♪ host: good morning. it is monday, june 12.

president joe biden and former president donald trump lead in the holes with their respective -- in the polls with their respective party nomination. -- it has led to increasing conversation and what a well-financed effort to build a third-party candidate. today, we want you to weigh in. would you be open to supporting a third-party candidate for president in 2024? republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002,

text us at (202) 748-8003. please include your name and where you live. you can join us on facebook.com/the --facebook.com/cspan and we are also on twitter --twitter @cspanwj. this article says the bipartisan group, no labels, wants to launch a campaign the matter what critics say. democrats across the country are going to this to prevent a $70 million effort. if this will help the gop. cofounders and leaders nancy jacobson has called the project

an insurance policy in the event both major parties put forth presidential candidates that the vast majority of americans do not work -- support. it also says they will not have an nomination if the polling suggests that an independent ticket cannot win. no labels is the organization that many expect may have a third-party candidate coming into 2024. the question is, is that something voters are willing to work -- to support? again, we want to hear from you. willie washington dc on the dim attic line. i watches -- on the democratic line. i want to start off by asking you do you have a preferred candidate or not for 2020 for? caller: i would vote for biden

but it is mostly because i don't like trump. host: ok would you vote for a third early candidate? caller: i would definitely vote for a third already. the news to me always crushes the other. -- other party. host: are there any -- fair have been some names turnout is a possible third party candidate. has anyone caught your eye? caller: no, but any third party i would definitely vote for -- for the third party no matter who they are to get away from the other two that always have problems. host: so right now in general you are ready to support a third already candidate? caller: absolutely. host: ok, interesting. axiom had holing out with the

title right in line with what we are discussing. the headline says most americans don't want biden or trump to run. when you scroll down, driving the news recent nbc news poll says 70% of americans believe biden should not run for reelection and 51% of democrats saying this poll was taken before biden officially announced his reelection. and one third of the -- republicans say that trump at 76 years old should not run for president. one said that biden is 80 years old should not run again citing his age as a major reason. democrat and republican votes

say that they will vote for the former and current president in the general election. 88% of democratic voters say they definitely would vote for biden. almost half 46% of republican mary voters would support trump as their first choice is what they expect to be a crowded bill for the bowl -- poll. so biden and trump owed well even if some say neither should run. we want to hear from you. our next caller is author in winter garden, florida. republican line. who is your candidate right now? caller: it is true and i'm just saying right now that from doug today before -- from 1984 to the past year i was about a

third-party. host: do you have any candidates in mind or open to whomever comes out? caller: i tend to vote [indiscernible] for many years i belong to the american form which is basically a very conservative third-party base out of tennessee. host: all right. caller: yes, i believe that there are things that should be place on the republican ticket that, so far, have not been placed on the platform. i still attend -- yes, because i

am conservative, but ideally a third-party could be a very good thing. host: alright arthur, thank you for your call. let's go to eric he is calling in cedartown, georgia. on the democrat line. are you open to a third-party candidate? caller: yes, i am a. i would not -- i am. i would not vote for trump or biden. when you get them in the house, they are calling the shots and the democrats are going on with it. they are cutting back on our rights. all of these -- republicans piling up all of the document and all of the scandals and investigations at school settle down, but they had control of these, they could have put a

stop to all this information. there are not doing nothing with that deal -- with the debt deal. we got our right cut back because of the house they should never default. republicans have constituent that would suffer from that also. it is like being in the dual where i have a gun and i give you micah just give it to you and you'd let you put the gun beside my head and hold me hostage. when the rats are an office there is no use to them. on one side they pitch the environment but he is actually doing nothing to help those constituents. one thing i can say about trump and stephen newton is they took control of the money. they were calling the shots of what they were doing at the democrats for going along with them. they were doing everything they could. they were taking any to rebuild the wall. trump is putting in borders.

biden has power but it is like they don't have any power going on with these cuts away clear doing. host: ok we got your point we have to move on to the next caller. frank is in kimsey, new york in -- independent line. what are your thoughts about third-party candidates? caller: since were going on third-party candidates, we could go forth already, for already, it does not matter because commonsense people in office you're going to have the same can asian and unction -- same -- same confusion and dysfunction it would be like children running a home. you need a party that is

controlled by conscience, it's thought to help people they serve, ok, and some people are not satisfied. the maga already. if they do not like the rules and laws applied to everybody in the country, like they used to say in the 60's, pack your bags and leave the country. go move to russia or something like that. host: you are an independent voter, right now which candidate if any or who would you like to support in 2024 even if they are not now yet? -- not announced yet? caller: well chris was the republican. he was kind of helping navigate

through his little problems. today started talking about donald trump like you should, like any other republican should that man is not qualified to do anything he is just a more on. chris sounds like a breakout candidate that i think a lot of people could back. he has talked to democrats, like , with a ball, during the hurricane, he did talk to biden and he did specific lycee -- specifically say i am here to help people in trouble. host: all right. that was frank in new york. we go to cheyenne, miami. diane on the line. what are your thoughts about a third party candidate?

caller: i would not vote for trump he is too divisive and he is destroying our -- earth. i remember in the 1970's was a terrible man, he did not pay his company workers. i would never vote for him. i don't believe biden is an effective resident candidate. i would definitely vote for a third already candidate. host: is there anyone you think would make a good third-party candidate into a neat or -- in 2024? caller: -- there are others that i would listen to and i would vote for them but i guess they are not interested in being in at our already or interested in running for resident -- president. it does not seem, very open. i don't really know what i going to do for the election.

i will probably be writing somebody say. because i don't like any of the choices. none. host: i appreciate your call. let's go to iowa now with gail on the in line. caller: i was planning on voting third-party into my canned that -- i got it candidate in one of the other parties. host: ok who is your candidate? caller: -- i am very open to a third party. in fact, kind of got in on the people's party about their self. he is a very viable candidate. but definitely will not leave by their jobs. abend voting for this party the last three general election. host: all right, gail.

gail mention cornell west. he is the candidate for the party to get once again -- he is not running on either of the two major political arteries. four northwest is considered coming from the left side. let's take a look at his lunch ad. -- launch ad. ♪ >> in these talks i have decided to run for truth and justice which takes the form of running for the president of the united states. i enter the quest with truth and justice. the presidency is one vehicle to pursue the truth and justice of what i have been trying to do all my life.

i come from a tradition where i care about you. i care about the quality of your life. i care about whether you have assets to a job or living wage, decent housing, women having control over their bodies, health care for all. de-escalating the destruction of the planet and the destruction of american democracy. democracy creates disruption and it creates an interruption, why? from below the energies of everything people is manifesting and i know there is precious will in your life that you care for. that is why it is important for you to be involved, important for you to participate. nobody hitting anybody. we are talking about loving,

affirming, and empowering those who have been pushed to the margins. because neither political party wants to tell the truth about wall street, ukraine, the pentagon, big tech. liberals like brother biden, i am so happy to make a world shaky decision. you know? [laughter] i know gangsters when i see them. that is an objective condition. do we have what it takes? we shall see but some of us will go down fighting. go down swinging. with the and a smile -- style and a smile. with the vesting you trying to bring out the best in me.

let's do it together. host: that was cornell west the professor and democratic-socialist activist who is running as the people's party candidate for president. but today we want to hear more from you. are you open to a third-party candidate? republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002 and you can also comment on facebook as well. one said on cornell west csi and considering -- i am considering voting for third-party.

charles gives rights i've mostly -- mostly voted third-party rights. and one says voting third-party rights is a wasted vote. save the gas stay at home. amy says we have a winner take all first half of the system. that means any third party will only drain vote from the other two with no hope of winning. again, we want to hear more of your thoughts on third ready candidate. let's get the republican line with brenda calling from piedmont, missouri. what are your thoughts? caller: well, i think the third-party is -- i don't think enough people will vote for a third-party. i know that, i used to be a democrat all my life -- people

on the left, i used to be a dimmer at all my life, -- a democrat all my life, until i found out that they are trying to change the country on base. there trying to destroy america. the republicans are in on it. they are working together to do it. so it is like i am looking for a candidate that is for the country. this country first, because you cannot trust most people like the guy you played the interview for. he's a democrat. and it seems to me that he is a socialist. we want to save our republic. for me on the democrat side i voted for trump and i think he is a strong candidate. i know that by -- biden and his

family are correct. they weaponize the doj and the fbi. but, to me, robert junior sounds less than he needed -- used to be. and those are the people i used to vote for, but -- host: ok we will need to go to our next caller now. karel is calling from alabama on the democratic line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i don't think i would seriously consider voting for a third-party candidate. not with the names that have been thrown out. i just don't think i could support any of them. not rfk junior and not joe

manchin. so i'm not saying i would not be open to it, but the names i have been hearing, none of them sounds right to me right now. host: i know you are calling on the democratic line right now who is your candidate of choice? caller: i have been a registered lifelong democrat so i am pretty much all in with the democrats. host: all right we appreciate your call. the next caller is tyrone in middletown, new york on independent line. open to a third-party candidate -- well you are independent so are you open to supporting other party candidate? caller: no, third-party candidates they don't have a

chance in our country to win anything except maybe on a local level. what i am open to is i am of been to a person like john cayson -- john kasich. john kasich when he ran in the last republican primary, he beat trump in manhattan. and he did well and some of the outlying votes. and he beat trump in ohio. he is more of a moderate republican already is totally broken. it is totally broken. the democrats are broken as well, but the republicans are just down the toilet. i would vote for john kasich to be mr. republican party.

but until then i will just stick with voting for the democrats. host: all right. let's go to the republican line now. jonathan is falling from ohio. caller: hi. host: good morning what are your thoughts about a third-party candidate? caller: i am back and forth with it, but probably not, but i am still just stick with trump. there's a lot of stuff from trump that has -- and all that stuff. but third-party out no with the

parties still take documentaries -- i mean documents home also? i remember republican. host: all right the next caller is on the democratic line. rudy is in washington. rudy, are you there? caller: oh yeah, i am here. thank you for taking my call. you know, i would like vote for -- i might vote for a third party candidate if one would run that is not a crack -- that wasn't a crackpot. but at this point i don't see anything. i think i would vote for anybody that could beat donald trump. and that is a guts to say. thank you. by now. host: let's hear from roy in

virginia. republican line. caller: hello? host: yes, you were on. caller: ok. i don't think we need a third already. to parties work well if it's ron wright. they have too much going on. they are corrected. the democrats i would stick with them but they lied is so much about trump. and i'm going to go with trump. and if there was a person -- jesus christ would not touch it with the didn't the whole. biden is no good for the country. he takes 401(k)s and my money from the hardware people. they just run up a bunch of money and bills for something that is not truthful. so i don't want to do with them. as a stick with what we've got

and vote for trump. host: all right. we've been talking about their already -- talking about third party candidates and the washington journal -- and there is a headline that said don't count out a third-party. -- a third-party in 2024. her piece.read an excerpt from the biggest gr america is not democra or republican, it is the affiliated. localiati reports a record number of american saying th are lyrically independent. -- politically independent. it is at 49% pretty much the same as the two armt together. nbc polls -- the two parties put er.

want trump to run again.ot out half of democrats do not want mr. biden. and another poll found that 4 did not want trump ar nominee. these are huge numbers, if you believe them, they roughly form with my observation. then the predicate for a successful third-party are there. that is the wall street journal patty newman. we want to hear more from you about the prospect of a third-party candidate in 2024. we have janet in rocky river, ohio. democrat line. your thoughts. caller: yes, why is nobody talking about this who is backing rob kennedy junior? steve bannon is.

look it up he is behind robert kennedy another case of bad scene. and i want to say to republicans in the country, if you are a republican you are a white the premise, christian nationalist, racy -- evangelical. this is the party that needs to change because they love what trump stands for. he has a white supremacist. all of these republicans they call in and they speak against steve bannon. and i wish people would talk about it more he is behind robert kinsey junior. a very dangerous man. thank you so much. host: let's go to the independent line right now. doris in massachusetts. would you support other party candidate? caller:hi, yes, i would say even with the third already system and somebody believes they would take away the vote it

is completely necessary. it is not you choose the left or right party otherwise the independent party would not exist either wise either -- otherwise either. even young people do not trust the left or right anymore. generally, like me, we do not trust it anymore. we will naturally be drawn to somebody who is not on the left or right. i think people will vote for a third-party, but they do not trust the left or right party. i think there going to vote. host: please candidates are catching your eyes right now? caller: the one you recently advertise the third already you just advertised. i don't like to vote and i don't trust -- most of my generation do not like voting. but i think if people do vote they will vote for him. host: all right in massachusetts

on the republican line dean calling from charleston, south carolina. go ahead. caller: good morning. first everybody needs to understand you and everybody else does the two control politics in this country which is media and money. that unfortunately excludes almost everybody in the republican party eggs -- in 2012 i have personal goods from virginia. he was an independent at one time, and a dim rat and then became a republican. he went independent again and ran in 2012 because of the party. in 2016, i voted for the constitution party. he is lower -- lawyer and a strong christian. and i will admit, 2020, trump

immediately got grief in 2016. people were swarming to give him about it all care for that. i don't know what will happen in the constitution party next year but i will take a hard look at it now. people say you are wasting your vote, well, i think i need to devote my conscious. and nothing just don't be red. i'm not hurting your republican candidate at all with my one-vote. i think it is necessary to have a third-party. i think we needs -- democrats need to have that flag on everybody for candidates. host: all right. again, our russian today is we be open to supporting a third-party candidate?

republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. text us at (202) 748-8003. before we get to more calls, i want to bring up a different opinion piece about this topic. this one is by the new york times and the headline says this is not time for a third presidential candidate. here is an excerpt from this. brooks writes i have longed for already that would long revive the te sain in american politics by alexander hamilton, abraham lincoln, theodore roosevelt, and contemporaries like bloomberg. if the 2020 for election was

bernie sanders versus ron desantis i would support this one house and percent. an independent candidate would bring this into the 21st century. their agenda would not be my cup of tea. donald trump changes the equation. a trump kaz -- presidency faces a threat to our democracy. in my view our show -- the sole purpose should be to defeat trump. we want to hear more from you on this subject. our next caller, susan, florida, democrat line. caller: hello. i am definitely a supporter of joe biden. i am very surprised by people saying he is too old just because he has stumbled a couple times. the man is not decrepit in mind

or body. i find it offensive when people say that. the man is doing a very good job. he is handling his job. he is doing it. he is doing it. he is completing the task in front of him. he is working hard and long hours. he is doing the job. we have to get rid of donald trump. and i once voted for another third-party candidate and that was ross perot. it did not do anything or any good. they threw my vote away and it was a waste of time and everything. so, please, joe biden he is competent and eloquent. he knows what he is doing. he has been around the block a few times.

he is the one for the job. thank you. host: all right, susan. let's go to charlotte, north carolina with steve on the independent line. caller: hi, yes i voted for jill stein last time. the way north carolina is you have to have close to 55,000 signatures to have a party. so just to write her name in there is no independent party here it's a for those. host: what makes you support jill stein? caller: well she is pretty smart. i like her ideas. she is a stand-in for bernie. [laughter] you know bernie is a good party man. i would vote for him in a minute. but the other two, especially

trump, we are not good enough for him. i felt like i could vote or either of them. host: all right. we appreciate your call this morning. let's hear from danny on the republican line in south carolina. you're on. caller: yes i have a few comments. one color called in earlier and said an independent cannot win, in an american election. i thought that is shocking got that we could do anything we want in america. that is america's dream. according to some people they would not vote one way or the other way.. i'm of the gel always. if donald trump ran as an independent i would vote for him as an independent.

he has been railroaded, chased, threatened, targeted. after all of that, i have not seen where he is being convicted of anything. not criminal, anything. but all of the colors that say joe biden is doing such a good job, they have to be rich because we can barely afford fuel, groceries, utility. you can hit the button now. have a nice day. host: all right we will go to the democratic line now with elena on -- new york. caller:hi, i am really conflicted because last year i voted for joe biden. he has done fine so far and i think that i would really like to see a third already come up to have a different option from the last right.

i agree that a lot of people are not happy with the two options that we currently have. i agree with the gentleman that said it is hard to avoid things right now. i'm not pleased with the taxis and that is here so i would love to see someone else give it a try. trump got a chance, let's give someone else a try. that is my opinion on this. host: israel is our next caller. they are -- israel is in florida on our end line. caller: yes, hi, thank you for taking my call. i am also a disabled veteran. i feel discouraged sometimes when i look at different armies that are taking presidency in our nation. whether it is republican, democrat, or whatever party they affiliate with because if we go

back in time for the time that our nation was founded. there was a lot of biblical principles involved. the moment that these presidents started taking place they started breaking a lot of rules and laws that are in my opinion the laws of the lord. and the lgbt thing, the nazi, and all the racist thing, marxism, and so many other thing have been welcomed into the nation because the very president is been in lace and congress and many people of the united states of america have been turning their backs on god. and we need god to bring your revival into the church which is the white house and our nation. host: who is your candidate of choice right now? caller: anybody who is wholeheartedly serving for god.

that is who i vote for because they would bring purity into the white house. edit would allow a lot of americans to turn away from this simple way and -- and it would allow a lot of americans to turn away from the simple way and put god in charge of our nation. host: we move on to the next caller. john is in california. republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. this interesting question about a third candidate, but to do that you have to really know what you want in that candidate. do you want them to close the borders? limit regulations? to put a third-party candidate in their you have to define with the goal would be. a lot of the third-party

candidates come in having an agenda. and that is why the third-party candidates have always struggled. and donald trump is the ultimate third already candidate because he is a washington outsider area he's been a republican, democrat area have been on both sides of the issues. just like donald trump, any third-party candidate is going to get ousted by their opponent. but when you think about it donald trump's ultimate third-party candidate. thank you for taking my call and go from. host: before we go back to the phone lines let's read some comments on facebook. scott wrote sure, i have in the

past voted for it -- in 2016 because i could not trust hillary in did not know i can trust trump yet. trump did get my vote in 2023 and e is on track again to get it. and this is a text message from michael in st. louis. he says as an independent i would be interested in voting with a third-party candidate. i would like to see they are and what they represent and what they would do the country. another text from zan in el paso, texas. he says it would work only if we have choice voting. the candidate needs to have more than half of the country not just over one third. and we do another one from facebook. carolyn code-4 rhodes, no,

american citizen candidate is trump. he is america first. trump 2024 for me. all the way to the ballot box. this is been weaponized by obama to be used against the american people. our question for you today would be are you willing to support a third-party cdidate? republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-80 our next caller is james in washington dc on the independent line. caller: good morning. host: good morning what are your thoughts this morning? caller: i been listening and i said i've got to call in. a been a democrat all my life and 2020 where trump was it is

like i've got skid trump out of here so of voted for my man biden. i voted for biden to get trump out of there. but it is the same the pandemic it is not as rough as it is right now. every time i got to washington him spending money, gas is running out fast. my wife is crazy right now because -- doesn't make any sense biden going good. it is bad right now. it is bad with the pandemic. [indiscernible] it is more about the country in america. what about us? [indiscernible] wake up. if it was somebody who is going to think about us, who will run for president? [indiscernible] host: all right, james we got your point this morning.

let's go to gary now. gary is in eugene, oregon. democrat line. caller: good morning, my name is terry mccomb, i am a democratic voter in have been all my life. you know, when he opened the show this morning you mentioned no labels. no labels is being funded mainly by billionaires. and one of the big ones is mr. crow -- they are not for democracy. i posted on twitter lots of links to various news sites about no labels. there really -- it is a really dangerous time. the dental -- gentlemen who just

called and was so upset about rice's. i am astounded at the prices at the grocery store, but but it is not president biden. if you, if people will look it is the greed event is happening from the companies and corporations. they are making higher profits than they ever have before. may i also just say that trump -- i have known about trump's history. i love watching the apprentice, but i want to say that i was not that shocked when he became -- was elected. it is because of this reason. we have pure red states they keep voting in. they are the poorest states in the country. they don't have medicaid. they have even got -- fair governors will not allow the federal -- the billions of

dollars that the federal government wants to offer them to pay for medicaid and help these people. they still that these people in. i tell you, this citizen tree has been dumbed down for the last 40 years and it is being offered the republic ends. they want authoritarians -- republicans. they want authoritarianism. and if people are a third already, you were going to -- you are putting your mark on destroying this democracy. host: all right, we will move on to our next caller. terry did bring up and i want to show a article from the republic. and it says -- in the headline the group no labels, has more than $100,000 from mayor crow. the sub headline says the nonpartisan group also relies on

-- its wells to bring in nearly two dozen other donors from 2019 up to 2021. let's go to the republican line with bob in indiana. am i saying that correctly, bob? caller: yes ma'am. host: all right what are your thoughts? caller: with the third-party i am interested, not a particular person, but right now we have two parties and the president is selected without a majority because the number of people that vote. you only have to have 50% of the people and the number of people that vote is less than majority generally. if you have the third-party would be electing president with 25% of the vote. i think you need more support

from the grassroots people then you can have with three parties running. thank you. host: all right, rob. let's go to alabama now. rob is calling on the independent line. caller: [indiscernible] host: robin, you're breaking up a little bit. ok much better. go ahead. caller: yeah, i do not know about third-party candidate, but i have a suggested about a candidate from one of each of the parties? it would be a good ticket and they will work together and it seems like -- i want to know what viewers think about that. thank you for taking my call. host: all right, robin. jackson is calling from washington dc on the dim attic

line. -- democratic line. you are on. caller: outstanding thank you. a lot of what your last caller said. i do not support an independent party and i 100% support josie gavin. i really like her. i don't support the two-party system because i think -- the policy said something about trump being an independent. i think the whole idea of the notion of an independent does not make sense to begin with. i am a lifelong democrat. i voted for trump last year. the only reason why i did not vote for him a second time was because of his son-in-law that took him into focus on america. and i think that is the thing they took us to israel, and that upset me to the point that it is upsetting.

that is why would not. but with inflation i can lee agree that joe biden, i would not vote for him again. i would vote for somebody that focuses on america first. i am a democrat. anything that puts america first. i do not think this party would work at all. but i think this candidate could do it. host: all right jackson in washington dc. let's go to the republican line albuquerque, new mexico. jesse are you with us? caller: hello? host: yes, go ahead. caller: hey, sorry, my phone is not working well. i was just going to say i look forward to talking about a third-party candidate. they need to have a viable third party. i think i'll you know, when i think about how you can really win an election and the numbers

-- i think there was like a -- party. a party that was trying to support the agenda majority of women in america and i just think based on recent supreme court case and i think the way a lot of women here feel about how politics is running in america, not canada, but politicians out there, i think they all came together trying to form a third-party of their own, i think they would have it as the w x y women sign you parties. because i think there's young people that are not being represented well. i think if they all came together there will be a massive third-party undertaking and they

could take hold of the american government. but, have a very good day. host: all right, thank you. let's go to kings, tennessee. independent. caller: good morning to you. i have to say, west has the best campaign music i have heard in decades. i support the constitution party ever since they reformed. -- 49% she sai have identified as indepen or nonated. yeah, they wl te for one of the two major parties. this is why one of the candidates will likely never win. it is possible, but it is called

a self-fulfilling prophecy. people say, oh yeah, i vote for another candidate. i vote for an independent. and yet they won't. when it comes down to it they pull the lever or mark the ballot for one of the two major parties. that is why -- if they would do in voter conventions, you could see a third-party candidate given the power, as far as what that would do, and how they would work with the -- with congress, that would be an interesting proposition but definitely, i think people should look at third parties and, you know, it sends a message if nothing else area as far as wasting your vote, anytime you vote you cannot say you wasted your vote regardless of who you voted for. you are not just voting for who you think is going to win, you

are supposed to vote for what you think is best the country regardless. not say i'm going to vote for the less of two evils because otherwise it is wasting a vote. that is my opinion. host: all right, got it. let's go to selma, calling from the bronx, new york. democrat line area caller: hello i am calling -- line. caller: i am calling in to say that joe biden is my guide. can you hear me? host: yes, of course. tell us why joe biden is your guy. caller: he is my guy 100%. i think he is doing a good job. [indiscernible] all of her vicinity. here we are florida is

controlled by the right people. he is doing a great job and [indiscernible] thank you. host: alrighty. i'll tourism is calling from savannah, georgia. independent line. go ahead. caller: hello there. we live in the corporate state of america. there is not a sequel -- single politician that has run for president that is not -- they are working for the corporation and pretending that is not true. we need someone that is not working for corporation and working for the people. we are all tired of it. give us one person, one person. not the corporation. altruism is my name.

it is about that. host: do you have any candidates in mind? caller: get me somebody that would work for the american people. i don't see anyone like that. bernie was like that. i don't see anyone else like that. with the events out there, people, can you hear me? host: all right we appreciate your call this morning. let's go to tony in new york. independent. caller: yes, good morning. thank you for the program. i do not see much choice out there anywhere. everybody looks like they are looking for somebody to leave out of this situation. i do believe like i have told before what other time, liz cheney and -- gilbert arvin to get together. i don't know what could possibly

happen, but i see the integrity of these people. i think they truly would put american first -- america first. i think these two ladies would get us out there on the right path. i think they have good hearts and i think they would win. i hope they are listening to this call. i would support them. host: all right, tony. we have a couple more comments from facebook. and this is what i think is being offered by both artese for this info. josh fisher says only if it were bernie. fox co said i supported third already candidate in the best that offered a sound, alternative form read i will again if there is one. and another writes that c-span i

wish for candidates and what third parties they run on. until that time vote for the parties of the people joe biden and vice president kamala harris ohio 2024. thank you for asking. we will take a quick break and up next wall street congressional reporter siobhan hugh discusses trump's indictment and previews the week ead. ter the smoke is clearing but wildfire continues to burnn the u.s. and and the. we will talk about the -- cada we will talk about the change in the impact of wildfires with berkeley professor patrick gonzales. ♪

>> c-span's campaign 2024 coverage is your front proceed to the presidential election. watch our coverage of the candidates on the campaign trail, with announcements, meet and greets, speeches and events to make up your own mind. campaign 2024 on the c-span network, c-span outcome our free mobile video app or anytime online at c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this, it looks like this where americans can see democracy at work, where citizens are truly informed, our republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word from the nation's capital to wherever you are, you get the opinion that matters the most, your own. this is where dimock -- this is

what democracy looks like, c-span powered by cable. >> c-span now was a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what's happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with today's biggest events with hearing from the u.s. congress the white house events, campaigns and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. downloaded for free today. c-span now, your front proceed to washington anytime, anywhere. >> watch video on demand anytime online at c-span.orand try our points of interest each are --

feature. use points of interest anytime online at c-span.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: good morning, we are back with siobhan hughes, a congressional reporter with the wall street journal. good morning. guest: good morning, good to be here. host: thank you, we will talk about the week ahead for congress. first, can you tell us a little bit about the reaction from members of congress when it came to the news that president -- former president trump had been indicted again. guest: there were two parts to the reaction. donald trump obviously got out i of prosecutors and announced this was going to happen. there was media support from the hard right wing of the conference. you suck kevin mccarthy for example and many others using language saying that this is

basically the weaponization of government. what was interesting is there was a big switch between how the house a process and how the senate did. by my count, maybe half of senate republicans came out and -- in support of donald trump of the other half was silent, little bit lukewarm. you saw some people like senator susan collins saying he is entitled to due process but not coming up and saying this is the weaponization of government and people like mitch mcconnell, total silence, essentially letting donald trump twist in the wind. host: tell us a little bit about the other side with what are you hearing from democrats when it comes to the news and how they are reacting. guest: these infected very serious charges. if you pushed aside the rhetoric and joe biden is essentially trying to take out his leading opponent in the 2024 race, what

you are left with is an indictment of 37 counts with incredible detail that poses risks to that nation's security that shows donald trump retained documents pertaining to the country's nuclear program, the u.s. military vulnerabilities, even some of the details in that indictment, things like the view of the geospatial information, the views we have into literally where you can see the hairs of the head on the people being spied on subseries material. host: is there concern that this indictment news and as you have outlined, the partisan divide even with the reaction, could that affect work in congress this week? guest: the answer is yes partly

because it sucks up all the auction in the room so it's a distraction. also partly because it has the potential to flow into some real areas of business and chief among them with the -- would be the appropriations process. you have some republicans who are likely to want to use the indictment as a way to go after the justice department funding. host: you mentioned that representative andy biggs of arizona who is a republican was among those -- we saw for many republicans -- but represented biggs was among those and he said we ought to defund and dismantle the doj. i stand with president trump. what do you make of the fact and do you think these indictments will have an impact on whether house republicans kind of ramp

up these investigations and going after different agencies that they think have been weaponized? guest: they are clearly going to regroup after the indictment last week. this past week, we saw a bit of standing dam obese -- we saw james comer of the oversight committee trying to hold the fbi's christopher wray in contempt and he backed down. this is now going to be a u-turn. i would expect that rhetoric of going after the justice department, trying to dismantle it and going after some of the leaders to wind down. host: we are talking with siobhan hughes of the washington journal. if you have questions for her or any thoughts about the week ahead for congress, we want you to call us now. republicans, (202) 748-8001,

independence (202) 748-8000, independentsa (202) 748-8002. what is your question or comment? caller: my question is this, if they convict trump, does that not take him out of the running of the presidential race? guest: you would presume there would be an appeals process and a conviction would take a very long time. it's not clear exactly how soon this will be resolved. host: alan is on the republican line in mississippi, go ahead. caller: good morning. i would like to make the comment

that after seven years of persecution to this man, mr. donald trump by our government, by the the democratic government , we have a country it's been overrun on the border, fentanyl coming in, crime rate the highest it's ever been, people on food stamps, people out of homes, the threat of tornadoes and here we have the democratic government that spent the last seven years and millions of dollars of the public money trying to bring this man down. and it's not that he didn't do a good jeopardy was president because he did. -- a good job when he was president because he did.

i actually voted for trump. host: we got your point. you are more reviewing -- referring to our previous segment. let's go to mary from potomac, maryland, independent line, go ahead. caller: thank you. i'm calling because i fail to understand what is driving the maga republicans? do they not love this country? what has trump done? he has increased the debt by 40% , he has given the richest people in this country to biggest tax breaks. i compared this devotion to trump like hitler's.

because trump did not want to see the reality of the situation. host: i didn't mean to cut you off but i want to give you a chance. can you explain why republicans, particularly those or in congress who have been speaking out, this caller doesn't understand why they remain so loyal. guest: there are a couple of different pieces. some republicans genuinely like the tax cuts that donald trump drove through. another piece is that he remains the most influential, powerful republican in this country and to get crosswise of them is to risk losing your political credibility. you cannot ignore him. host: let's take another caller on the democratic line, nathaniel calling from mississippi, go ahead. caller: good morning.

i am a 68-year-old black man and i have been watching politics over the last 40 some years. i've never seen the president do things that donald trump has done and said. he talks about anybody, any person he wants to talk about and threatening people. these people have the nerve to claim he's the best president we had? he is the worst president we had. this man did everything. they try to go to the border on biden about the border. now the key talking about this. if anybody thinks for a minute, every election to elect a republican in office, it will skyrocket. when a democrat gets in there, obama had cut the deficit when trump took over and now look at it. they always say when donald

trump wants his money, they say how much. when a democratic president was to raise the debt ceiling, where is the money going to come from? it will come from low class people and hard-working people like i am. it's just a shame these people want to put the man on this pedestal and he is the worst president. he said things i couldn't believe. this man should've been locked up 40 years ago. host: we appreciate your call. he brings up the debt ceiling debate that has caused a big rift. how was the debt ceiling and the compromise that kevin mccarthy reach with president biden still having an effect on the house today? guest: from the perspective of some of the house conservatives, it speaks to the question of trust. they feel kevin mccarthy promised to go back to fiscal 2022 spending levels in the debt ceiling build not do that.

they are also upset because the debt ceiling bill passed with more democrats than republicans. the question is -- is kevin mccarthy essentially endorsing a democratic position? they don't trust him. host: can you remind viewers what happened last week when those conservative republicans you mentioned kind of were able to revolt and stall the house? guest: revolt is the right word. there was a situation where a group of about a dozen house republicans voted against the rule. it sounds incredibly procedural but what it did was stop the votes from happening in the house. the house ended up in a complete standstill, no votes occur because kevin mccarthy was negotiating with the conservative wing to figure out how he could give them what they wanted so they would allow more boats to go forward. host: they are back today. the rules committee is meeting today. that will be at 10:00 a.m..

there will be some pills and want to talk to about one of them. they are considered noncontroversial but what will you look for today is an indication of whether this stalemate continues whether speaker mccarthy is reach an agreement with these far right conservatives? guest: i will be looking for a couple republicans on that committee, ralph norman and chip roy have as been very unhappy with house speaker cap mccarthy over the debt deal. it's very possible they allow the rule to come to the floor and turn around and vote against it. what we will be watching for is what they might say from that dais. host: we mentioned there are some noncontroversial bills. one of them has to do with your wall street journal colleague, tell us about it. guest: thank you for giving me that opportunity. my colleague has been detained in russia since the end of march on a charge of espionage which both my paper and the u.s. government vehemently deny. this resolution is on the

suspension calendar and there were calls for his immediate release. i also want to mention there is another boat on paul whelan which is the same thing. host: those are among the legislation that will be on the house floor? guest: that will be on the house floor tonight in a rare moment of bipartisanship, we will start off with something noncontroversial and unifying. host: all right, let's go back to the phone lines. ruth is calling from tennessee on the republican line, what your question or comment? caller: i think a lot of this thing going on about donald trump, i think it's a cover up and i think the democrats are trying to cover it up. they are only trying to get mr. biden off the hook so they've got to have a fall guy. donald trump did a better job than anybody ever had in their. from the time of george

washington, my god, and the men did more in eight months then biden has done the whole time he's been in there. every month, my paycheck is like robbing peter to pay paul, you know what i mean? i don't even have enough money to buy groceries. this isn't right. i've got one thing to say and that's go donald, go and do not give up and do not give into these people. i love donald trump and a lot of people love donald trump. host: all right, ruth. any thoughts? guest: number one, she does reflect a very prevalent sentiment within the republican party and number two, i would encourage people to read the indictment. it's fairly dense but whatever decision you end up making about it, reading that indictment will

give you -- at least make you have an informed decision. host: this is speaker kevin mccarthy from twitter after that most recent indictment after trump said he was indicted. . he wrote that indeed today is a dark day for the united states of america. it's unconscionable for a president to indict a leading candidate opposing him. joe biden cap classified documents for decades. that is what we heard from a lot of republicans, not just trying to tie the indictment to president biden but also to say donald trump, his actions haven't risen to anything out of line with what other past presidents have done. can you provide any context to that? guest: one clue comes from the indictment itself and it talks about the willful retention of documents. joe biden once he learned classified documents were in his

possession, those were immediately returned. he didn't try to hide it and he didn't try to withhold that from the archives. host: all right, back to the phone lines. moody, maybe it's muddy in idaho falls, idaho. go ahead. caller: it's madi. host: go ahead with your question or comment. caller: he had the bodyguard and if he goes to prison, what does he need a bodyguard for? the other thing is, if he had a bodyguard and the bodyguard sticks around him all the time because when he had people move the boxes and he was around, where was the bodyguard at?

number two, i think we've got 50 states and i think there should be at least a republican equal opportunity for each state no matter what. even the independents. it ought to be equal with no one state should rule over everybody . can you answer that for me? why can't they be equal? if they have a president, a democrat and a republican vice president. they have a republican president, they get a democratic vice president. everything should be on equal level. thank you. guest: there is a lot in there. i'm not under -- i don't

understand all but one thing about electing a president is you elect a slate because of anything happened to the president, you would need a line of succession. it might be a little bit awed to have a republican president and a democratic vice president because in the line of succession, you would not be reflecting the will of the people. host: the constitution was changed to create that slate at some point. it used to be that the president and vice president were elected separately. this was early on in our country's history. john in annapolis, maryland, independent line. caller: hi, thanks for taking my call. my take on this issue [indiscernible] is he should take the fight to

the end. what is bothering the ordinary people now is inflation. it's high gas prices, that's what is affecting me. for our political leaders, someone like mccarthy, i don't think he is facing the fact. for me as an independent voter, i believe in the justice system but it's being corrupted by politics. this is like a persecution to trump. for me, i hope [indiscernible] they should think of what would benefit me. the prices are so high.

that is my major concern. thank you for taking my call. host: that caller mentioned some economic issues like inflation. we know the appropriations process is getting underway, determining how america spends its money and those budget cuts that republicans of asked for. how do you see that unfolding given that speaker mccarthy is having trouble keeping his conference on board? guest: i see this being a very stumbling, halting process. we are going to get some clue of that tuesday when the house of appropriations committee marks up one of its approach -- appropriations bills. this process has to be done by the end of september. with 12 bills to pass, that will be a high hurdle. host: in the debt ceiling bill, there is a penalty that takes in.

how and when does that kick in if they don't get these 12 bills passed? guest: that is a 1% penalty that kicks in at the end of the calendar year, december 31. it does not kick in at the end of the fiscal year on september 30. in that environment, there is the potential for a sort of a shut down if you don't do a continuing resolution. host: there is lots ahead, john in texas on the republican line, what your question or comment? caller: hello? host: go ahead, john. caller: i would like to say that people forgot about when biden came to the presidency was after the pandemic. hundreds of thousands of people died. trump is the correct person. -- is the correct person.

-- corrupt person. he spent a lot of money to go after the democrats. hello? host: we are here. caller: and also, in the midterm come republicans lost in wisconsin, georgia, arizona and michigan. they lost the whole state. mccarthy has a hard time to become the leader. they get the vote in mccarthy's not a good person. [indiscernible] today he says something and tomorrow he changes. host: all right, not a fan of

speaker mccarthy. guest: it just speaks to the partisanship in this country and it also shows a once you become a house speaker and you are a national figure and a lot of people will have feelings about you. host: all right, judy is on the independent line from rochester, new hampshire. caller: good morning you two beautiful ladies. i have a question in regards to the indictment that's against him now. when they first went into mar-a-lago and took everything they need to take out, how could they possibly miss 27 boxes in a bathroom and that's just that room and from my understanding, there was more boxes in another room area so much for the fbi

and the cia being thorough. i cannot understand how they could have missed those boxes. thank you. guest: i don't want to get into this because i'm a congressional reporter and not a legal reporter but from the indictment, the boxes were stored in a bunch of different rooms and there is a man moving boxes from one room to another and it seemed very chaotic. host: like you said, the indictment, people can read it for themselves online. i want to bring up that you have written about another potential roadblock that the house speaker could face and that's whether to give additional funding to ukraine. he wrote an article last week that mccarthy opposes extra ukraine spending after debt deal. that is a flashpoint with senate

republicans who want more dollars for ukraine. can you catch us up and tell is where you think this discussion might be headed? guest: this discussion is headed for a clash and it's one that will test kevin mccarthy. what we expect to happen is sometime over the summer, the administration will send up a supplemental request saying in addition to the $113 billion congress has already approved, we will need more money to push us over the finish line. at that point, kevin mccarthy will be faced with a choice of putting this on the floor or not putting it on the floor. as an asterisk, one potential outlier strategy we should be watching for is the use of a discharge petition. so many people in the house want this ukraine funding and they might do in and around kevin mccarthy and bring a bill to the floor on their own. host: all right, it caller from jersey shore, new jersey,

rhonda, democratic line. caller: hi, good morning america. i really want to talk to the trump supporters here regarding this durham report that fox news and newsmax are peddling, this big lie. this letter came from rudy giuliani. this is russian propaganda. we went through this with the durham. he hired that guy, took him to court and the grand jury threw it out. it's garbage. it's not true what they are saying about joe biden and $5 million. let's talk about the $2 billion that jared kushner got from the saudi's. they were there at bedminster when they raided mar-a-lago for these documents.

how can trump supporters think it's ok that donald trump has nuclear weapons secrets at mar-a-lago? host: all right, we appreciate your call. let's wrap it up, what will you be looking for this week? guest: i will be looking for two things, the degree to which the indictment starts to show up on capitol hill and affect business and whether kevin mccarthy can get his arms around the fractious conference he has. host: javon hughes from the washington journal, thanks for joining us. guest: thanks for joining us --thanks for having us. host: coming up, patrick nzalez will be discussing the impact of climate change on wildfires but first, it's open for him, your chance to call in with any political or public policy topic on your mind. start calling in now.

republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000 and independents (202) 748-8002. >> tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to "washington journal" daily at 7 a.m. eastern with important congressional hearings and other events throughout the day and weekdays at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. eastern catch washington today for a fast-paced report of the stories of the day. listen to c-span any time, tell your smart speaker, play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable. >> shop for items to decorate

your home during your home decor sale. it goes on now it c-span shop.org. save up to 25% on our latest collection of cpablankets and pillows, mugs and drink where, bobbleheads and puzzles andor there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase help support our nonprofit operations. the sale is going on now at c-span shop.org. >> she spent now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what's happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events, reports, campaigns and more in the world of politics all at your fingertips. also stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and find scheduling

information for c-span's tv networks and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling podcastss. it's available at the apple store and google play. downloaded for free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington, anytime anywhere. >> "washington journal" continues. host: it's time for open forum, your chance to weigh in on any political or public policy topic. we are ready for your calls right now. republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000 and independents (202) 748-8002. our first caller is on the republican line, joe in new jersey, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? i have two points to make if i can. the first one was about what your guest said that joe biden,

once he found out that he had classified documents, he brought them back. that was about 50 years ago and he has no right to have them. he wasn't even president. he was a senator and a vice president and he had that from the time he was a senator. that's illegal. he took them illegally. president trump had every right to take the documents home and most of them were declassified. i'm curious to see what she thinks about that. host: well our guest is no longer here. we are in open forum but that was joe calling in with his thoughts on that topic. willie in slidell, louisiana, democratic line, you are on. caller: i am a 20 year military veteran. i did two tours of vietnam.

the representative here is talking antigovernment stuff. i know why all these right wingers are notes of her than the north vietnamese. it is ridiculous, thank you. host: we appreciate your service. james is our next caller in battle creek, michigan, independent line. caller: hello, i want to talk about mccain. he talked about having a democrat and republican. i'd like to see cheney and hillary may be run maybe we could get something straightened out. you need a woman in there anyway, something different. host: all right, appreciate your call this morning. let's go to teresa now. she is calling from dandridge, tennessee on the republican line. caller: good morning, nice to speak with you. the way i see it, it was the

national archives who dropped the ball may have committed the crime in my opinion. there is a service the national archives offers to every president leaving office. obama had 33 million documents at the national archives accounted for. 18 wheelers moved it with a police escort to where they are being held to this day and was paid for by taxpayers. reagan, bush, everyone of them had this service except for trump. it was not offered to him and i want to know why he was not given the same benefit that all the other x presidents were given. thank you. host: all right, vincent calling on the democratic line from brooklyn, new york. caller: good morning.

regardless of your political persuasion, is a lifelong democrat, i want to bring out some facts. the democratic party has been disseminating this information to its own electoral. about president obama and him cutting the deficit? yes, president obama did reduce the federal budget deficit during his tenure in office. when he took office in 2009, the deficit was at its highest point since world war ii. by the end of his presidency in 2017, the deficit had fallen by more than two thirds. this was achieved through a combination spending cuts, tax increases as well as economic growth and job creation. however, the deficit did increase in the latter part of his presidency due to factors such as increased military spending and the impact of the

2017 tax cuts. obama bombed more accurate -- african countries in any president in american history and a lot of that money went to the military. the democratic party painting a picture about him cutting the deficit are not telling the whole truth. as a lifelong democrat, i am considering, 30% of the black national vote should abandon the democratic party and boat fork -- and vote for trump. host: let's go to michigan now, joyce on the independent line. caller: i keep hearing no one is above the law and i think of myself as a law-abiding citizen.

also the supreme court should not be above the law either. it's not a real fair assessment sometimes. we are all human beings and that includes democrats, republicans and everybody. we are all human beings first. people should remember that. no president or no one has put down and hated so many people as trump has in front of everybody. anyone who thinks to look at him wrong.

he has just laughed at them and the republicans are all for this. what about the law? it's ridiculous. are there law-abiding people around more than the others? i guess we will find out maybe. host: on the republican line now, eileen is calling from drexel hill, pennsylvania. caller: hi, thanks for taking my call. i have to say the reporter earlier said the difference between donald trump's document case and joe biden's was the willfulness of it. i think it's very comparable to hillary's case, very willful destruction, emails and devices. i also think joe biden was very willful when he took as a

senator, documents from a secured sift -- facility which he is not allowed to do and they ended up in his garage floor. the other thing i would like to say as far as clarence thomas is i don't know why black people don't unite and say listen, we get to think differently. the relentless attacks on him and he is such a great example of what you can do in this country. thank you. host: let's hear now from franklin in washington, d.c. on the independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. this is to circumvent the deluge of other calls you will get on trump in these documents. this is political and the democrats can keep them from running -- i'd like to point out that the best thing that could possibly happen for democrats is for trump to get nominated and run. he cannot win a general election.

he has already lost everything is run for since 2016. he lost the house, he lost the senate and he lost a different special elections. i heard somebody call in talk about the winning he's done. he hasn't won anything. the idea that he somehow going to be able to get 20 or 30% of his hard-core base. large majority of these people who call, of course, they represent the 20 to 30% of people. that's not a way to win a general election. if i were going to choose somebody out of political motivation, i want to see trump lose and i would choose trump himself. that's all he can do is lose, thank you very much. host: william is on the

democratic line from goodyear, arizona. caller: good morning. i just wanted to mention that senator sinema who is now an independent and ran as a democrat and defeated martha mcsally is a horrible embarrassment to arizona. my hope and vote is for gallego in 2024. thank you. host: all right, william in arizona. let's go now to sewall, new jersey, albert on the republican line. caller: good morning. i could care less about them boxes of material. [indiscernible]

ground beef is a most five or six dollars. everything is costing so much to live. we gave all this money to ukraine, billions of dollars any could have helped the homeless people in our country. the money is wasted over there. they haven't taken care of the people like homeless veterans. they are worried about these boxes and legal papers. it's not important to me, i want to feed my three kids every day. i wish somebody would talk about that on the news. thank you, have a great rest of the day. host: our next caller is windy in clinton township, michigan, independent line. caller: hi there. my question is, i keep hearing that trump will be able to run for president and everything

even though he's got 37 indictments on him? i thought he would not be allowed to run. i just wanted to verify that he can still work for president and even serve yet all these indictments are on him. can you explain why he is allowed to do that? host: we normally don't respond too much but we have had a lot of callers text about this. i want to read the highlighted portion.

most experts have said even if convicted, president trump still could run and win in 2024 for those who have been asking. let's get to glen burnie, maryland, ginger is on the democratic line. caller: good morning. how are you doing today? host: doing well, what your question or comment? caller: i wanted to talk -- you guys were focusing on voting and talk about a third-party. as it is now, you definitely need a lot of money and a lot of wealth to even look at money today. i think that's why we end up having two parties that are so similar especially when it comes to social issues, when it comes to financial issues, things like that.

my big thing is we definitely need to level the playing field. other countries do that they have a greater variety of voters in the have a greater variety of candidates. that's all i wanted to say today and thanks so much for taking my call. host: we will get back to open form in just a moment we will chat briefly with the associated press national politics reporter meg cannard about the latest on the presidential election and what to expect in the week ahead. good morning. guest: good morning to you. host: thank you so much for joining us. we received a lot of questions about president trump and i want to ask you, how have the indictments most recently announced impacted the gop field so far in terms of messaging in

light of the news? guest: it's been interesting to watch the trump fellow gop rivals reacting to this indictment news and even more interesting considering the fact we kind of have a template for this going back earlier this year to new york state charges on which trump was indicted in watching the gop field react to those. from several candidates including florida governor ron desantis and also former south carolina governor nikki haley, we have heard verbiage around a weaponization of the department of justice. fellow republicans are questioning the biden administration's take on not only a former president from the opposing party but also potentially bidens rival for the 2024 presidential race. we are seeing that characterization from some in the field and we are seeing some like former our concert governor asa hutchinson -- former arkansas governor asa hutchinson telling trump to pull out of the

race. he says the country doesn't need to be dealing with. there are others like the biotech entrepreneur who has not only joined others in condemning this weaponization of the federal judicial system and prosecutorial system but also saying he would pardon trump if he reelected to the nation's highest office. there is definitely a difference of opinion among the republicans who are competing alongside trump for the gop nomination. again, when we back earlier this year to alvin bragg's case in manhattan against trump, this is similar to what we heard at that point, a first wave of not only support for trump in terms of standing alongside him and saying this case is not something that should have been brought, but also an overall questioning of the system under which it was being brought. we will continue to see how this statement evolves.

it's interesting to point out that we heard from a lot of candidates and fellow republicans across the country as soon as news of the indictment came out but then once the details from the indictment were made public there has been kind of a not as loud perhaps response in terms of ingesting the details and seeing what it is the department of justice is alleging. there is just a little bit of a difference in the reaction from that point. host: you also contributed to the associate press coverage over the weekend as president trump held events in georgia and north carolina which were his first public events since this recent indictment was announced. what was your impression of how he handled his campaign is handling these developments? guest: i think we heard from donald trump over the weekend pretty much what we would have expected.

he announced the charges himself on his social media platform and he has been very loud in his condemnation of them and strong in his defense of himself. we heard his characterization of these charges as baseless and without merit. then he took the opportunity to not only go after the department of justice but also the biden administration at large and questioning why these charges were brought against hillary clinton back in 2016. i think we are hearing from the former president what we would have expected in terms of his characterization of this case against him. considering we will be seeing him but not seeing him directly but he will be in federal court this week on these charges, i think we can expect we will continue to hear a lot of that same characterization from him. he will address supporters when

he returns back to new jersey after that court appearance in miami on tuesday. i would anticipate we will hear a lot of the same sort of messaging. host: do we know yet if the indictment announcement has had any impact on fundraising for the former president? guest: i think we have yet to see officially how much money but i would be sure that once there is a figure, we will be hearing that from trump and his campaign. in the hours and days subsequent to the manhattan indictment earlier this year, there was more than $10 million flagged by the trump campaign and his associated committees in terms of what they had brought in. the point of fundraising and purportedly show up report -- show of support is something they will want to flag. host: i'm showing the new york times has the photos of all the declared candidates for president. we see the republicans feel --

field has already thinned including former president trump. there were three new entrance last week, former vice president mike pence, former new jersey governor chris christie and north carolina -- and north dakota's governor. have the indictments overshadowed the message of these other candidates taking the air out of the room as they tried to break through in a trump challenge? guest: it is going to be tricky for anybody is getting into the race the tickly last weekend. two -- into the race, particularly last weekend. we try to see some of the field aiming to campaign as usual while still being asked by reporters like us how you feel about this. they are trying to manage their own campaign getting out in the field and raise money and talk

to donors and voters. we saw former vice president mike pence at the same north carolina gop convention as the former president saturday directing delegates earlier in the day. they are hot out on the trail and i will be a tim scott later today in spartanburg, south carolina where he is rolling up more than 100 state officials to endorse him his campaign here. he will travel to iowa this week and nikki haley and tim scott will be in california this week raising money. also, ron desantis of florida is making steps in the campaign trail as well heading to nevada. these candidates are certainly having to deal with a lot of the attention on the former president. i think they already knew that regardless of the cases against donald trump that he was still going to be occupying a lot of media and attention in the race. this is now complicated further by the pending legal charges against him. from what we see, they are trying to get out on the

campaign trail to continue their own messaging and do that the best they can in this current environment. host: all right,meg canard thank you for joining us this morning. 5 guest: good to be with you. host: we will get back to open forum, feel free to give us a call to wait in on the news of the day, republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats, (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. this is negative just, texas, independent. caller: good morning. i wish everybody would [indiscernible] you got an opponent doing wrong. whatever party it may be.

i wish everybody would act like a parent that if they find out if kids do something wrong, they would take them to the jailhouse. they know when a person is doing wrong and they still support their interests. it's because of their party. i wish they would see what the law would say and vote for the right candidate. host: all right, let's go to fort river, new jersey, jerry on the republican line. caller: good morning. i was just wondering, the 1023 document that showed that joe and hunter biden each got $5 million from the ukraine thing, when biden and 2018 was on tv and he said the prosecutor has to be fired, biden won't give you grain that -- ukraine that

$1 billion, is that a quid pro quo well? is biden saying that ukraine would not get that $1 billion unless the prosecutor from ukraine was fired that was investigating? isn't that a quid pro quo? and the 1023 document that shows that joe and hunter each got $5 million from the barisma, is that legal? i just have to know. thank you. host: we will go to donald now in jenet, pennsylvania, democratic line. caller: good morning. i'm calling today in regards to yesterday's show. it also has something to do with earlier in this show when you were talking about third-party candidates. yesterday, mr.sabaco from the

university of virginia was on there and he was discussing third-party candidates in past elections. he brought up that al gore -- i'm sorry, you brought up the ralph nader cost al gore the election in 2000 and that is incorrect. the reason for that is al gore carried his home state of tennessee which has 11 electoral votes to put him at 277. he wouldn't have needed florida to begin with. al gore lost the election on his own by losing his home state. mr. nader did not even get any electoral votes in the election. how did he affect the outcome? i just think that needs to be

corrected. host: ray is our next caller in king of prussia, pennsylvania on the independent line. caller: hi. i was just calling to say unfortunately, things are not going to change until there's a new generation of politicians and their. it would be nice if some of the middle-aged politicians would change but the way it is now, it's crazy that one party just votes whatever the head of the party, whichever way they vote, they should be independent-minded. nobody has an independent mind now. if an independent likewest, he would need the independent-minded democrats and republicans to speak up for him,

to nominate him and say he is a good guy, why don't we come together around this independent? as far as him doing it alone without help or democrats and republicans, a third party is not going to get anywhere. it's crazy the way people file in. [indiscernible] out of all those republicans, you can find three people that thinks for themselves and say right is right and wrong is wrong? i will vote this way because it will help my people and is the right thing to do3 long story short, an independent person would need democrats and republicans to step out and say,. let's host:, ray.

let's go to minnesota, republican line. another ray. caller: good morning. i listened to a lot of democrats. a woman called earlier and was upset that trump could be elected even though he has got so many indictments or something like that. they are indictments. you can indict a ham sandwich. the democrats already have a criminal in office, joe biden. they do not seem -- i do not know why they have no concern over the stuff that he has done, but they are all on trump. i am trying to figure out what these crimes are that trump has done. maybe one of your callers, a democrat caller, you could ask them to name these crimes he committed. i have no idea what they are. it is fictitious stuff they make up. the news media pushes stuff that

is not real. it has not been proven. just like the russia stuff. remember the russia stuff that cost us, hillary clinton did that to us? just lies. that is all i have got right now. . host: arnold is our next call on the democratic line in wallkill, new york. caller: good morning. i have a question for our regular republicans that keep calling in. ask yourself one question. why did donald trump have all of these documents? the most disturbing thing to me is how he stored them. you talk about how proud of this country, he stored our most precious secrets in the trash. let's will the tapes. -- role the tapes. here is a man who has been

convicted for not paying his taxes, that has cheated on his wife. my parents told me if you like, you will steal -- lie, you will steal. i want someone to call and tell me why this man had all these documents. when joe biden found out he had his documents, he probably forgot he had them. to have someone come get them. he did not have his lawyers lying for him. one thing about donald trump, he hires criminal lawyers because you have to be a criminal first and then a lawyer. that is all i have to say. host: all right. let's go to the independent line. karen is calling from charlotte, michigan. caller: are you there? can you hear me? host: go ahead. caller: i would like to see a

similar amount of time you have given falsified, constructed, orchestrated story about donald trump. i would like you -- to see you give the same amount of time to investigations with joanne hunter biden. you are starting to sound more like cnn every day. it is beginning to bother me. goodbye. host: we have guests on all the time showing different sides of the conversation. check out our expansive library on c-span.org for all types of viewpoints. let's go to the republican line now. jody is calling from overgaard, arizona. caller: yes, hi. thank you for taking my call. i would like to congratulate the gentleman that talked about the woman who was calling and saying, 37 indictments, how will

he run for president? you explained it well, but what she didn't think -- an indictment is not a conviction. that is what the grand jury said, go ahead and have a trial. during a grand jury, there is not a defense. there is nobody there representing trump. it is the prosecutor saying, this is what we have got, what do you 22 people think? only 12 of them have to say go ahead with a trial. another thing, these are people who are voting. do you think they have a basic concept of our laws, that you can determine who is going to represent us? and all of the lies? like another woman who called in and said that biden got us this

huge social security increase. that social security increase is based in the pudding, it depends on inflation. which, biden brought inflation up to the roof. social security got a big bump. things like that, people need to understand what is true and what is not true. i do not know anyone is going to get the truth when people lie constantly. thank you for taking my call. host: let's go to loretto in shreveport, louisiana, democratic line. caller: yes, my name is loretta w. francis and i live at 5930 yukon drive. my daughter's name is didi, but

her real name is diandra lynette atteberry. my son's name is timothy, you see right there? wiggins. i only have two kids and my brother name is henry wiggins junior. he was in vietnam. i am calling on his behalf. that is what i have got to say. i will be calling in from now on. the first caller that you had on that was talking about trump. trump should have been in jail when he started out lying about obama wasn't born in the united states. you all let him go on with that lie all the way through his president, he still line from the time he got in there until the time he -- you know what, obama throwing down a lot

because his behind would have been in jail when he told the first like. i do not listen to nothing he said, that is all i want to say. this is my first time calling, i have been watching you all almost since i retired when i called the first show. you, i want to know if you can send me a copy of this here because the first woman that i heard this morning, take her to the nursing home because she is senile. host: ok, you can have someone help you navigate our website to find video from today or any other show. let's go to the republican line now. tom is calling from charlotte, north carolina. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say i think anybody who has been holding these confidential documents illegally should be prosecuted and in jail equally. they are all breaking the law, they should be treated like

criminals. host: all right, tom. ann is our next caller in new york city on the democratic line. caller: yes, i am calling because judge cannon has already shown her allegiance is not to the rule of law but to donald trump. in order to get her to resign, which is the only way you can get her off being the judge on this case is to show that the public has no confidence in her ability to be fair. so, you should call judge cannon's office at 772-467-2340 and say you have no confidence in her ability to judge this case. thank you. host: let's go to the independent line now. tom is calling from rio rancho, new mexico. you are on, tom.

caller: thank you very much for my call. first of all, about that particular woman judge for the indictment. i believe she needs to recuse herself and go forward from there. i also want to point out, i used to be a republican years ago under ronald reagan, but not anymore. the republican party has changed and is out of control. i have a quote from dwight d. eisenhower of march 6 1956. i think this is what the situation is right now with the republican party. if a political party does not have its foundation and determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party. it is merely a conspiracy to seize power. i have a feeling to dwight d.

eisenhower was feeling about his party at that particular time, that is the way i feel about the political party, the republican party as of right now. i believe the american people need to understand the situation as it is. thank you. host: we are in open forum right now. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. let's go to the republican lines. randy is calling from kentucky. caller: good morning. what ironies here. i saw last night where it was reported biden signed off on the doj investigating, indicting trump. now, once you all have his campaign rallies, lock him up, hillary will be on stage with him. throw that piston the air, lock him up.

lock him up, lock him up. [laughter] you people are insane. thank you. host: our next caller is ted in hawaii on the democratic line. caller: hello. host: hi, tes. go ahead. caller: i like to keep things pretty simple and i want you guys a lot. everybody on both sides keeps talking about lies and this and that. everybody has a gut instinct. gut instinct is what tells you what the truth is. i think because of all the back and forth lies, people are going to have to rely on their gut instinct. they can look at donald trump talking, walking across the stage. they can look at joe biden, they can look at their history. i can just see it is going to be

a gut instinct call for most of us because you cannot hardly believe what you hear on a lot of television. we need to rely on our gut instinct. i was in the air force during the vietnam war, you had to rely on your gut instinct to sur vive. everybody needs to get their gut instinct and go with that. there is too much one side line again the other side lying. unfortunately, i think we are going to have to rely on our gut instinct to get to the truth. host: now let's go to northern virginia. hugo is calling on the independent line. caller: thanks, good morning c-span. thanks for taking my call, i appreciate it. i think one of the colors earlier said that the end of the day, the mishandling of documents, i think they called

them falsify documents or what have you, they should be prosecuted. i think a lot of callers do not appreciate the fact that we, there is a lot of effort to make these things secure and to ensure that any violation of that should be prosecuted at the extent of the law. it is unfortunate some of the previous politicians who also may or may not have done some of these things are not prosecuted as well. they should all be prosecuted equally. they should take account for it. that is one of the biggest issues that we see. in general, the idea that you just cannot -- we all have responsibilities, wherever you are, working or what you are doing.

you have to live up to them. lynn is asian of -- hopefully, a lot of your callers, today there is a desire for greater truth and transparency and i would hope that the government can work harder to wrestle with that and provide that transparency so that voters can make informed decisions about character, about individuals and who they want, who they do not want in office. thanks for taking the call and thanks for what you do and trying to -- trying as hard as you can to report what is happening and not just commentary. thank you very much. host: we are still in open forum. i want to bring up today's wall street journal front page because we have received a lot of calls that reference the indictment of former president trump.

this article headlines, trump special counsel spots early strategies. it says arraignment set for tuesday in a legal battle that comes as the 24th -- 2024 primary heats up. i'm going to start with the second paragraph. it says trump's legal team is likely to seize on two key factors as it mounts a court room defense against a detailed early seven count indictment brought by special counsel jack smith. his past presidential powers to declassified documents and the looming 2024 election from which trump is the early republican front lower -- front runner. it will also seek to benefit from the trial florida venue. that is a little bit of former president trump's strategy as he prepares for his first appearance in federal court on tuesday. open forum continues. our next caller is on the

republican line. joan in cleveland, go ahead. caller: good morning. i just one to say that when president trump was in charge, i could go to sleep at night and cannot wait for the next morning to listen to the news. now that we have joe biden in the house, i am afraid to see what he has done the previous night. i just think he is the worst president that we have ever had. i do not care what anyone says. his age is against him. he has fallen, he is tripping. he walks like he is going to fall forward. i do not see any sense to this. when trump was in charge, my interest rates were low. now, biden bailed out the banks and all my cards, the interest

rates went sky high. he made a mistake and he should have never, ever raised our interest. if you look at your cards and your interest, you are going to see they are skyhigh. nobody cares about the little guy. if trump was in charge, we never, ever would have had all of this commotion and all of those people in the federal that were supposed to be looking at over the banks, they all should be fired. then, i hear no one has ever been fired from the federal government, which is a shock to me. i cannot believe it. they are all that honest? host: appreciate your call this morning. that is going to do it for open forum. this morning, chairs of several european parliamentary foreign affairs committees will discuss the upcoming nato summit hosted by the hudson institute. you can watch live coverage

starting at 9:30 eastern on c-span two, c-span now, our free mobile video app and online at c-span.org. we are going to take a qck break and next, the smoke is clearing but wildfires continue to burn in the u.s. and canad we will talk abouthempact climate change is having on t severity of wildfires with university of california berkeley professor patrick gonzales. ♪ ♪ >> shop for items to decorate your home during our home to core sale going on now at c-spanshop.org,. c-span's to 25% on our latestollection of c-span pillows, bobbleheads,. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase

helps support our nonprofit operation. scan the code on the right to shop our home to core -- decor sale. ♪ >> since 1979 in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has 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 in how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span. your unfiltered view of government. ♪ ♪ >> nonfiction book lovers, c-span has a number of podcasts for you. listen to best selling nonfiction authors and influential interviewers on the after words podcast.

on two and a here wide-ranging conversations with nonfiction authors and others who are making things happen. book notes plus episodes are weekly hour-long conversations that feature authors of nonfiction books on a wide variety of topics. the about books podcast takes you behind the scenes of the nonfiction book publishing industry with insider interviews, industry up states -- updates and -- ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with "washington journal." climate change scientist and university of california berkeley professor patrick gonzales joins us to discuss how climate change is impacting wildfires. good morning, professor gonzales. caller: good morning.

host: i have an article pulled up by the guardian. i am going to read the first couple of paragraphs. it says canada's ongoing wildfire season is a harbinger of our climate future, experts and officials say. the fires are a "clear sign of climate change that mohammed raisa, a researcher at mcgill university in montréal, who was also a postdoctoral associate at the massachusetts institute of technology." research shows climate change has already exacerbated wildfires dramatically. my question is, do you agree with that hypothesis? guest: absolutely. scientific research shows human caused climate change is exacerbating wildfire. wildfires caused by a complex mix of factors. let me briefly set the stage and

describe the context. a certain amount of wildfire is natural in many forests. , it kills pests stems out small trees and insurers forests health. in california where i am and in the southwestern u.s., buyer naturally occurs every 10 to 20 years. in canada, buyer naturally occurs every 100 to 300 years. an amazon rain forests, a wildfire never occurs at all. in the western u.s., old outdated policies of suppressing all fires, even natural ones, have caused unnatural human relations of fuel. in canada, roads and towns have caused unnatural increases in ignitions. at the same time, climate change

is intensifying the heat that drives wildfires. specific, scientific analyses called detention attribution have looked at different factors that go into wildfires. these analyses have concluded that human caused climate change has lengthened buyer season around the world -- fire season around the world up to two months. in the united states human caused climate change has doubled the area of wildfire above natural level since 1984. in british columbia, canada in the extreme fire year of 2017 human caused climate change increased burned area seven to 11 times over natural level. a combination of local factors and human caused climate change have increased the area burned by wildfire. host: i am bringing up some data

from the national interagency fire center. it shows that the number of fires in acres burned can vary greatly from year to year. what other factors are causing that fluctuation? you talked about the human impact, but why do we see so much fluctuation from year to year recently? guest: it is because both temperature, rainfall and snowfall very year to year. human caused climate change is causing a long-term increase in the temperature. in some years, rainfall is very high so the landscape is moist. so, we have fewer buyers. -- fires. in other years, the rainfall and snowfall drops and it is drier.

that is superimposed on this long-term increase in heat. it is in those years like this year in canada that wildfire explodes. host: we want you to call in with either questions or, professor gonzales, for any thoughts about wildfires and climate change. those numbers are, if you are in the eastern or central time zones, we want you to call us at (202) 748-8000. if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones, call us at (202) 748-8001. again, eastern and central, (202) 748-8000. mountain and pacific, (202) 748-8001. before we get to the calls, i want to ask you, professor

gonzales, you are in california which you have said has experienced wildfires increasing over the past years. recently, when the wildfires in canada impacted the northeast corridor, new york, washington, d.c., it seemed public interest increased greatly. did you notice that and has that caused frustration with those in california who said, we have been talking about this for years and you did not pay attention until it affected you more directly? guest: it is good when the public takes note, wherever the public is. the hazards of climate change, how it is exacerbating wildfire and other impacts around the world. so, this -- these recent episodes in the eastern u.s. just expanded the awareness of the impact of climate change.

host: we are talking with university of california berkeley professor patrick gonzales, ready for your questions or comments. first up is ann in spyro, oklahoma. i think we lost ann that quickly. we will wait and get back to the phone lines. you mentioned the floodwaters and snow. this is from the california department of water resources, it says that there is, the manual survey recorded 126.5 inches of snow depth and a water equivalent of 221% of average for this location, that was in early april. the quote says "this year's severe storm and flooding is the latest example california's climate is becoming more extreme," said department of

water resources director. after the driest three years on record and the devastating drought impacts to communities across the state, the department of water resources has rapidly shifted to flood response and forecasting for the upcoming snow melt. we have been talking about climate change. some people are going to say wildfires were in issue, now we are talking about wildfires and drought. now, we are talking about flooding. how can both be an impact of climate change? guest: published scientific research shows that human caused climate change is increasing the amount of energy in the atmosphere. this energy is redistributed in unusual ways, such that temperature extremes and rainfall extremes have been occurring.

so, the drought california experienced, the severe drought from 2012 to 2016 is actually part of a larger, more widespread drought across the southwestern u.s. that is in the most severe desk that has been the most severe since the 1500s. climate change and this redistribution of atmospheric energy sometimes brings extreme, storms extreme rainfalls. that is what occurs this year with the atmospheric river's. the snow is good news in terms of wildfires. the landscape is going to be moist this year. climate change is causing these extremes. sometimes, rainfall goes up. sometimes, it goes down. it is imposed on this long-term heating. host: let's go to phone lines now. robert is in susanville,

california. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: thank you for taking my call. in california, i have worked for the forest service. part of the problem is how their policy is on fighting fires now. when i used to work for them 40 years ago, they tried to put fires out. i understand that the underbrush growth and that kind of thing does need to be taken care of, but their problem is now with these huge fires that burn for months at a time. they do not try to put them out. they try to control the burn. eventually, we get a windy day, it blows over there buyer lines and we lose towns like paradise.

the town of greenville three years ago for the dixie fire. that was a controlled burn that got out of control because they decided to leave. ok? i understand climate has a lot to do with it. sodas population. -- so does population. fires used to burn before in remote areas, now they are not so remote. i have watched them. i used to work with them. i use to watch -- run supplies to them. i watched fire fighters waiting and watching as a fire burned. i even ask one of them, do you have a shovel? i will throw dirt on the spire -- on this buyer -- fire. guest: the depth and damage from wildfires are very sad and regrettable. published scientific research

shows that the most effective means to prevent those deaths and damage in the future is to restore the natural fire regime that have been unnaturally suppressed over a century of outdated policies. the federal agencies have a national wildfire plan and have operational plans for each fire. if fires are naturally ignited and remote, then the fire crews monitor the fire and let it burn, let the natural fire clear out the understory to reduce the fire hazard for the future. when fires are close to towns or suburbs or have a risk of jumping over, the fire crews are very vigilant and their orders

are to defend life and property. we can do both. it is important to have this long-term view under climate change to reduce the fire risk by the natural, reintroduction of natural fire. host: our next caller is jasmine in washington, d.c. caller: thank you for taking my call. thank you professor gonzales for your work and research. i am curious what is on your radar when it comes to other types of research or innovations that are working towards preventing climate disasters, if there is any work to use other disasters to support disasters. i was in the midwest -- midsouth and there was torrential rain and thunderstorms. i was wondering if this was water you could use to help put fires out, curious if there is

anything in that space. thank you. guest: well, climate change, the fundamental way to prevent future, disastrous, catastrophic wildfires is to cut the carbon pollution from cars, power plants and human sources that causes climate change. the floods that you mentioned, the wildfires we are talking about, and also the actual extinction of animal species and tree mortality, sea level rise, all of those impacts of climate change. the most effective means to halt the most drastic consequences of climate change is to cut

because, and that is -- cut the cause, which is emissions from cars and other human sources. a lot of innovation is now going into energy efficiency and renewable energy to attack the cause. host: let's go to grand junction, colorado. we will hear from everett. caller: good morning. patrick, i am not sure exactly how old you are. i am guessing around in your 40's somewhere. in my 70's -- i am in my 70's. when the beetle kill was getting started, and saw different deals that happened with mismanagement of the forest, besides that if you go back far enough, you look at the dustbowl era in the 1930's.

the ground was plowed then, mismanaged. that is another thing. nasa had a catalytic converter that basically purified the exhaust fumes and different elements, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide out of existing cars over 12 years ago. it was cheaper, use less precious metals. , basically purified the air. now, we are going to electric vehicles and changing the entire country because of that. the sun is warming, it is getting hotter. host: your response, professor gonzales? guest: on this last point, on the intergovernmental panel on climate change have examined the potential causal factors before the measured heating at weather

stations. the analyses, the detention and attribution of analyses show that carbon pollution from human sources, cars, power plants and deforestation has caused 99% of the measured heating and that natural causes are less than 1%. all credible scientists agree that human caused -- that climate change is caused by carbon pollution from human activity. host: ok. let's take another caller. andy is in upstate new york. what is your question or comment? caller: good morning. i live in the beautiful, high peaks of the adirondacks, not far from the fires -- we started getting smoke up here from the

western province of manitoba. they were pretty big out there. not totally amazing, but it made it out here, which is pretty far. the fire started on the eastern part of nova scotia, québec and that smoke started heading south to where we are, which is only a few hours away. down in new york city, they got it much worse than we did. we just happen to be in a good place. what i understand is that the fires in québec and up there were started by people, you can call them dumbasses that were camping, lighting fires and did not put them out properly. so, there is usually warnings.

do not light fires. do not burn. maybe these people do not hear those warnings. it does not take much. that is basically all i got to say. we also have a thing up here. we are known for the beauty and ecological type of situation, if you take it in, take it out. you should not ever leave a camp fire going. you should not even start one. host: let's let professor gonzales, you hear a lot of people saying that wildfires are caused by human error. how big of that is a factor? guest: human ignitions, accidental ignitions, are a major cause of fires. the caller is exactly right that

when people are camping outdoors in nature, it is very important, it is very crucial not to leave the fire unattended and to completely put the fire out when they leave. in fact, the national park service enforced service in the united states, when conditions are dry, they ask people not to set fires, make campfires. ignitions can be natural. lightning, in addition. it is the combination of natural ignitions and these accidental ignitions that are driving wildfire. host: can you talk, i think some people are saying if it is unnatural ignitions, human error, how can those wildfires be attributed to climate change? guest: again, it is that

long-term increase in the temperature that dries out the forests and, in québec of this year, scientific analyses show that temperatures in the month of may in some parts of canada were 10 degrees celsius, for 18 degrees fahrenheit above average. that is on top of the long-term increase already of one degree celsius, for two degrees fahrenheit since the preindustrial era. so, that is the context in which accidental people because ignitions, have been causing wildfires. that long-term increase in temperature that dries out the landscape, that increases fire risk. host: let's go back to the phone lines. ruth in california with your

question or comment. caller: good morning. i am calling about forestry in general, and forests, with respect to climate change. we have heard a little bit this morning about proper management of forests to keep them healthy, which means -- or doing controlled burns when possible. the other thing is the destruction of vast amounts of forest, specifically the rain forests in south america. one of the things i am impressed with is how fast a rain forest can recover if it is allowed to. if we restore our forests, not

only could we reduce the fuel for wildfires however they start, but also, nature comes back very quickly and that climate to restore rain forests and restore the carbon capture it provides. host: your thoughts? guest: globally, an area that is half the size of australia burns globally. most of this is in the tropical rain forests, about 80% of it as the caller noted the rain forest is burning, the congo rain forest in africa and the rain forest in southeast asia.

deforestation is one of the most effective ways to reduce carbon pollution from ecosystems, halting tropical deforestation would cut mobile carbon emissions by 10%. this is an important component of stopping climate change, that is only 10%. 90% is from fossil fuels, oil and methane. host: our next call is in florida. john is on the line. caller: thank you for taking my call.

what i wanted to say was about the wildfires such as what is going on in canada right now. the out-of-control aspect of it is because we as stewards are not taking care of the -- of deforestation. we are not clearing the underbrush, the brush that is the accelerant for these things. we used to. i know out in california, we had a lot of wildfires there, but the same thing. part of the reason why we had these wildfires is to get out of control is because of the poor stewardship that we have of not

taking care of the forests. and protecting the live trees by removing the dead brush. host: go ahead, professor gonzales. guest: we have returned again to this issue of outdated policies, of suppressing all wildfire, even natural fires. the caller and other callers have talked about forest management. an important component of forest management is restoring the natural, severity of fires that burn along the ground that naturally clear out the understory and allow the larger trees, the more resilient trees, to grow up. restoration of natural fire is one of the most important forest

management practices to prevent catastrophic wildfire in the future. in canada, the situation is a little different because the buyer is different -- fire. the forests in canada naturally only expense fire every 100 to 300 years. is there, the problem is human ignitions from timber harvesting, roads and towns. there, the most effective forest management actions are halting these unnatural ignitions from human activities and restricting the disturbance of the forest by timber harvesting by roads and towns. host: ok. we've got our caller from

canada. john is in alberta. jonathan, what do you want to share with us this morning? caller: hello. i wanted to make a comment about historical forest fire data, both in the united states and in canada. if you look on the internet, you can bring up historical data about forest fire acreage burned and the number of fires going back several decades. the data from the united states in particular shows that there has been about 180% decline in the amount of acres that have been burned -- 80% decline in the number of acres burned since the 1920's and 1930's. there has been a bit of an

increase since the 1990's, but it is still about 80% down from the 1920's and 1930's. the canadian data only goes back to about 1980. it shows a gradual decrease, not as dramatic as the u.s. data. this year looks like it is going to be a bad year. we are up to about, what is reported on the news, 3.5 million hectors. there have been news in the 1990's where there was about 7 million hectors burned since, it is yet to be seen if we will actually reach that. yes, that is my comment, why is the media reporting dramatic increases in forest fires when the data speaks otherwise? host: professor.

guest: actually, the measurements of wild fire burned area in the united states shows in the western united states since 1984, the area burned by wildfire has increased by about 10 times, about a thousand percent. as i mentioned previously, the detention and attribution analyses show this is double what would have naturally burned without climate change. in western u.s., 1984, the burned area increased about 10 times. half is due to climate change and half is due to non-climate factors. in canada, the fire season started earlier this year. there is some places in canada in the month of may that experienced temperatures 10 degrees celsius or 18 degrees

fahrenheit above average. before this time of year, the area burned is above average. host: joseph is calling from california. go ahead. caller: thank you, good morning. i would like to say i would like to see the, on c-span, on the fire coverage for california or the west coast and canada, if you could display it. it would help your viewers understand what you are talking about. i have a harder time going by just the verbal information that i receive on tv. it would help a lot of people if you could maybe show some data, actual, physical data on the screen. that is all, thank you. have a good day. host: for those who want to look

it up, the national interagency fire center. their website is nifc.gov. we are showing it now. it has historical data from starting in 1983. prior to 1983, the federal wildland fire agencies did not track official wildfire data using current reporting processes. as a result, there is no official data prior to 1983 posted on their site. this is just one agency. you go back to 1983, it has 18,229 fires reported. 1.3 million acres. it ebbs and flows. i wi scroll up to the most recent years, all the way through 2022.

you will see for example, 2022 had about the same amount of the number of fires as 2015. 2015 had more acreage. it ebbs and flows as professor gonzales has mentioned. if you want to look up those numbers for yourself, that website is nifc.gov. stan in grants pass, oregon. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: good morning. i think we should do something about the chinese pollution. on those air and other travels around the world -- earth, can pollute our areas and all the stuff to keep the wildfires and all of that down ain't going to happen unless we have cooperation with china that is

polluting the earth. we have got to take care of that problem first. mismanagement is one of the biggest problems in earth trying to heal itself. you have got to be on the ground to protect the earth. have a good day. host: how much is pollution in other parts of the world affecting wildfires in the u.s. and canada? guest: it is true that china is now the biggest emitter of carbon pollution in the world. total amount. but, the united states per person has very high carbon emissions. on average, every person in the u.s. emits 4.8 tons of carbon per person per year. this, compared to the global average of 1.8 tons per person. then, if you look at europe, the

average is about 1.9 tons per person. that shows that it is actually completely possible to live a comfortable and healthy lifestyle like in europe, but more efficiently producing less carbon pollution. the caller is correct that china is now the biggest carbon polluter in the world. the most recent policy, international policy instrument, the paris agreement to which all 194 nations in the world have agreed, it has carbon reductions for every single country, every single country has pledged carbon reductions. we are all in this together. host: we have a question that came across in text message from

robert in price, utah, who writes, why don't we harvest the pine beetle trees? i understand these trees are still useful for a period of time. guest: some salvage logging, it has been done but dead trees actually serve a purpose in ecosystems. they provide habitat for certain species and actually, the harvesting and transport of a lot of dead stems takes a lot of energy and money. also, in the larger context, a lot of that carbon that has been locked up in trees, harvesting

it can produce even more carbon. so, that is a complex issue. host: also via text message, d atkinson from monte rio, california writes sudden climate change deaths left behind have been a huge factor in our area along the redwood forest along the california coast. in a response to that? guest: sudden oak death is caused by a pathogen that is affected by climate but public -- published scientific research has not definitively linked it to long-term climate change. the caller mentioned the redwoods, which would -- which are the tallest living trees on earth. one of the risks of climate change is increased tree death among redwoods, because redwood trees depend on the fog that

comes in every year to keep them moist and green. climate changes affecting the fog patterns and some of the projections project decreases in fog and attentional increases in tree death among the redwoods. host: we have been chatting this morning with the university of california berkeley professor patrick gonzales. thank you for joining us this morning. guest: thank you. host: that is going to do it for us. later this morning, there will be a discussion on the environmental protection agency's proposed regulations on new car sales to be 60% electric by 2030 and the effect it could have on the car market in competition with china. you can watch live coverage of that event hosted by the

heritage foundation, beginning at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span, on c-span now, our free mobile video and online at c-span.org. that is going to do with this morning for "washington journal." we will be back tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. enjoy your day. ♪ >> this morning, a discussion on the environmental protection agency's proposed regulation a new car sales to be 60% electric by the year 2030 and the effect it could have on the car market and competition with china.

watch live coverage starting at 11:00 eastern on c-span. c-span now, our free mobile video app, online at c-span.org. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring unfiltered view of what is happening in washington. keep up with live streams and floor proceedings from the u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network and c-span radio, plus a variety of compelling podcasts. download it for free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere.

>> since 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress from the house and senate to congressional hearings, party briefing, 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. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> are you thinking it is just a community center? it is way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with thousands of community centers so students can get what they need to be ready for anying.