actions like helping russia with sanctions and there have been reports of chinese interests in giving help with the actual war effort whether it's ammunition or something else. the u.s. has been focused on trying to deter this action by china by publicizing what it knows of those attentions -- intentions. you seen the diplomacy over the last year focused on trying to make clear that china understands what the consequences to supporting russia might be but you also see the reuters one that suggests that g ching ping tung is constantly testing these boundaries and seeing what he can get away with and what he can do to sustain russian

efforts without alienating parts of the world that might see that is going too far. this is the kind of latest phase and it's called the beijing straddle. xi jinping wants to deepen the relationship with rougher -- with russia. host: this is at a time when this story about how china brokered the iran saudi deal raises place for the united states. what should we read from that effort? guest: it's easy to over read that relation between iran and saudi arabia and those who have

not been tracking this, i ran broke off relation seven years ago in response to growing tensions about yemen and bilateral relationships and fundamental disagreement about the state of the middle east between iran and saudi arabia. they have been talking for the last couple of years and the chinese helped nudge them back over the line but this is a reflection of a u.s. turn away from the middle east. it's a fairly deliver it process by the last two or three administrations in the united states, that we focus too much on the middle east and it grows out of the iraq war and were about to hit the 20th anniversary of 9/11. you've seen the push to spend less time in the middle east and when you do that, you will never the bleak leaves others to step in.

i think you can probably see the chinese effort here is not entirely opposed to u.s. interests. we have a stake in seeing a degree of stability in the region and i ran-saudi normalization helps in that regard but it signifies the change in u.s. foreign policy but this growing and bish and by china to play a global role. xi jinping announced the security role which is his effort to talk about china playing a bigger global effort. he talked about non-interference and staying out of some problems but as power grows and capability grows, you will see china doing more of this. there will be times when it will not be entirely inimical to u.s. interest and we would be happy to see those developments. it's not a bad thing to have other powers helping them but

the other times when there are preferences, we will start to see that in the middle east. china has flirted with having a bigger military presence and economically reliable on middle eastern oil so that's a place where you will see greater chinese presence. there will be times when it will be fairly beneficial when it comes to u.s. interests. this is not something we need to panic about but there will be times when we use that leverage that will be more threatening. host: plenty to talk about with u.s.-china relations. thank you for joining us for the conversation. if you want to join the conversation, democrats and independents.

you're up first, and independent. caller: good morning. i understand the preamble. it's no surprise that china is our competitor. we've been shipping jobs to them for a long, long time. they use the money to build up their own military and then they will be using this stuff against us. this is what i want the guest to address -- just like with the chips act where these manufacturers made money by shipping the jobs over to china. in my opinion, it was treasonous and they built that china and now they want us to be taxed more and cut social security to fund them, bring back the

manufacturing that we used to do here anyway. i want your opinion as to maybe what we need to do is step back for a moment, hunt down these guilty people that actually caused this and immobilize them. right now, the american business community still wants to do business with china and make money. host: we got your point. what about shipping jobs to china? guest: he raises an important dimension of this. the sense that the american manufacturing base has been eroded is one of the sentiments really driving a lot of the concern of the united states. you saw the rhetoric in the trump administration as well as the present administration.

there is a sense among american policymakers across multiple administrations and the for -- and the first part of the obama m's ministration, the world this -- the sense of the world is moving in american direction and trade and engage in -- and engagement was going to lead to curbing china. with the right kind of engagement across economic policy, diplomacy and lots of other regards, you wanted to see a china that was evolving into a more corroborative -- cooperative global actor, more like our system. there was the basic assumption that the kind of engagement would ultimately lead to a world that was much more friendly to

american interest and reflected the kind of economic and political system we thought we would like to see and that was going to be in american interests. probably 15 years ago, around the time of the financial rises, people started to redevelop -- reevaluate that assumption. that raise this set of concerns. once people gave up the assumptions about that going in one direction, there was a reevaluation of policy across a huge number of areas. i think we are reckoning with that. the manufacturing piece is important because it pertains to jobs in the united states and there is the big focus in these last two administrations on investing in jobs here.

you see it in the inflation reduction act which is focused on giving subsidies to manufacturers that are building things here with american workers. there has simultaneously been this focus on investing in innovation, whether it's in basic finance or semiconductors and investing in manufacturing capacity. they are also trying to cut off some chinese access to technology. along with jobs, you also see this on the technological front, that there is a lot of technology that was created in the united states are among american allies that has been making its way to china and some of that was because of intellectual property or other covert means on the part of chinese companies or the chinese government but some is about this trade and the usual state of the global economy which has shifted a lot of capacity to

china and brought a lot of technology to china. i think now is an attempt to look more closely as to what type of technology is flowing into chinese companies or the chinese government. semiconductors has been one of the big focuses. one of the most prominent examples and you get the chips act which is in the -- which is to invest in manufacturing capacity and development of semiconductors in the united states. you also see new export controls which is probably the more important and new part of this. this attempt to ensure the some of the most advanced equipment for manufacturing semiconductors is the most advanced technology. i think this spooked the chinese government more than the parts of the chips act focused on building manufacturing capacity here. that is seen as the normal state of competition. these assertive attempts by the u.s. government to prevent semi

conductor equipment and technology from going to china, that's a new step in this relationship, the kind of thing we will see more of. it indicates the level of concern and some of that is from the job concerns with some is about the technology as well. host: on the economic engagement of the late 90's, the biggest sign of that engagement was probably china joining the wto in 1999. how did the clinton administration feel about that effort and were there people raising red legs at the time, saying that -- red flags at the time coming saying china could use this to spread out into the world not it -- not that it would open up china to the rest of the world. guest: if you go back to the debates, you see voices who were predicting back then that no matter what we did, no matter

what kind of economic development you get in china and how much you brought china into the international system, you would still see them emerge as a competitor and rival of the united states. i think there was still a much broader view across parties if you go back to the administration of the late 90's and early 2000, the sense that ultimately, if you had trade or business or development, that would start to drive change in china's international behavior in -- and the political system. the wto decision was seen this way in part that if china were richer or you had more people with exposure to u.s. companies, ultimately, that would help drive the political change. it was only 10 years later when you started to see a much broader lyrical consensus that that change is not happening in the way that was expected and some of the assumptions about what trade would mean for china

but if you go back, you will see voices who saw the hopes at that moment. they were too optimistic so those voices became much louder as you got into the last decade or so and now they view this as a mistake from that time. it's much more complicated than the simple story suggests, but the assumption that went along with that of being overly optimistic were in retrospect. host: north carolina's next, line for democrats, good morning. caller: thank you for letting me speak this morning. i am sitting here and laughing. i'm a world war ii child so i'm going back a little ways. we are fussing at the russians for going into the ukraine.

the russians have been playing footsie with this ever since roadwork to now we are worried about the chinese. i read a book in the early 60's written by a general, i believe his name was zachary taylor. at the end of his book he said, we won this war but we are going to have to decide who are we going with, the russians or the chinese. we did not do neither one. to be so dependent on china is -- it absolutely blows my mind. we are a self-sufficient country. how dumb are we to let all this happen? thank you for letting me speak and have a great day. host: what about u.s.-china russian relations after world

war ii? guest: thank you for that. i wrote a book about debates about china after world war ii. we hope to china would become an ally and move in our direction. nixon went to china and that was the u.s. and china aligning against the soviet union.

caller: we were given warnings for quite a while that we would get hurt bad if they got nafta through and it hurt us that. take it very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] host: what about the folks who warned about china in particular the trump administration? guest: i think we are going back to that period of the 90's where there was the sense that trade

would change china for the good in it would create a different china and has not happened. there were voices warning about it then. the nafta part is complicated. when you look at the response to chinese economic dominance now, there is the sense that one of the advantages the united states had is to improve trade relationships closer to home and that includes mexico and canada. when you look at china's efforts to build an economic threat, it's focused on signing trade deals with its neighbors and its somewhat envious of the economic relations the u.s. has. they are focusing on global trade, trading with everyone across different geopolitical faultlines were different political systems and focusing on shoring up those relations so

there's lots of work on economic coordination between the u.s. and the europeans. you seek new initiatives in east asia in the economic framework which the biden administration has rolled out. i think there is still an effort on going that started in the trump administration and the biden administration to find new ways of using economic power and developing relationships with allies and partners that are not the old global traders. the transfer partnership with the initiative that was started in the bush years and continued under obama for a free-trade agreement with partners in east asia which did not include china but now that there is a sense that those kind of old trade models are not serving u.s. economic interest in the right way, their stone effort to figure out a way to apply economic leverage or influence

in east asia with u.s. allies and partners that would not just replicate some of the same models that were dominant in the 90's and 2000. use of the beginnings of the use of leverage in the trump administration with some of the tariffs and trade wars that dominated headlines then. the biden administration has kept those in place. there is still an ongoing effort to figure out with that trade relationship looks like. trade has grown with china across administrations even with all the headlines about treat frictions. this is a very dense economic relationship so we can talk about decoupling but what that means in practice is something the policymakers are trying to figure out. there is a focus on reducing vulnerability in key areas, and effort on national security and

technology transferred to china but that is not the same thing is lowing up the entire economic relationship. that's a question the policymakers in the u.s. will grapple with certainly through the duration of this administration whether it's another couple of years or so but across future administrations as well. this is an ongoing process to figure out a new vision for the global economy and the u.s.-china economic relationship. we are really in the beginning stages of this. host: this is a line for republicans, good morning. caller: good morning, i missed your first hour so i hope i'm not redoubling something but they talked about how dumb we were to put so much emphasis on china but have dumb are we in the democratic party to put a foreign agent of the chinese communist party as president. they came out and said they had for business partners and they

didn't have bank statements showing where he has benefited greatly from the chinese common is party. we have and it foreign agent that was voted in. that's why they were easy on that balloon. they got all the intel and then put it down but but biden financial ties with china and hunter biden's influence in china, which you speak to that? guest: i see the policy direction across administrations as cutting in different directions than the caller suggests. this is not a case where you see a shift back to the kind of older view of u.s.-china policy. if anything, there has been continuity across the trump and biden administrations when it comes to taking a harder line with china.

if there is grumbling of people on the left in the way the biden-china policy looks, it looks a lot like trump's. he didn't get rid of the tariffs. they were continued under this administration and we spend a lot of time talking about a lack of bipartisanship in american politics but this is a case where you see fair degree of bipartisan agreement with differences over what the right responses. if you watch the senate select committee or house select committee on china proceedings a couple of weeks ago chaired by republican mike gallagher, you saw fair degree of consensus as to exactly with the challenge is. while there were differences on the policy, i don't think you see any attempt at minimizing the challenge from either side. this is a case that is running

more in contrast to some areas of american politics and there's a high degree of bipartisanship and you sense that this will have to be a policy framework that continues across administrations and this was true in the cold war. there were lots of debates about what the response to the soviet challenge was, there is fairly bipartisan framework put in place first in the truman administration and the eisenhower administration and even with the changes in the presidency over the subsequent years. there was a high degree of agreement about the basic challenge. i think we are seeing the same thing with china and people argue about whether to call this a new cold war. one area of similarity is the sense that there will be a bipartisan focus on this going forward and that will be true in the biden administration and i suspect it will be true with anyone in the white house in the coming years. host: what is the one china

policy and how long has it been around? guest: this is a complicated part of the relationship, this is about taiwan which is been one of the biggest flashpoints in the u.s.-china relationship and still remains a really important to mention of this. this was an agreement to disagree over what exactly should happen with taiwan. this goes back to the history that i wrote about in my book, the china mission after world war ii in 1949 when chiang kai-shek and the national government that had been fighting the communist for control of china withdrew to taiwan and is called the people's republic of china. they see this as the government of china and the communist party wants to seize back control when

the u.s. normalized relationship with china in the 70's, there was agreement to recognize the chinese view of this without supporting beijing to take back taiwan by force. there was broad agreement with lots of different details that more or less work for a while but over the last several years as chinese power has grown, you see more noise out of beijing especially about the need to take control of taiwan even it requires military force for the next few years. the agreement over taiwan has started to come apart. that is why people see taiwan is a great flashpoint. i think we so the most recent flareup when nancy pelosi visited in august and china responded with lots of military drills and rehearsing a blockade and doing of the that would be

useful if it didn't want to use military force to forcefully unify the chinese mainland. i think we will see flareups like this quite recurrently going forward. kevin mccarthy will go to taiwan at some point in the next couple years, we will see. i think this will be one of the hardest areas for u.s. policymakers because it requires both deterring china from doing anything especially taking military action with regards to taiwan but at the same time, trying to prevent where the government would get into an enormous war. host: 20 minutes left in plenty of calls for you. let's take to edit time and we will come back for your thoughts. this is barbara from massachusetts, good morning. caller: good morning. just the most outstanding guest and the most useful and helpful

and clear description of everything. your great questions as well. i am a utopian who wishes to remind everyone that we earthlings are on a death ball hurtling through space. in that context, the absurdity of nation against nation in 2023 as so grotesquely demonstrated in ukraine as we watch the madness on bold, we are in a situation where nation-based identity versus global identity is, in itself, in a transition of tech, plates that are shifting. there is hot war, cold war, i'd like to invite addition vent something in the middle called warm war except it's a mouthful. tepid war --

humanity has evolved beyond the point where nation-based identity, much less god help us republican partisan identity can stop human evolution. people, we are in a time of profound human evolution. host: we will take the point. this is jim, and independent from florida. caller: good morning. my biggest concern, i have a trust issue that's why i become an independent after obama became president. also with their adversaries. i'm having a hard time about our pharmaceuticals and vitamins coming in from china. what if that is tainted with fentanyl? china is trying to kill is one way or another. years ago, they were doing it with sheet rock. how many people had to go die

and there's no response for that and now fentanyl which is letting it happen so i never trusted the democratic party. i'm concerned about vitamins because is the old line of walmart vitamins are all made in china. how do we know that's not tainted jacket -- not tainted? guest: both callers .2 important dimensions we have not gotten to. if i can go to the wonky implications of your call for more utopian approach, one thing that has been a challenge and this is true across administrations is that even if you have a much more competitive relationship, a bipartisan focus on pushing back on chinese influence and lots of ways, there still are contexts in which the united states and china will either have to find ways to prevent or prevent

catastrophe but also do something on some of the global challenges that really span border so the pandemic is the key example of this. there is more we need to know before we know it the origins of the pandemic were. that's the case where you would ideally have operation between governments to jump on those things more weakly. that was part of the problem. the chinese government has dissembling about what was going on which made it harder for the rest of the world to respond but also a lack of global coordination on a threat that crosses borders. there is climate change and lots of others. i think you have an attempt by

those in government to keep a minimal level of cooperation necessary to prevent catastrophe on these issues even if you have a much more competitive relationship across other areas. that doesn't always work so you saw lots of cases where the chinese would cut off discussions over other issues. one of the scarier moments for me in the balloon incident a few weeks ago was not so much the balloon itself but the fact that when lloyd austin wanted to talk to a chinese counterpart about what was going on a making sure there was no misunderstanding that would lead to war, his counter port did not pick up the phone. all of those mechanism for maintaining some degree of flexibility and global challenges that will affect all of us and preventing this understanding of a catastrophe that could lead to a greater conflict.

that has become harder to maintain and if we don't, we will see greater challenges. there's been part of the broader deterioration of the relationship where there was more coordination between china and the united states on cutting down on some of the chemicals coming out of china and becoming fentanyl. that has broken down as well, victim to a broader deterioration in the relationship. i think we all are aware of the terrible toll that fentanyl has taken on the united states. without some degree of international cooperation here, not just with china but more broad based, that's really hard to counter effective lee given the small quantities of fentanyl that are required to do so much damage here. it doesn't for you -- point you to a great formula for all of

these. it highlights the depth of the challenge and the problems of where we are now. host: i've got colonel and david up next. caller: good morning, gentlemen. first time caller, longtime watcher. one question -- giving free trade to china in the 90's? did china take us? who are the politicians who voted for that? we got what we paid for. host: this is david in michigan, independent. caller: good morning. how long to you think it will take before someone comes out and tells us about the mushroom clouds that will be here? i read in california and georgia

and alabama, there are some chemical weapons. host: i've got the wta -- wto book from 1999 and i think nuclear war was the concern of the last caller. guest: two different topics but let me see if i can cover both of them in one answer. the question of wto but this goes back to the assumptions not just for china but much broader view of what economic development and commerce would mean for the whole system. this has been true with russia and we see the same debate playing out in the sense that if you had a russia that was trading with europeans and the united states and others, that would moderate behavior. we see the same debate with china. the hard part now is what kind of global economy we should be

pushing for? we need to be aware of some of the leverage that the united states might have. one caller talked about vitamins and the pharmaceutical supply chain. if you have dependence on china or russia or anyone else for critical supplies, that gives them some degree of leverage. how do you protect our allies and partners from that kind of leverage? it's a hard challenge even if we recognize the limitations of the old framework. there is not a total approach that any administration has come up with. it will be the kind of thing that both parties will be focused on for years in the future. we are just at the beginning of this. the threat of nuclear war is

usually back of mind for policymakers on both sides. you talk about the taiwan straight dish straits and how yoprevent a chinese attempted a military takeover of the island that could we be used to create an escalation that would become nuclear. this means back to the need to deter china or anyone else from taking that rash action in the first place. the failure in ukraine in the failure in russia is that russia was not deterred in their attempts and you can argue about the history and the moments were in might've been but i think that's the focus of china policy now. they talk about deterrence all the time. it is the million-dollar question that goes to that

fundamental fear that the caller was raising. where this ends could be nuclear war if we don't get the policy right. it's the balance that you see in these responses. it's showing a clear united front in response to some provocative news of the chinese might make without getting to outright escalation. i would go back to the previous discussion of the lack of crisis intubation. to pick up the call and call the chinese military, there is some kind of escalation to make sure things are interpreted correctly and there's no misunderstanding that would lead to inadvertent escalation but this will be a hard task for members of the military and policymakers and others going forward. there will be moments when this

is in front of mind in a way that's been familiar for most of us for the last couple of decades. host: the english language version of the paper owned by the ccp, the central propaganda department they focus on the 14th national people's conference and this is lee kwang who was recently elected as premier. what should viewers know about lee kwang or the power structure here? guest: there is a fevered effort among china watchers right now

to understand exactly who these people are and what it means. those are two different things when you look at the our rate of figures now in chinese leadership. one is this is xi jinping's party and he has made an effort to do things like launch and anticorruption drive area there was reporting by western media outlets but he is use that as a way to put his people in all of these positions. the new premier has someone who's been very loyal and implemented the lockdown in shanghai last year which was very costly. it was the beginning of the end of the g thing paying hero.

on the other hand, there is the question of whether jeezy in kane will be able to get the economy growing at yan. the chinese, and his party has a hold on power because of the tremendous economic growth of the last few decades. it started with the chinese economic reforms. it's benefit -- been an extraordinary's dori of economic growth with many people out of poverty. that's what accounts for the stability of this political legitimacy such as it is of the chinese communist party. that's become harder to sustain. zero covid was part of the challenge but it's what's start to happen as an economy gets richer and the economic tools when you are trying to get out of the most basic poverty.

it becomes harder to use. there are we'll just real questions about reversing the steps that jeezy inc. paying has taken. -- that jeezy thing -- xi jin ping. that will allow them to push back on some of his policies and power of this data -- power of the state. whether the focus on the others is getting the economy growing in the other parts of ping's agenda, which side will win out over than the coming months. host: less than five minutes left so let me get in both of these callers. anthony, eastern pennsylvania,

republican, go ahead. caller: thanks are taking my call. the most favored status that china has, who is responsible for that? can you expand on the people that make this possible? can you name names of the people and can anything be done today about it? host: thanks for the question and this is thomas from houston, texas, independent, good morning. caller: you answered a bunch of my lessons. it seems like he's in trouble with the middle class over there . thank you. guest: not to repeat myself but i would go back to this moment when there was a cross parties that starts with the end of the cold war and the h w bush

administration and the clinton administration and the george w. bush administration and the first part of the obama years, the sense that bringing china into a globally connie where the u.s. was dominant would help moderate the state and a lot of those have been disproven. you can look back and see a lot of hopes that look naive in retrospect. i think it's worth remembering that this was a broad, bipartisan view. voices were calling into question some of the assumptions and it spanned many different administrations. things probably started 10 years ago and then accelerated in the trump/biden administration and that's a chance to roll back some of those stresses and address vulnerability while

trying to manufacture again and manufacture -- while trying to invest again in manufacturing, etc.. the end of zero covid was a fascinating moment that cause people to sit up and take note of how quickly china was moving. he talked about zero covid as this great triumph for china. he had kept the borders very locked down and maintain strict controls. people were testing will time they ripped the band-aid and there was a huge amount of spread of covid and the weeks after that happened, there were

reports that more than one million chinese people died in the government figures are less. there is no one who believes what we are hearing from the ccp when it comes to covid deaths is anywhere close to the real number. that quickly has gotten to a point where much of the rest world, it has moved on. six months ago, when china was still in, would been hard to that the change would have happened. this is really an indication of speed with which xi jin ping can do things because of his control over the system. the government turned on it time and reached a different message was in -- which is an indication of where we are in why this will be a challenging issue for american policymakers through

this congress and going forward. host: you can go look up daniel at foreign affairs.com. we mentioned his book in a key and it came out of 2018. what else are you working on? guest: i haven't been able to step back and delve into the history as much as i would like to. i will continue the story of u.s.-china relations but i need the world to come down a little bit before my job allows me to do that. caller: know on book tv and we will feature it again. thanks for the time this morning. next, we continue our conversation about china, focusing on the origins of covid. we will be joined by jimmy tobias, independent investigative journalist who has written on this topic. he will join us after the break. stick around.

>> c-span has unfiltered coverage of the u.s. response to russia's invasion of ukraine, bring you the latest from the president and other white house officials, the pentagon, and state department, as well as state department. we also have perspectives from the united nations and statements from four leaders all on the c-span networks, the no mobile app, and c-span.org/ukra ine. our web resource page you can watch the latest videos live, and follow tweets from journalists on the ground. go to c-span.org/ukraine. >> there are a lot of places to get political information, but only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you're from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word.

if it happens here or here or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. ♪ >> since 1979 in partnership with the cable industry, c-span have provided complete coverage of the halls of congress, from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings, and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions, and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> if you are enjoying book tv, sign up for our newsletter unions in the qr code on the screen to receive a schedule of upcoming programs, book festivals, and more.

book tv, every sunday on c-span or anytime online at booktv tv.org. television for serious readers. >> washington journal continues. host: jimmy tobias joins us now, independent work has appeared in the nation, the guardian, other obligations. the headline of yours that got a lot of attention recently, evolution of unredacted nih emails show the rollout of the lab origins of covid. tell us about what you found out about those early days when we were try to figure out where covid came from. guest: we obtained a cache of emails that offered an inside look, concerns among some of the world's top virologists, that covid may have been engineered or came out of a lab. these virologists reached out to dr. fauci in the early days of the pandemic in january, february 2020, and brought him

these concerns. what followed were a series of intense, confidential the liberations between dr. fauci, these virologists, dr. collins, other health officials, where they really looked at the virus, discuss some of the features i thought were unusual, made them think that this may have come out of a lab. throughout these discussions, they started circulating the draft of what would become the proximal origin paper, a very influential paper in the early days of the pandemic that shaped the debate about the origins. host: what did the proximal origin paper find? guest: it came down pretty strongly in favor of a national origin. in the early drafts of this paper, the discussion they were having was different from what came out at the end. host: what are some examples of that?

who was leading these discussions? guest: one of the main organizers of the confidential call was jeremy from arkham a who lead at the time the wellcome trust in the u.k., dr. fauci, dr. christian anderson of script university, and australian virologist. in the beginning of these discussions, they focused on a variety of unusual features that some of them felt could not have come out of nature but a lab. as they looked at these and started circulating the draft paper, throughout the discussion, they continued to say there is not enough data to determine the origin of this virus. somewhere along the line, they came down pretty hard on the side of natural origin. a lot of experts i interviewed for this story, some of them felt like there was an effort to downplay a laboratory leak.

others felt differently. these documents are important because they offer a really inside look at discussions of the origin among some of the top officials responsible for the pandemic response. these documents were highly sought after. the reporter got them in heavily redacted form. they were shown to congress but congress was not allowed to release them publicly. it was only after a year-long foia lawsuit that we were able to get the full unredacted versions. they shed light on things that people didn't know, about how serious these top officials and virologists took the possibility that this may have come out of a lab. host: what would be the motivation for playing down a lab leak theory? guest: different people have perspectives. some of the people i spoke to thought the discussion was just

science at work, hypothesizing that this could have come out of a lab. they looked at the evidence and then changed their mind. others feel there was an effort to downplay in the lab leak. one of them, he said he had no idea these discussions were taking place at the time, that he was upset when he learned about them and was sidelined from them, because he had a different perspective. he felt this came out of a lab and was not invited to the conversations that ultimately led to the paper that shaped the debate in favor of natural origin. these conversations were very important because they did set the narrative. in terms of what the motivation may have been, the nih have been giving grant money to labs in china looking into

coronaviruses, doing experience -- experiments on coronaviruses. before these experiments took place, dr. fauci went to his deputy and asked him to brush him up on what nih involvement in china was. there could have been fear, if it came out of a lab, there could have been blowback to the nih. people look at these emails and they have been interpreted differently by different parties. some feel it was an effort to downplay the lab theory, others say it is just science at work. host: how does one paper shape the debate so much as you described it? guest: it was very influential, this paper, cited in 2000 media outlets. dr. fauci described it from the white house podium in april. dr. francis collins wrote a blog post about it in march 2020.

it had a large impact. at the time, people didn't know that it first started being formulated in discussions between scientists and top government officials. host: if you want to join the conversation, (202) 748-8001 for republicans to call in. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independent, (202) 748-8002. jimmy tobias is our guest. the headline of his piece from the nation, unredacted nih emails show effort to rule out the lab origin of covid. that is what we are talking about. jonathan from old bridge, new jersey is up first. he is an independent. caller: i just feel like, you know, this person is using a lot of loaded language, saying it is

unnamed experts of an unnamed expertise, not saying how many. wouldn't there be a good reason why they would say it is not a lab leak? we have plenty of people, elected representatives in the country who are saying things like jewish people control the weather with space lasers. i don't think that should be used as an example of an expert or anything, right? guest: there were five authors in the proximal origin paper, some of them the top virologists in the world. they were on these calls along with dr. fauci, dr. collins, jeremy ferrar. this was a pretty small group having these discussions. host: you didn't have the transcripts of the call. what were you looking at? guest: we had emails that kind

of let up to the call, summarized the call but there was no transcript of the call itself. this was a discussion that lasted throughout a week more or less. it started with this concern among christian anderson and his colleagues that the virus looked potentially engineered, that was the phrase they used. that is what alerted dr. fauci. he said that if their concerns bear out, we should alert the fbi. farrar organize this call the next day, and that is where things took off my where they started looking at the features of the virus they were concerned about. some of the scientists in these exchanges, after looking at this feature, they were like, i don't understand how this comes out of nature.

one scientist said it was stunning. they wrestle with things like that. after a week of these conversations, by february 8, they were still saying we don't have enough evidence to determine whether this came out of a lab or natural origin. at that time, christian anderson, the first author listed in the paper, said i don't think we should publish it. we spent the last week trying to disprove any lab theory, but we don't have any evidence. i don't think we should publish it yet. less than a month later they had put together the final draft of the proximal origin paper. differed from some original drafts. host: in your story, you talk about urgency felt by these folks to get ahead of what was happening on social media at the time as all of these theories about where covid came from,

there was any urgency to have some kind of scientific explanation. guest: i think that comes across pretty clearly in the documents, that they knew people were starting to talk about the possibility it came out of a lab, and wanted to put something out in the public that presented evidence -- that is one interpretation -- others feel like they were trying to set a narrative. he felt sidelined, that this paper in particular was part of an effort to create a narrative that favored a natural origin. there is a lot of debate about that. my goal is not to take a side here but to remain neutral. that is one way that prominent people are reading these documents. host: do you think we will ever find out conclusively if it was a lab leak or natural origin? is that information out there? guest: another thing dr.

redfield said in his testimony, he doesn't think that we will do this doing scientific research, it will come from intelligence agencies. in my arcle, i spoke to a doctor who said he was not optimistic that we will ever find out because of the stonewalling from china. others are more optimistic. host: dominic informed dale, ohio. republican. good morning. go ahead. you are on with jimmy tobias. caller: i love the theory growing -- you know, you cannot trust our government today. a lot of people are feeling like that, as this thing grows about coming out of a lab. that is what many of us have

felt all along, that it was derived there and released. but we believe it was because fauci and george soros and bill gates, globalists, would do anything to stop the growth of america first on industry and what trade did to our country. host: jimmy tobias, what do you want to jump in on? guest: my goal for this article was to take public records, present them in the context that they were written and let people decide for themselves. i don't think there's any evidence that there was some conspiracy involving the billionaires that were mentioned.

there is just no evidence of that. instead what you see in the articles is -- and this is one what one of the experts in the article told me. he saw an early effort to grapple with the unusual features of the virus. they went from fairly airing out these views toward heavily leading toward one perspective, one origin theory. that is one possible reading of what happens with these articles and emails. host: ray in napa, california. you are next. caller: what i want to say is, i think it is a conspiracy with a trump administration trying to slow down china. they probably planted this virus, didn't say anything for months, try to turn it back on

the airwaves in the u.s. it seems pretty obvious to me. host: jimmy tobias, the larger question of conspiracy theories in general around covid-19. guest: there certainly have been conspiracy theories, and that is what turned this debate into the toxic debate it has become, especially in the beginning. right now, we are in a place where the intelligence agencies are looking at this question, congress is looking at the question, reporters are taking it up in a way that they have not before. i am optimistic that we will get some information and find something, one way or the other. i encourage people to really look at the evidence that has been put out there, try to take the full view, tune into the hearings and pay attention to what is happening with intelligence agencies and news

media, now that this is being looked at more closely. host: c-span is a good place to go for those hearings. two minutes from last week's hearing. this is the coronavirus subcommittee. this is arizona republican debbie lesko talking with dr. robert redfield. >> in a recent energy and commerce oversight hearing, i ask the nih acting director about the nih's gross negligence and monitoring the ego health alliance grants and sub-grants to the wuhan institute of virology. he admitted that we may not have held onto all of the information and research reports from wiv and eco-health. he insisted, however, that he was sure that the coronavirus research at wiv was completely unrelated to sars-cov-2. with the information we know, and the fact that china deleted data, and asked nih to delete

the data, do you believe that we can have certainty that the virus did not come from the wuhan lab and that u.s. funding was not used for covid-19 related research? >> absolutely we cannot do that. if you look back -- and it is declassified and now. the declassified information now, in september of 2019, three things happened in that lab. one is the deleted the sequences. that is highly irregular. researchers don't usually like to do that. second thing they did is they changed the command and control of the lab from civilian control to military control. highly unusual. i've been involved doing these labs when i was in the military. the third thing that they did which is really telling, they let a contractor redo the ventilation system in the laboratory. clearly there was strong evidence there was a significant event that happened in the laboratory in september.

it's been declassified, you can read it. i am sure there is more classified information around it. >> the new york post reported that you stated," i could use the word cover up but i don't know, so i will not speculate that." do you believe there was a cover-up? if so, why would federal agencies work with legacy media to silence scientists and other americans asking questions about the origins of sars-cov-2? >> i am not a big fan of quoting the new york post. i don't think i use the word "cover up." there was an attempt to misguide, redirect the debate. but i would not have use the word "cover up." host: dr. and congresswoman debbie lesko. if you want to watch that, you can watch that on c-span.org. your thoughts on that exchange?

guest: to the first segment of it, there was an inspector general report released in january from the department of health and human services that looked at some of the nh money that went to the wuhan institute of virology. one of the more interesting, disturbing things it stated, the nih, eco-health alliance, a research base partnering with china, had been trying to get data, logbooks, other information from the institute about some of the research they funded. the institute is stonewalling them. in that report, the ig at the department of health and human services suggested the nih consider recommending debarment, which means they could not get more federal funding. there is information that the federal government is trying to get from the lab in china that it is not able to get. as for the cover-up comment, dr.

redfield declined to call it a cover-up. what they were discussing was the proximal origin paper, i believe, these early discussions that led to this paper which really set the narrative around the natural origin. host: pembroke pines, florida. this is nelson, and independent. caller: good morning. what dr. redfield just stated, the cover-up, then went on to describe what he would call it, sounds like a cover-up to me. i would like to point out the wet bar virus was not a gain of function activity. common sense would indicate that the covid that affected the world actually did come out of the laboratory.

this kind of concerns me because, 40 years ago, i read in national geographic, the world finally got rid of smallpox except for a small amount left in a laboratory. i pray to god that gain of function testing is not happening with that. host: paul on twitter asks the question, what is gain of function? guest: i believe your guest last week commented on this. it is a term that is hotly debated, but a common understanding of it, it is experiments in labs that increase the effectiveness of viruses. that is a common way of seeing it. host: did you watch that segment? guest: i did. host: what did you think? he is somebody who has been on

this for years. guest: i think he was right, talking about where we are certain where this come from, i don't think he was telling the whole truth. this is emphasized in the hearing and intelligence community assessment. there is not agreement where this came from. there is not consensus, dispositive evidence on either side. reporting soon investigations are appropriate to continue here. host: it was on march 1 that warren strobel was on the program. we asked him about how long you have been on the beat, whether he had been to china. how long have you been on this, have you been to china? guest: i have not. it took us a year of litigation to get these documents. i have been pursuing these documents for more than a year.

that has really been my main focus on this beat. i do cover other things as well, foia requests. when i saw some of the redacted documents in 2021, i wanted to see what was in the reductions, and we succeeded in getting those removed. host: the article published in the nation, the guardian. jimmy tobias is an independent reporter, taking your phone calls about his work. this is john in mclean, virginia. republican. caller: good morning. i don't think anybody is going to be able to tell us in a certain manner that it came from a lab or market. but i think we should look carefully at the gain of function aspects of this virus, how it seems to -- let's say come out of nature and be very

virulent in human society. i think gain of function associated with this virus is a clear indication it came out of a lab. i would like the person there to comment on the protocols for safety issues, and the french, etc., related to the wuhan lab and the problems there. host: jimmy tobias, as you are doing that, can you explain what a -- cleavage site is? guest: what he mentioned about the way the virus spread rapidly within the human population, that is one of the things that made dr. redfield, in the early days of the pandemic, think that this came out of a lab. there are certain biological aspects of it that did not seem like it came out of nature.

that was one of the things that concerned him. dr. deborah birx was recently on tv sings looking similar. that was one concerning element of the virus that set people's alarms fell off. >> stop. don't clean out your gutters this year. guest: it helps the virus infection. this feature has not been found in other sars-related coronaviruses. that was one of the features that deeply concerned the scientists in these calls in january, february 2020. they could not figure out how it came out of nature. they said it was stunning. other people on emails and calls disagreed. but the paper has been a focus of these discussions for quite some time. it is still unclear to me how

the scientists and dr. fauci and others in january and february 2020 overcame their concerns about the site. that is something i would have asked them if they would have spoken to me, which they declined to do. how did they look at the furin cleavage site, and how did they overcome their concerns? that is an outstanding question in my mind that i'm curious about as i report on the story. host: you also teach journalism at the university of montana. what do you think the lesson for journalists and all that we have seen, how this story has played out with covid, how journalists cover covid, what is the take away for students in journalism? guest: great question. i talked about this article with my students a couple weeks ago. we were talking about the peer-reviewed process, the culture of science.

if your listeners and viewers look at these emails, they paint a different picture from the final paper. i encourage students to look behind the paper, get the story behind the peer-reviewed process, dig into what is happening in the background. science is a human endeavor, there are policies involved and other things. it encourages us as reporters to scrutinize even the most studious individuals, scientists, and try to understand their actions and behaviors that might not be clear from the polished final product. host: last two callers. i will let you respond to both of them together. kristin is up first in maine. line for democrats. caller: good morning. i wonder if you have ever looked

into, along with china, a connection with north korea. in december 2019, kim jong-un warned the united states to prepare for a christmas gift. i have never forgotten those words. i also don't think it was a coincidence that donald trump left new york city i think within a month or so before those words. i wonder if you ever looked into that. host: this is marian in lakewood, new jersey. republican. caller: good morning. first of all, i want to say, dr. fauci should be in jail. second, i want to tell you, long before the virus came out, my daughter worked with a chinese woman in a bank in new jersey. she and her husband was a chinese scientist but they both lived here in america. she told my daughter -- this is

long before covid came out -- that the chinese government was creating a deadly virus. she didn't know when it was going to come out, when it would ruin the world. my daughter didn't believe her. why would they do anything like that? it would kill them, too. i'm telling you, they are going to do something. i don't know when and what it is, but it is in the chinese government, they are doing in the labs. host: jimmy tobias, what do you want to take from those calls? guest: i have not looked into north korea. through thec secondaller, the intelligence community has been pretty adamant that the coronavirus is not some sort of bio weapon or something like that. my hope for these hearings in future investigations is we can move away from some of the more toxic and vitriolic aspects of this debate, look honestly at

the evidence, scientific, political documents. i really hope the select subcommittee looking into this can accomplish that goal. host: before you go, what are you working on now, what is the next big foia request? guest: i have requests about this, trying to get some of the emails from dr. collins. my attorneys and i are exploring another lawsuit. i will continue to cover these hearings, cover the other beats i work on. host: the best place for viewers to go if they want to follow you? jimmy tobias.com. appreciate your time this morning. guest: thank you for having me. less than 30 mins left in the washington journal. we will end as we often do in open forums, let you lead the discussion. any political issue you want to talk about, the phone lines are

open for you to do so. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will get to your calls after the break. ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington. keep up with the biggest events including floor proceedings inherence from the congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips. to stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find schedule information, and c-span radio, and a variety of podcasts. c-span now is available in the apple store and google play. download it today. c-span now, your front row to

washington, anytime, anywhere. >> if you are enjoying book tv, sign up for our newsletter using the qr code on the screen to receive a schedule of upcoming programs, information on book schedules and more. book tv, every sunday on c-span2 or anytime online at c-span.org. television for serious readers. >> c-span has unfiltered coverage of the u.s. response to russia's invasion of ukraine, bringing you the latest from the president and other white house officials, the pentagon, state department, as well as congress. we also have international perspectives from the united nations and statements from foreign leaders all on the c-span networks, the c-span now free mobile app, and c-span.org /ukraine. our web resource page we can watch the latest videos live or on-demand or followweets from

journalists on the ground. go to c-span.org/ukraine. >> there are a lot of places to get political information, but only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span, powered by cable. >> washington journal continues. host: it is just after 9:30 on the east coast. for the next 25 minutes or so, it is our open forum. any public policy, political issue that you want to talk about, the phone lines are open to do so. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001.

independents, (202) 748-8002. lisa is in utica, michigan, a republican. caller: good morning. i just want to express my concern about the fentanyl crisis in this country. i do not like having to discuss this issue with every young person about how dangerous it is, and how one mistake can be deadly. host: how do you start those conversations with a young person on this topic? caller: i just come out and saying there is a fentanyl crisis in this country. do not put anything in your mouth that has not come from a pharmacist, has not come from your parents, or has not come from a sealed bottle, such as tylenol or some pharmacy. host: have you lost anyone to fentanyl? caller: only tangentially. but i am feeling it and i don't

want to lose anyone. that is why this subject needs to be addressed, and that is why i'm calling this morning. host: lisa in utica. republican in indiana. good morning. go ahead, cici. caller: i just want to know -- donald trump being put back in office, the only one who can save the united states, our loved country. he is the only one who can save it. host: robert in manhattan, new york. democrats. caller: good morning. this issue goes back to before world war ii, the japanese occupation, the chinese set up their biological warfare system. they did all sorts of interesting things, like using

the chinese people like white mice. the chinese inherited it after world war ii. people don't know that. it was devoted to biological and chemical warfare as it was nuclear weapons. nuclear weapons go off with a big bang and get the publicity. the all nuclear weapons tests in nevada, people in las vegas would stay up late or get up early to see the sky. that is why biological, chemical warfare has taken second place. the whole thing with covid, undeclared biological warfare. host: this is john in kyle, texas. independent. caller: good morning. thanks for having me.

my cousin, who is to the right of me, asked me a question this past month. what i think about biden getting rid of the college debt of various students. i responded in a way and i think it out to be discussed nationally. president biden attacked the symptom instead of the problem. i think the problem is our higher education is too expensive. i think the way to attack that is to provide more, not only to one education method, but distance learning, and employ a lot of people that have professional and specialist jobs

over the years, retired though they may be, incorporated into the educational process. i think that requires some elasticity in the accreditation process but it will be worth it. we may be able to drop the cost of higher education, make it wider, maybe deeper, and keep people from having to go into such debt for the sake of their degrees. i will be quiet and hope for the best. host: you mentioned president biden. here is a headline from the wall street journal. we talked about the story in the first hour, the u.s. takes steps to stem the bank fallout. regulators assuming control of a second lender, promising to cover all deposits, focusing on the collapse last week of silicon valley bank, svb. 20 minutes ago, president biden from the white house spoke in

front of the cameras about the steps that federal officials are taking to secure u.s. banking system following the collapse of dvb. -- svb. this is what the president how to say this morning. president biden: before i leave for california, i want to talk about what is happening at silicon valley bank, signature bank. over the last few days, with action from my administration, americans can have confidence that the banking system is safe. your deposits will be there when you need them. deposit accounts at these banks can breathe easier knowing they can pay their workers and pay their bills. the hard-working employees can breathe easier as well. last week, when we learned about the problems of the bank, the impact they could have on jobs, on small businesses, the banking system over all, i instructed my team to act quickly to protect these interests. they have done that.

friday, the government regulator in charge, the fbi see, took control of silicon valley bank's assets. over the weekend, it took control of signature bank's assets. treasury secretary yellen and a team of bankers have taken immediate action. here are the highlights. first, all customers who have deposit in these banks can rest assured they will be protected and will have access to their money as of today. that includes small businesses across the country that bank there and need to make payroll, pay their bills and stay open for business. this is an important point. no losses will be borne by the taxpayers. let me repeat that. no losses will be borne by the taxpayers. instead, the money will come from the fees the banks pay into the deposit insurance fund. because of the action that regulars have taken, every

american should feel confident that their deposits will be there if and when they need them. second, the management of these banks will be fired. if the bank is to over by fbi see, the people running the bank should not work there anymore. third, investors in the banks will not be protected. they notably took a risk, and when the risk did not pay off, investors lose their money. that is how capitalism works. fourth, there are questions about how the banks got into the circumstances in the first place. we must get the full accounting of what happened and why those responsible can be held accountable. no one is above the law. finally, we must reduce the risk of this happening again. during the obama-biden administration, we put in place tough requirements on banks, like silicon valley bank and signature bank, including the dodd frank law that make sure

the crisis we saw in 2008 would not happen again. unfortunately, the last administration roll back of these requirements. i will ask congress and the banking regulators to strengthen the rules for banks to make it less likely this kind of failure would happen again, and to protect american jobs and small businesses. the bottom line is this. americans can rest assured that our banking system is safe. your deposits are safe. let me also assure you, we will not stop at this. we will do whatever is needed. host: that was president biden from a little earlier this morning. 15 minutes left in the washington journal. taking your phone calls. it is our open forum. any political issue you want to talk about, it is your time to call in. kelly is in ithaca, new york. an independent. caller: good morning. how are you? host: doing well.

how are you? caller: thanks. i just want to give you a compliment. i've been listening to washington journal for years and i've never called in. i am really quite impressed just how objective and -- you and all the moderators are very good at accepting a lot of strange calls from people. host: appreciate that. what line of work are you in, kelly? caller: in the education department. host: are you a state worker, federal worker? caller: state worker, new york state education system. i just wanted to say, the moderators must have gone

through a very grueling -- maybe not grueling -- host: one of the things we try to do is not focus on ourselves but the caller. i was interested in the new york state education department, the status of all of these debates right now about what kinds of history we can and cannot teach in schools. i wonder if you run into any of that in new york? caller: yes, i do, every day. host: how do you feel about it? caller: so frustrating. that is my point. you take a lot of calls from people that have all kinds of theories. i don't mean to be pejorative, but a lot of crackpots and

lunatics call in with all kinds of theories. but i'm very impressed that you can take all of these, keep a straight face, and i really appreciate your ability to withstand all of the attitudes, strange calls that you get. i just want to thank you for your great service. it's a great program. i am just amazed at how many different attitudes people have. host: thank you for that. that is what we try to do here, give people a chance to air their thoughts, opinions about things. there are a lot of them in washington. a lot of folks will be speaking at you. this is the one place where you can actually speak back. let me get to linda rose in brooksville, florida. an independent. good morning. caller: good morning.

i would like to address the immigration situation that so many people are complaining about. our american corporations went down into those central and south american countries, took up all the land that those people were releasing to live on -- leasing to live on, and our corporations force of those people out because we starved them. we also sent militias to create civil wars in all of these countries. i am sick and tired of hearing americans complain about the immigrants. this country could not survive without them. go back to reagan, iran contra, and remember how he created civil wars in those countries. and we are to blame what is happening, not them. if the republicans would agree to an immigration bill, we could

solve this problem overnight. but they refuse because they like the issue. it is good for their people. thank you. i hope i have informed some uninformed americans. host: before you go, with your criticism of republicans, you are calling on the independent line. caller: i used to be a democrat, but when the democrats allowed the iraq war, which everyone knew was not justified, i decided not to be a democrat and went independent. host: linda rose come independent in brooksville, florida. this is --in baltimore, maryland. caller: i'm calling in response to the student loan debacle. the american taxpayer has been generous to foreign countries.

between 2013 and 2018, nearly 300 billion dollars of u.s. taxpayer money flowed in 80 to other countries outside the united states. i don't understand why americans do not have a problem giving billions of dollars to other countries, but we have a problem helping our own citizens with student loan debts. when i graduated from rn school 30 years ago, i didn't have a student loan. grants, loans, pell grants, workforce payments were plentiful. i didn't have to borrow any money. it was not until black and brown people started going to college in bigger numbers, that they decided they would no longer help americans do that. and student loans became the only source for getting a college education. now, rich people don't need student loans. they can afford to send their kids to college. it is the poor, black and brown

people, indigenous people who need the help of the government. but we don't want to help them. we want to give billions of dollars to other countries. it is a tragedy. it doesn't help the american economy at all. it doesn't help us be a better country, it doesn't help us be a better nation. it doesn't help us when it comes to looking out for those who are the least of us. host: gloria in baltimore. this is rich in the buckeye state. republican. good morning. caller: great conversations. it seems like we have our head on straight. there is a fast-moving game going on with the banking. our government knows, when they spend too much money, the federal reserve has no choice but to crank up the interest rates. when they raise the interest rate, things are going to break.

some of the best companies are doing good things. our housing market has to pay the price. but don't raise all of this debt and you will solve the problem. why do we keep repeating this goofy thing? the president knew what he was doing when he was doing the extra spending. the other thing, on our border, when we make a big magnet for giving people money for people coming to the united states, we can attract people. we can do that with any department store. have a sale and see how my people come running to it. we have to get smarter at the border. host: this is david in jennings, louisiana. independent. caller: good morning. this inflation has caused a great windfall profit for the state and local governments the tax.

items we use to pay one dollar four have gone to two dollars. in this particular state, on groceries, it is four cents. you are getting the same product but in some cases we are getting 3, 4 times the amount of taxes. this inflation is just a windfall for the state and local governments. i cannot get any of my representatives to address the issue. they seem to play ignorant of the fact that this is even happening. another thing, on the college programs, as long as the government finances these student loans, the colleges have the responsibility. if they had such a great product, let them finance these loans. just like general motors, if the

government backed every car that i bought, they could continually go up on the price. when i went to college, it was $300 a semester. my granddaughter, i think they are paying almost $15,000 a semester. as long as the government backs these loans, the colleges will keep increasing the prices. thank you for listening. host: a few mins left in the program. eugene, oregon. the line for democrats. caller: good morning. i would like to offer a different approach to the abortion question. that would be two party consent with dna verification. this would allow the woman to make better choices about who they partner with, as well as

altogether making it a more equitable choice for everyone. thank you very much. host: five mins left this morning. i did want to remind you of our c-span coverage later this evening. 7:15 this evening, covering former president donald trump speaking in iowa, his fst visit to the hawkeye state since announcing his republican mpaign. he will be talking about education policy in davenport, wa. you can watch on c-span, c-span.org, free c-span video app. we showed you president biden speaking earlier today, talking about the bank fallout, silicon valley bank, the efforts the government is taking. he was on his way to a trilateral meeting today with

the prime ministers of australia and united kingdom, to discuss the three countries and their military efforts. the president meeting at 1:30 p.m. local time with them in san diego, california today. probably close to getting on the plane to go in that direction. this is karen in pembroke pines, florida. republican. caller: thank you for taking my call. we had a daughter in college, son in high school, another daughter in high school. pan am airlines close down. my husband had a license for jet aircrafts. he was in the market suddenly with tens of thousands of people to get another job. back that it was impossible for him. somehow, they couldn't get a student loan but they worked

their way through. they went to school and they went to work. anyway. i don't think now i should be responsible for paying off other kid's loans. we had a struggle, our kids paid them off and we got on fine. now we have two grandkids. more coming, but anyway. i don't like how joe biden said, he blamed this on donald trump. donald trump is a great businessman. he understands economics all over the world, not just the united states. joe biden always makes these comets about them and that it comes out later that the president told another lie. god help our country during this time. if the immigrants come here, they have to come here like in world war ii. somebody sponsor them, they have to work, and they could not get anything from the government.

we lost our insurance and everything when pan am was closed down. it was terrible. host: karen in florida. this is john in leland. independent. good morning. caller: i will be real with america and the world. i may see some that you don't want to hear and what black people need to know. they gave billions of acres to immigrants to come here after enslaving us for hundreds of years. they denied us education for hundreds of years, killed us if we tried to read. now you want the poorest of the board to be the bedrock of this country? capitalism is a credit card, where you can use slavery and people up, and then never have to pay them. declare bankruptcy and you never have to pay your debt. when people come here, they don't come to george bush's neighborhood, they go to black neighborhoods. they take businesses from us. that money goes back to other communities.

1.5 trillion dollars goes to other communities. that is planned. that is like the government getting another budget again. they will put drugs in our communities, they will kill our leaders, all of that. it is just crazy. host: john in mississippi. we will end and santa fe. james is a democrat. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just wanted to point out the dichotomy, i just thought of lately. first of all, the comparison on guns and fentanyl in the country. people saying that we cannot have fentanyl because they are killing people. with the guns, the guns are not the problem, it is the people. but they want to get rid of the fence and not the guns. i just thought i would point

out. host: james is our last caller on today's washington journal. we will be back tomorrow at 7:00 eastern, 4:00 a.m. pacific. >> now our live coverage today here on c-span. at 12:30 we will hear from infrastructure -- the average of her law. he is speaking at the american association transportation conference here in washington, d.c.. at 1:30 former chair peter

defazio talks about china and its impact on global supply chain. the conversation being hosted by the hudson institute. this evening at 7:15 eat -- eastern, former president trump is in iowa. you can watch all these events live on c-span and stream them live on c-span now, our free mobile video app or online at c-span.org. thu.s. senate returned tuesday at 3:00 p.m. eastern. sinners will consider several of president biden's nominatis including former los angeles mayor to be u.s. ambassador t india. the president first ninated him for the post nearly two years ago. in july of 2021. the house is cuently in district work period. they retn for legislative business wednesdayarch 22nd

after the house republicans annual retreat in orlando, florida. watch live coverage of the house on c-span. see the senate on c-span two. you can watch all of our congressional coverage on our free video app c-span now or online at c-span.org. since 1979 a, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress from house and senate floors, to congressional hearings, party briefings and committee member -- committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these

television companies and more, including charter communication. c-span giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> president biden talked about government steps taken over the weekend to prevent a banking crisis following the collapse of silicon valley bank and the closure of signature bank. the president argued the quick action by the federal reserve, treasury, federal deposit insurance federation means americans can rest assured the banking industry is safe.