>> "washington journal" starts now. ♪ host: good morning. it is friday. the house will meet for a brief session this afternoon. we have a three hour "washington journal" ahead for you. begin with the recent poll that

found social conservatives on the rise in u.s. after they found the percentage of americans identifying as socially conservative was at its highest level in over a decade. we are getting your reaction and what to know what social issues you see as most important in america today. phone lines split by political party. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. you can send us a text this morning 202-748-8003. we ask you include your name and where you are from. otherwise catch up with us on social media on twitter @cspanwj . on facebook, facebook.com/c-span. start calling in now. this is the headline from the poll from last week. social conservatism at its

highest in about a decade in u.s. 38% of americans say they are socially conservative. 44% say they are economically conservative. both are at their highest level since 2000 12 while those identifying as socially liberal declined. the number down 29% -- that number 29% iamerica today. gallup rights americans were about as lely to say they were liberal and conservative when it cometoocial issues. this year there is a advantage due to the shifting at a me social issues such as anender rights, abortion and other concerns are prominent in public debate. maybe fostering environment more bearable to pass and leaning social legislation they write

especially in republican dominated states. that from gallup. will go through more of the poll in the first hour of the show. some headlines from the pole. this from newsweek, surprising change in socially conservative americanis how they describe it. usa tod, maybe desantis is onto something with his insight woke fight. conservative federalist, new gallup poll debunks myth of an embeddable left wing cultural change -- inevitable left wing cultural change. phone lines as usual. we'll get to your calls throughout this first hour. we start in brownsville, texas. joe. independent.

good morning. what do you think about the results? host: i disagree -- caller: i disagree with that. actually since reagan, reagan destroyed the unions. from reagan to this, republicans -- trump is a good example. he copied reagan. make america again. you remember that? [inaudible] i'm sure russia -- we have more guns than any country. 330 million people.

we have more guns than that. if you're good at math, think about it. host: joe in texas. this is david in maryland on the line for democrats. what you think of the findings of the poll? are you seeing that in maryland? are you seeing this rise in social conservatism or you are? caller: i think yes, absolutely. over the history we have gone back and forth between being liberal and conservative. i think it is a natural force of history. we're going to see it going on indefinitely. i think the major problem i see is that separatism is tight economic -- conservatism is tied to economics we still have a

country where the federal government has not going after the people, top percent, they do not pay taxes. we are short $250 million a year. then we fight over the budget. as a result of that fight, people become more conservative. it is usually round economics. if the government were to follow through and have people pay their fair share of taxes rather than the poor and middle-class, then get stuck with having to work two jobs, not being able to send their children to school, not being able to be in the home to raise their children, then we would have some the social issues we have. it is really important that the federal government follows through and provide funding to programs that can support child programs, school

lunch programs, all the other things we want to do socially without putting economic stress on those in middle class who then become more conservative, usually as a reflection or response to the economics. host: on that point of economy impacting social outlook, albert on facebook agreeing with that saying in times of economic instability people tend to be more conservative. the poll we are talking about, the caller was also talking about historic trends say it goes back and forth over time. let me give you a visual from gallup. only in recent years that more americans had identified as being more socially liberal this socially conservative. this chart is a result of this question that gallup asked

thinking about social issues, would you say your views are very conservative, conservative, moderate, liberal or very liberal? the greenline at the type answered very conservative and conservative. going back to the -- the year before 2000. socially conservative were usually well ahead of those identified as being socially liberal. you can see the change taking place around 2015, 2018 when those numbers started to flip and more people identifying as more socially liberal and went back and forth and now, 38% of americans say they are either very conservative or conservative. 29% are saying they are very liberal or liberal. this is the gallup poll they got attention this week. we are getting your reaction to it and also want to hear what you think are the major issues -- social issues in the country today.

john in d.c., republican. what do you think of the results? caller: i think a lot of it is the size of government. conservative people want to take more personal responsibility. having children as a sacrifice. why do you expect the government to babysit your kids? there should be one parent that stays home during the childbearing years, figure out how you're going to manage finances, and you sacrifice. you do not expect the government to raise her children. that is ridiculous. host: bill in norcross, georgia. independent. what do you think? caller: thank you for taking my call. i have not seen an increase in my area in conservative in the area i live in, but i will say,

i feel strongly that the most important critical problem we have in this country is the fact that we have -- we have no respect for law and order. people today not really care about the truth as long as they get what they want. this troubles me a great deal. surely we are always going to have conservatives and liberals and people who talk about taxes but our major concern, as i am seeing more people armed and i see more and more people who are feeling that they are in danger. that is one of the most critical things i feel this country is being faced with. it is a sad time for me.

it is very difficult to think of your fellow citizens that are about to pick up arms and go to war with each other for any little silly think. what we need to do is to focus on this and try to avoid a totally, you might say, another civil war. host: bill not seeing it. mark melvin come former democratic poster very much involved in congressional races, also opinion contribut for the hill newspaper not seeing its well. this is column in response to th gallup polls saying social conservatism rising depends on the issues. harish gallup startling nclusion based on a single question asking, about social issues, would you say your issues are conservativ, moderate, or liberal. whatever social might be

voters consulting a tally on these issues to ir social issue ideology. the headline grabbing questions assumes there some agreed-upon set of social issues. there is not, he drives. people have insight into how the views have evolved. they do not create he writes. -- they do not, he writes. mark, new york. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. my point is this, i am a conservative. we should get rid of -- suspend all of the subsidies for all the republican back entities and big government. that is what big government is.

have a great day. take care. host: chuck. charlotte, north carolina on the republican line. what you think of the biggest social issues in the country? [inaudible] and in texas. good morning. what do you think are the biggest social issues? caller: [indiscernible] what is happening right now, people are realizing what have we done and what they have done is they have given over the raising of their children to government programming, schools, what they are finding out the children are being indoctrinated. that is why people are becoming more socially conservative because what is happening now is there coming for our children. they are saying children to make

decisions about whether or not they are male or female when they are three years old. a child came to their parent or said they want to eat candy three times a day for every male are they going to let them do that? there say it is important to let it drag queens dancing in motorways right in front of children. that is ok to put these grown men in front of children. you have naked men on the lawn of the white house. you have naked men to have altered their breasts and they are dancing in front of the white house. you are the president saying it is ok -- have a president saying it is ok. targeted marketing bathing suits to little boys to test their genitalia so they can pretend they are not little boys.

that is the problem. when moms, dads are finding out these going on in schools they do not want their children to be exposed to and that is what is happening. when you come for people's children and they realize what is happening, that is when they draw the line. i'm glad you let me speak. host: anne in texas. for those who may not be familiar with the what happened on the lawn of the white house, it is referred to in this article in washington post about president biden walking a tightrope when it comes to political transgender rights. the administration approach to transgender issues sometimes been cautious, reaction from advocates makes when proposed a role in april prohibiting schools from issuing blanket bans on treasures or athletes

but also allow them to impose restrictions on individual cases. transgender advocates say that administration could be doing more to speed up antidiscrimination roles. they write political sensitivity in apparel issues highlighted when trans activist posted a video of herself and two others topless at last week's white house pride event previewed conservatives infuse president biden of the grading the presidency for the white house announced the -- degrading the presidency for the white house and announcing prohibiting them from going to the white house. caller: what you just read about that woman who took a picture of the trans and posted it, it was all staged. they have people out of they are doing ridiculous things and they want to blame it on the biden administration. i do not approve of storytelling

by people dressed up like woman for little children even though i am a democrat and i believe in equal rights for for gay people. as long as they carry themselves in respectable way, who knows and who cares. host: how would you answer that question, would you describe yourself on social issues conservative, very conservative, moderate, liberal, very liberal? caller: you cannot put everybody in one box. you cannot say i'm in this box or that box. your views have to be more wider than that. i want to say about this conservatism poll that rates of

these people high, you have to think about all the people who went to the capital on january 6 from all over the country. they were drawn into this trump, trump, trump think. a lot of these people have been convicted of crimes and they are locked up. what is trump saying? i will pardon them. i would do this and that. that is why a lot of them want him so they can get they people out of jail or get the synthesis turned around. that is why i think it is on the rise. there are so many republicans that got wrapped up in this trump syndrome. host: donald trump also comes

into this article on the washington post looking at the biden administration message of the political tightrope they walk when it comes to transgender rights. they note donald trump during a recent speech in north carolina, he took note when his endorsement of an anti-transit measure prompted standing ovation. they quote to my stay in the speech, it is amazing how strongly people feel about that, cutting back -- as i talk about cutting taxes and they go, like that? if i talk about transgender, everyone goes crazy. who would've thought you did not know what it was. donald trump. this is david in syracuse, new york. good morning. caller: i just wonder. two calls ago, why would you let someone come on and spew such hatred for three minutes? trans rights are human rights.

it blows me away. it blows me away you would let someone come on the air and totally spew nonsense. one thing i want to say, do you remember in the 1980's, when i was growing up, their hatred towards the gay population? now we look back at that and it is embarrassing. we can make progress. trans people are just people. they just want to be left alone to have their life. why is there always someone we got to hate? that is the one thing makes me really doubt my conservatism is that it seems like there's always -- this is who you have to hate now. this is who you have to hate next.

this is who you have to hate after that. host: what would you say you are conservative on? caller: i used to think -- i'm a good christian. i used to think my conservatism gave me the moral high ground. but what i am realizing is that it is all just about hatred. all of us have a day relative, a gay friend -- a gate relative, a gay friend. soon you all have a trans relative in a trans friend. 10 years from now we will look back and these horrible people spewing this garbage, it is not going to age well. it is going to look awful. they are talking about five-year-olds getting genital mutilated. that is not happened. that is not i thing. do you understand that?

host: we had two desk coming up to talk about the issues you bring up. guest: talking about lgbtq rights and some of the efforts going on in the states pushing back on some of these issues. when it comes to transgender's rights and as you're putting it, it will eventually be how america feels about gay rights in decades to come. sherry's of us that writing in today's washington times who -- sylvester writing in today's washington times, just look at one issue from a supporter trans rights which affects those suffering from gender confusion. she says it is following that support. according to gallup the number of americans who -- have

increased to 70% almost the same as texans who oppose it. addictions by the love that trans rights will gradually evolve into broader acceptance as gay rights have seem to be off base is with sherry sylvester rights. bernie in pennsylvania, independent. caller: good morning. i want to clear the air. the party that was over society -- it is time to convert humanity so we can become popular and become a cello. this change in their -- transgender is a step towards trans-humanism. it has nothing to do with national order of rights. they keep shoving this. host: who are the powers that be

that control society? caller: the elite. they keep bombarding us with the products and new ways of living. tried to transform our identity. they try to uproot our culture so we can become like jello and they can shape us anyway they want. host: fred in virginia. democrat. caller:. good morning thank you for taking my call. i want to say that there is no such thing as a conservative person. the dearly departed pat robertson was supposed to be a staunch conservative but he's always looking for a liberal offering.

if you are conservative, when it is time to conceive, you'll be conservative, it is like your conservative when it is time to give out. that is a kin to being a hypocrite. i've never met a conservative and it is time to receive. it is always a liberal. this conservatives calling claiming to be conservative are hypocrites because you are always liberal when it is time to receive. host: mike in texas, republican. good morning. caller: good morning and wow. i'm not sure where the last caller was going. i think mishkin had it right. you cannot put folks in a box. i'm conservative, libertarian bleeding and yet i have some democratic friends and voted for a couple democrats over the years. here is where i think the problem is, the far left and

back in the 1980's something akin to the middle is 40% republican, 40% democratic and 10% and 10. i think we have a verse that number to the point that the militant on both sides, conservative and liberal, have overtaken their parties and we look at things through almost the winds of warfare rather than politics. host: you think we do that all social issues? caller: i think we do it on a great number of her issues, not just social, but financial. host: give me the top two or three social issues you think is

causing that warfare as you describe it. caller: private example is transgender issue. biologically -- perfect example is transgender issue. biologically there are two jitters, male and female. there are differences between the genders. when you put a male it is said that if he had been able to compete as a woman back in 76 games, not only would he have won the gold medal, which he did he would have what it running away. there are differences between men and women in the areas board. you cannot equally compete with a man and a woman in most

sports, not all. golf and tennis, there are sportswear it is equal but as a general rule, weightlifting, boxing, fighting, football, soccer etc., the transgender issue and the ncaa had the problem with male swimmer this last year, 40 seconds ahead of his competitors. really? that sums it up. to say that person has the right to swim against woman when they are a biological male. that is a militant form of liberalism. i think in many cases the abortion issue and i will flip it around to be fair to everybody. the abortion issue -- and pro-life, absolutely. i disagree with the short term,

shortsighted bill that have come out in various legislatures over the last 6-8 months since the overturning of roe v. wade. it does not know she is pregnant until 2-3 months you're putting her past the deadline for getting care? get real. use common sense. 4-5 months, second trimester, she has to make a choice. it is not that hard to use common sense. i wish people would do it more. thank you for the time this morning. host: depaul we have been talking about in the first hour came out june 8 and june 8 was the same day president biden spoke out against some of the policies conservative politicians have recently evidence, specifically those that limit lgbtq rights.

this was president biden last week in the white house. [video clip] >> i was proud to end the ban on transgender troops in our military signed the respect for marriage act, strengthened the right protections for lgbt americans and advanced lgbt human rights around the globe. our fight is far from over because we have some hysterical and i would argue prejudice people who are engaged in all you see going on around the country. it is an appeal to fear and in appeal that is unjustified and ugly. it is wrong for -- it is wrong a person can be married in the united states and fired in the afternoon by their employer because they are gay. it is wrong the violence and

hate crimes targeting lgbtq people is rising. it is wrong extreme officials are putting hateful bills targeting transgender children, terrifying families, and criminalizing doctors. these are our kids. these are our neighbors. it is cool. it is callous. somebody else's kids is all our kids. it matters a great deal how we treat everyone in this country. host: that was president biden last week at the white house. this was for the governor ron desantis last month at an event at the heritage foundation speaking about the importance of standing up, in his mind, of conservative values of socialism. [video clip] florida -- >> photo shows -- florida shows,

we took a state as a swing state and would people in our direction. i am happy for what we have done. the left helps us because it is a saying what they are trying to do. -- in saying what they are trying to do. when you have that agenda permeated every institution in society you are going to face blowback if you stand for traditional principles, values. that is reality. it is not just me being a governor. a parent going to school board trying to speak the truth, what do you think the immediate right raised a glowing profile of the conservative mom doing that? no, they attacked. standing up for what is right in our country come in this day in age, it is not free but you have to be willing to accept that and what i come into this part of the country, sometimes you find to reagan airport, it is always great, you see lincoln memorial,

all these great monuments, the capitol building and it is like that is what america is about. i say do that as u.s. congressman but then i figured out the view is better outside of the right plane that you look over the potomac river, small monument arranged orderly over rolling hills in arlington national cemetery and the connection between those you could have the best declaration of independence in the world, best constitution, great leaders, none that will amount to much if you do not have people willing to stand up, put on uniform, risk their lives and get the last measure of devotion. that is what i believe america is all about. we are not asked to give such a sacrifice amongst ourselves with what those folks did but we are asked to sacrifice and i think the way you do it is you wear it as a badge of honor. they come after me, i take it to know i must be on the right

track and keep going ahead. host: for the governor and presidential candidate ron desantis speaking at the heritage foundation. it is just after 7:30 a.m. on the east coast. we are talking about the gallup poll you have seen, social conservatism in united states is at its highest in about a decade. 30% of americans say they are socially conservative -- 38 percent of americans say their socially conservative. 44% say economically conservative. both numbers highest since 2012. socially liberal the client this year. just 29% -- socially liberal have declined this year. that number just 29%. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001.

looking for your text, social media posts. from richard, apple and oranges comparison. always socially liberal and most people would have said i was socially liberal 30 years ago. today i know i am still socially liberal but most people would call me socially conservative. andrea saying democrats lurch to the left has left most americans uncomfortable forcing them to rethink their values and realize they are not as progressive as they thought. bob, what we do not have a platform to move the country forward, it is easier to focus also she issues like lgbt rights , women's health, transgender issues. audrey in philadelphia. caller: i want to make a few quick points. it surprises me people become more conservative as they get older. i am 65 years old and i've always gotten more liberal.

i think i got more experience, more perspective. it makes me more understanding of people and a more generous. i grew up republican. i became a democrat in college and after the 1-2 punch of reagan and clinton i became independent. i want to say i'm surprised that many christians are socially conservative because jesus was not. jesus embrace samaritans, social outcasts, prostitutes. he was very liberal. i want to say if you look at polling, was consistently we pull people about individual issues like strengthening social security or not intervening in other countries, you find people really are liberal but they do not like to label a liberal. i think that is a part of what we are seeing now.

i was heartened to hear some of the calls from republicans today. they did not sound very socially conservative to me. david from michigan and the other guy talking about transgender rights. it was absolutely wonderful to hear them say those things. i agree transgender rights are human rights. it makes me wonder in 20 years was we finally accepted transgender people, who are we going to hate then? it always seems like there is somebody we're supposed to hate, as david said. my daughter is transgender. she's absolutely wonderful person she is kind and hard-working. absolutely terrific. why anybody would hate her without knowing her is beyond me. if we took away the sports issue, i think maybe people would look at it differently. i think we are being diverted by this sports issue.

if we think of them as human equal to everybody else than i think it will not be such an issue. host: why do you think we get so hung up on the sports issue when it comes to transgender rights? caller: i think probably because we are e-sports loving country and also -- we are a sports loving country and also people that use media well knows it is a weak point in transgender equality. that is what they are trying to focus the argument because it works. it is something everybody agrees. i myself question whether or not a transgender male should be in the most boys. i'm not sure how to handle it. i do not know it the answer is but i understand concerns. it is different than saying transgender people should not be able to vote or able to use a bathroom. host: another flashpoint i guess

of this debate, gender affirming surgery and therapy for minors. the arguments back and forth on that that there are other things we keep for minors, 18 to smoke. 21 to drink. why should we not restrict gender affirming therapies and surgeries to a certain age? describe that as a weak point in this debate? caller: it is an interesting point we should all be talking about instead of yelling back and forth about sports. it is like immigration and other issues. we focus on these points where there is no resolution instead of trying to sit down and talk about it. i'm not comfortable giving surgery to an eight-year-old.

but i also did not think we should totally ignore them. it is not -- i have a degree in biology and i took a lot of genetics and you cannot just say this male or female. that is not true. there are definitely people who feel they are in the wrong body. it could be psychological. it could be biological. we do not know and we have not figured it all out yet. reasonable people need to be talking about these things rather than letting unreasonable people to the discussion all the time. i love hearing from republicans earlier today. i thought they were great and those of the kind of people i can sit down and talk to. host: will also be talking about lgbtq issues in our 8 a.m. our. plenty of opportunities. thank you for your call.

vicki in houston, texas. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i would like to say as a woman of color i believe a lot of these issues are somewhat, not made up, but i think blown out of proportion. also thinking when the governor of florida was making me comments about looking over the ocean and what else -- in other words people who fight for the country, well they're all types of people who fight for the country. to just single out people -- how are you conservative, socially conservative, and you hate people?

i do not know why that word. basically the word conservative, when i hear it, -- i was a republican. i voted republican. when i voted republican conservative to me means you are making sure you not spending your money, your making sure watch what you spend, taking care of your family. believe even with morals being in check, that is not me you get to choose who you're going to show love towards. now to meet the word conservative it relates to hate. i tell you i. -- i will tell you why. i discussion the other day and we were in church and we do not realize we had different views. the person was saying the same

thing that is going on now. oh, i cannot love everybody because they are gay, this and that, and so forth. i said here supposed to be a christian, seems like it -- it says the commitment jesus gives all of us is that we love one another. you may not be a christian. that is ok. at the same time, you are saying you are representing faith, the country -- the state, the country of people who live there are gay. whatever. they are human beings. host: halt on twitter quoting the bible saying traditional families can be accepting of those that are different than them. beleaguered your neighbors's continuation of using people to manipulate politics. love thy neighbor. do not get sucked into the hype of the hate.

marshall, florida, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a veteran and a cd pride flag -- and to see the pride flag and the american flag on each side of it is disgusting. i've never seen another flag in front of the american flag. i fought for this country. i am very upset about the way the flag right now was disrespected in front of the white house. people to understand when you go out and fight for this country, like myself and a lot of veterans, and a lot of veterans that have gave their lives for this country, and to have the american flag at second rate is disgusting. it made this country look terrible. to have people do what they did in front of the white house how

could any president do something like that? as far as transgender's in school, if i had kids in schools today and they brought the stuff up about be transgender, i would take them out of school in a heartbeat. there is no place in this school for this. we are here to teach the kids reading, writing, and arithmetic. we are here to have -- to teach them how to be better on themselves, not to become a transgender. host: on the flag issue at the white house, this is the picture from fox five in d.c. white house accuse of u.s. flag code violations over is pride flag month display.

christopher in louisiana, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a grandson who came out to me as transgender. i accepted it. host: january in tennessee. -- jerry in tennessee. caller: thank you for taking my call. can you not let people controlled the whole show? i've been waiting 25 minutes to get on. the three issues that are most important are they cutting social security. that is the most important issue. are you still with me? host: yes. you think that's the biggest social issue in the country? caller: the biggest social issue

is social security and all of a sudden it is smokescreen. we have woman's issues, little girls being forced to have babies. those are the things that are the biggest social issues and a one payer health care bill. it is that plan is simple. we can afford it. insurance companies they have -- they make all kinds of money. wife you paid to the government can they not make money off of it -- why, if you pay to the government can they not off of it? put it on a cell tax. they got to have health insurance. people are dying from this. woman issues, the cutting of social security. imagine what it would be like if social security would be cut off tomorrow? what with the usb like?

-- what with the u.s. be like? host: on colors controlling this show, that is kind of what the show is. the show does not work without the callers coming in and having their voices heard. jim is in pennsylvania, republican it. you are next. what he think of the gallup poll showing social conservative is at its highest in a decade? caller: maybe people are finally waking up. i would call myself conservative but i call myself a christian first. all these problems that you're describing today -- discussing today are symptoms of a godless society. we turned away from god, we turned away from the truth of the bible. this is a result.

fighting against god is like the fright -- defying gravity, do it at your own peril. host: this is lorelli in texas. good morning. independent. caller: good morning. i'm going to say that -- i'll be castrated with you as i can, i am a lesbian. wake up america. maybe republican's are falling into nazi-ism. they're calling for genocide. most republicans have been calling for my death. they are saying i do not have a right and i should die. he is and i see a he does not want me here -- nazi and he does not want me here.

host: stephen, democrat. good morning. caller: i want to say to that one prior caller who said there are only two genders, there are three, male, female, and intersects which has the sexual organs of both genders so there is three. conservatism by definition like to preserve the status quo so it is easy because it requires no thought, just conformity. when trump was raining i used to hear people say they were glad he was saying he thinks he was afraid to say and i was always like, what are you afraid to say? it is usually hateful. indoctrination, think the pledge of allegiance, is indoctrination. i was forced to go to church in sunday school long after i said i did not believe it but that is indoctrination as well. christians are losing influence and that is why they are so upset. no one is telling him he cannot believe but he's trying to tell everyone else he has to.

the other thing about conservative catching on, southern poverty law center when barack obama was elected said hate groups are on the rise and i think that was due to racism and now it is moved on to the latest target of trans people because conservatives do not want to change, they just like the way things are. host: this is joe. columbia, south carolina. republican. caller: good morning. that last caller really hit on every good point. the whole idea for me is -- i was born and raised through the 1960's, i am able to see a difference on hatred. the bottom line for me as a black person in united states who was born and raised in new york in bedside/woodland which i see now a lot of different groups where there is asian

-- whether it is asian or moving into lower east side, now and to south carolina. the bottom line is nothing but acceptance that we have to deal with. the young people are the ones who are going to have to either help us to get through with their decision. i am old now. i'm in my 60's. i'm glad i was able to get retired to social security. i love living there my love seeing some of the developing young people are trying to express. we should get by example. share some of the differences we see. i hope and pray that we do not just physically eliminate each

other like some of the other planets. host: alan in d.c. independent. caller: good morning. a couple callers before me who brought up the intersects is another gender, that was spot on. one of the things i think you guys need to do is bring in more diverse people that i can talk about these issues because right now the one coming up on june 30 called everybody and it looks at intersex community and their fight for recognition. there is another author who wrote a book that was called before we were trans, a history of gender and a looks back all the way to egypt, 3500 years ago were you had became a male as he

became king. americans by looking at things now is in binary contexts. it is necessarily play out has history has looked at the inters ex community over the span of history. we need to look at more different endeavors perspectives set up in echo chambers because there is a lot of scholarship out there. host: what got you into intersex scholarship in this issue? do you know somebody? caller: i'm an educator and i'm teaching kids that are that way. i had one student who in the seventh grade knew that they were different. now graduated and has decided to have the top surgery. they're not going to change their bottom portions but they know they are different. how do you come as an educator,

deal with students who you are trying to advocate on behalf of as opposed to marginalizing them? if we do not have enough information to be able to look at them -- at a more broad perspective. that is really important. i was say -- democracy now is a space where i go to find different perspectives they have a lot of stuff that explores this topic in a much more holistic manner. as opposed to good or bad or the binary we engage in. if you look over history of humanity, people have been doing this forever and a day. it is only when western culture began to connect with indigenous cultures with a sector find these notions of otherness and whiteness was predicated on not being like them. you had to be more one gender or another, according to this guy,

were they trying to -- they have a really interesting perspectives on the histories. host: this is antonio. five minutes left in this first document. for massachusetts, republican. caller: i think it shows how american people are going this way because critical race theory , parental rights in school, and radical gender ideology in schools. i think the american people have seen what is going on in the erosion of parental rights with -- i think -- the american people are tolerant but we have been left behind in democrat party. it is moving further to the left every single year. we've always been this way.

anti-american teaching, telling kids they should not stand for the flag or respect their country. these are things we have never been on board with. that is why i think you're seeing this gallup poll come out and i think it is abortion because democrats out of touch on abortion. look at the state of massachusetts, their moot the duty of care to say baby's life. you look at the legislation. american people are out of touch with this. democrats out of touch with the american people on this. the american people have been left behind. i talked to old school democrats who say i do not leave the democrat party, they left me behind. host: john in minnesota on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: it is joan, but that is ok. a few years ago i watched a

program on television where a two parent got told a story to have a child that instead of having a physician make a choice and birth, whether their child was a male or female, let that child grow for two years without thinking that this and he gave the child a chance to show where they had male or female trace, which we know everybody has. females do things one way and mouse to another. i think that was the smartest thing. he never showed again on tv. i had a friend who said i'm going home to see my family and i said why are you going? she said, they're going to the hospital to try to make a decision where there might niece's baby is a boy or a girl. i think people who let the child grow a little while, they do not

know the difference anyway, to see what traits they shall before they put that child -- show before they put that child through these things children go through. they have a chance to show what they are, traits feminine or masculine, it would be a godsend and saving for people and save so much pain and misery we cause people because we think they should be making choices and not making choices. they have a right to live like everybody else and it is nobody else's business and how they love or how they live. we need to get people a chance. host: and their traits, feminine traits, masculine traits, it would be life too many people

and save so much pain and misery that we cause people because we think they should be making choices are not making choices. they have the right to live like anyone else and it's nobody business how they love. we need to give people a chance. host: that was our last color in this segment. plenty more to talk about this morning, of next we will talk about state legislation focused on lgbt to americans and joining us first is carl charles attorney with lambda legal and later we will hear from matt sharp from alliance defending freedom. stick around we will be right back.

on august 24 195514-year-old emmett towel visited brianne's meat market where he was accused of flirting with the store clerk. his 16-year-old cousin was with him when the incident happened and four days later when he was inducted. sunday, they recount the events that led to the murder, efforts to get justice for his late cousin. >> i left him in the store. nothing happened while they were inhe store. they came out of the store and once they were out of the store a short time later, i don't know how long. misses bryant comes out of the store.

emmett love to make people laugh. so he wolf whistled to make us laugh. he misunderstood the atmosphere of 1955 in mississippi. a black man whistling at a white woman. that was death itself. a few days full of trouble on cuba name. you can listen to all of those podcasts on our podcast cap c-span now. visit c-spanshop.org. c-span's online store and save during our father's day sale going on now. save up to 15% on all products site wide. there is something for every fan . scan the code on the right to

shop the father's day sale going on now at c-spanshop.org. a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this, it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work, get informed straight from the source on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word from the nation's capital to wherever you are it is the opinion that matters the most, is your own. this is what democracy looks like. "washington journal," continues. host: a conversation on lgbtq rights with carl charles with lambda legal just to remind the viewers what their mission is? guest: lambda legal is the

oldest and largest lgbtq advocacy group. seeking full rights for lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgendered people. we celebrate our 50th anniversary this year. host: how many cases are you involved in and how are you funded? guest: we are involved in dozens of cases both as lead counsel and amicus. it's exclusively funded through charitable contributions of people who support our missions. host: what are two of the cases that you see right now that could impact lgbt americans? guest: critical cases are representing transgender people in a variety of settings. most notably in opposition to the bands on gender affirming

care for adolescents across several states. primarily, in tennessee, oklahoma and in florida. host: explain what that means, gender affirming care? what he mean by the term? guest: that refers to medically necessary, safe, effective care for transgender people that aids them in their ability to live as their authentic selves. this has been supported by every major medical association across united states. it has been in use for almost a century contrary to the talking points. it has been a long time -- been around for a long time and his help transgender people live happy lives for many years. host: who decides whether it is medically necessary? guest: a team of medical

professionals. doctors, endocrinologists, psychiatrists, they evaluate if an intervention is necessary and even more so if that person is an adolescent. host: when you talk about the state laws banning gender affirming care for minors, this is the map. we will show this from the human rights campaign. the states and red, have laws or policies banning gender affirming care that have passed. the states an orange are the states that are considering laws when it comes to banning gender affirming care. florida is one of the states in red on the map. recently they passed one of these bills and it was ron desantis who spoke about that legislation as he signed it into law. i want to play one minute and a half of what he had to say when

signing it. [video clip] >> you have a movement amongst rogue elements of the medical establishment to do things, the mutilation of minors. they are trying to do sex change operations on minors. giving them things like puberty blockers that are irreversible and that is not based on science. that is not based on evidence. you have countries that have tried to do this in europe and they recognize this was very harmful and now they don't know do it. in the united states, you have an ideologically charged small group of folks within medicine that are pushing these types of procedures on minors. we think that is wrong. in florida, we took action so no physician that does those

procedures will keep their medical license. so that is gone if you do this which is great. but when we do the sb 254 this will permanently outlaw the mutilation of minors. it will outlaw the surgical procedures and puberty blockers and require any adults receiving these surgeries to be informed about the irreversible nature and the dangers of these procedures. host: ron desantis last month. i wanted to give you a chance to respond to that clip. guest: he is lying. he is making a number of false statements in his description of the medical community's acceptance and across the board

wide acceptance of treatment of gender dysmorphia with gender affirming care. it's not the rogue element it's the entire medical profession. is telling that the governor of florida in an unprecedented fashion will reference what countries outside the united states are doing. i would be shocked if another study where the governor of any state would care what any other country is doing. republican politicians notoriously dismiss what other countries are doing when it comes to holding up civil rights. it's fascinating that he is now aware of what other countries are doing and he is misrepresenting the facts. the facts are that gender affirming medical care is supported by every major medical association in the united states. there are standards of care that

practitioners and clinicians follow for the treatment. no one is mutilating minors, that's a misrepresentation and falsehood. children are not ever treated with medical intervention. i use adolescent on purpose because those are the only young people for whom medical interventions are even considered. once again, the governor as many republicans are doing in 2023 are using the specter of child mutilation, not a true and accurate they in any stretch of the understanding to drum up outrage into prey upon people's ignorance and lack of understanding about transgender people. over 70% no a lesbian or gay man and only one in five people think they know a trans person.

we have a real gap in understanding that needs to be addressed and hateful, ignorant laws like ones by ron desantis are not helping bridge that gap. host: let me give the phone numbers to call in to speak to carl charles for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002 and for those who identify as lgbtq (202) 748-8003 . the acceptance in the medical community, the washington post about the american college of pediatricians which has gained outside influence in these fights. it has successfully lobbied since 2021 for laws to band gender affirming care.

what should they know about the american college of pediatricians? guest: that is a junk science group used to bolster and write papers for our opponents the alliance defending freedom. they created themselves solely to oppose any lgbtq equality, not just trans equality. you can find articles on their website talking about the harms of same-sex relationships to children and they parrot a lot of anti-lgbtq talking points that track in lack of acceptance rooted in religious beliefs. people are entitled to their religious beliefs but they are not entitled to discriminate based on those beliefs. the american college of pediatricians is a french outlier, not widely populated

medical organization. when i say wide acceptance i'm talking about the american medical association, the american academy of pediatrics, the endocrine society. i am talking about well-established decades-old medical organizations that are reputable and have established procedures and protocols for evaluating medical interventions and supporting clinicians. not groups that are formed solely to oppose and repress civil rights of lgbtq people. host: we will start with chris in edmond, oklahoma, and independent. caller: hi, good morning carl and john. thank you for taking my call. i am going into my second year of psychiatry residency and i am actually at work right now. don't worry i am not ignoring my

patients. i wanted to call in i feel a lot of the time this conversation around trans issues and trans children and gender affirming care of the pediatric population is so misinformed. there is this fixation because of people like he was thought cool on youtube who made that documentary what is a woman? people like him. getting bomb threats called into boston children's hospital and doing stochastic terrorism based on the belief that children are out here getting bottom surgery. getting genital surgeries for willy-nilly.

as far as i know, this is incredibly rare and happens after years of counseling involving parents, the minor or is almost nonexistent practice. there is more commonly, using puberty blockers which are completely reversible. you discontinue puberty blockers because a minor says, i think i'm not actually trans which is far more uncommon than the common populace seems to believe. even minors who come out of strands generally stick by that

determination throughout their life. host: let me pause there and let carl jump in because you bring in a lot of topics here. guest: thank you for the call and thank you for your work as a medical professional and oklahoma. i've a family member who is an elementary school teacher in oklahoma so that state is near and dear to my heart. there is a lot of fear mongering happening based on things that are not true. adolescence, the only group of minors for whom any medical intervention, they do not go genital surgery. that surgery is not recommended or even discussed until after age 18. when our opponents say things -- when they raise the specter, that is not actually happening. puberty blockers are a medical

intervention that are used in cis-gender children for decades and it is reversible. the medical literature shows that when a young person identifies as transgender into adolescence, that identity is stable and 98% of those young people. our opponents are routinely trumpeting a few situations of people who later returned to identification with their sex assigned at birth. that is an incredible minority of people and to use that as a way to preclude access to appropriate medical interventions for trans people who need them as an injustice and i thank you for your call and your work. host: this is sheila from

massachusetts, a republican. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i am one of those people that firmly believes that this whole trans movement is a blight on society. i don't understand what the word authentic actually means, authentic self. to me that means what you are born as being authentic. i also don't understand this idea of puberty blockers being non-reversible or reversible. i understand that the commonly used drugs causes sterility and i wish that you would address those and i think this whole movement goes against all of god's nature and thanks for

taking my call. host: a chance to respond to sheila. guest: everyone has a gender identity, even you have one. all of us have an idea of who we authentically are. i encourage you to connect with some lgbtq groups. you said your political identity doesn't matter then i would encourage you to use that age old american principal of getting to know folks who are different from you in learning about their lives. if you sat down with a transgender person and listen to their experience he would have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. it's inaccurate to say puberty blockers because sterility, if they did they would not be used in cisgender children for decades. what god does or does not intend. we are not talking about

religion, we are talking about medicine and science in civil rights. host: atlanta, georgia, maria, a democrat. caller: good morning. i have seen a show starting with trans children and i think it's a terrible shame to start a child out that young. even though i am a democrat and it doesn't have anything to do with it. i agree with desantis about children being young. when you are a male, you feel how you are born. you can't change how you are born. if you are still a male, a female. this is where they go way too far with children and playing

sports. host: we haven't touched on the sports issue yet. guest: there is a lot to say about athletic participation as it pertains to trans children. no one is starting children out young. they are saying to their parents who they are and loving and accepting parents are listening to them, or they are not in those children go on to live difficult and challenging lives and often times do not change their gender identity. that is something that everyone has. in terms of sports, when we are talking about what happens in k- 12 athletics. all children have benefits of

the rights of education and that include school sports. we represented a young trans girl in virginia who is the only trans girl who is the only one playing sports in west virginia but their legislature have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars defending a law that as far as we can tell will only impact becky peppard jackson. when you say some people don't have a right to participate in school activities they internalize that message for years and that follows them into adulthood and it stigmatizes them and that discrimination is something they carry with him. that is not an american value. discrimination, stigma and harm to a powerless group of people has existed in our history and has been a shameful component of

our history and we at lambda legal are looking to change that for the future. host: they talked about an hbo program. what about your thoughts of transgender americans in television and movies in our culture today? guest: it's deeply important precisely for the reasons the last caller underlined. she is unfamiliar and think she knows no one who is transgender and that is likely not accurate. continue to have programs that show transgender people and accepting parents and families is deeply important. we have had the entirety of the media establishment in an anti-trans standpoint for decades. i would encourage audience members so watch disclosure on

netflix that details the pervasive anti-transgender sentiment in media, television, radio. all of the popular culture we have consumed has been making transgender people the but of every joke. and finally, in the last five years or so we have started to see mainstream media, pop-culture make a slight turn. saying we have done things wrong in maligning these people without understanding them it's time to address that. this happened with the understanding of lesbian engage people in we see a lot of the same hate will rhetoric used against lesbians and gays now being turned against transgender people. i really applaud mainstream media, television, media,

programs, podcasts that are aiming to be trans inclusive and understand the trans experience and destigmatize it especially for people like maria. host: christine and chevy chase, maryland, and independent. caller: good morning, first time caller. i have so much respect no matter what their position. it's important that we continue discussion even when we disagree. originally i was calling in to say i don't agree that puberty blockers are 100% reversible, though the effects can be reversed to some degree. to say gender identity is not malleable does a disservice to those trans people that feel

that their gender is one thing and then maybe change it. you are discounting those people who change their mind which is not fair in any way. so the comment about youth and sports, i don't want to disrespect, the cisgender person born with that gender, what about those people who are losing in sports and they are giving another group of people favor because you want them to feel included. we are denying a reality that is causing other people to feel not included and safe in their sport that they worked so hard for. which i think is pretty unfortunate. host: we will take your question, we are running short on time. guest: she did not identify

herself as a medical professional. i will not debate with scholars who are not medical professionals who don't provide this treatment about whether or not the effects of puberty blockers are reversible. children come on and off of them all the time. second point, when i said gender identity is not malleable i meant transgender people's understanding of being trans, a gender different than the sex at birth is not viable. one's understanding and expression of that gender identity may change over time but their identity as not cisgender does not change. to the final point, the consideration about cisgender girls who are losing in athletics.

again, not happening. we could take a look at the court case sewell versus the connecticut high school association that's now on appeal. cisgender girls are not losing. the people who are losing our transgender young people who are being excluded from participating based on unsubstantiated fear that they will win and that is unfair. i'm not saying that people's feelings about winning and losing don't matter but to allow those fears and your position in the majority to exclude people from being able to participate is wrong. host: bob in oregon on the line for democrats, just about two minutes here. caller: good morning america. my question is, did we forget what our flag stands for? it is freedom. one side is trying to cram their

freedom of thought down the other side and what we are fighting over is the right for people to be free in their own choices. that is what america stands for, it's freedom. i don't understand why we have to live with other people's freedom while ours are being taken away and that goes both ways to both parties. host: can you give me a specific example? caller: how come abortion half of the people are free to have an abortion because half of the other people's opinion about it. that is not freedom. guest: i will extrapolate his point and make mention that a

lot of the bills we talked about at the top of the hour about gender affirming care and precluding its availability invades the family relationship. something that conservatives hold very tightly and it inserts government into private family medical decisions in a way that republicans once upon a time did not feel was appropriate. they used to be the party of small government to leave them free to make the choice is for them. what we have now is state governments, politicians, anti-lgbt groups inserting their views of the world into the medically appropriate and safe decision that families are making for themselves. that goes against much of the believes that people across the political spectrum agreement. host: we will have to ended

there for today. carl charles is the senior attorney for lambda legal. thank you so much for your time. guest: thank you. host: up next we will hear from alliance defending freedom, matt sharp represents them. and later we have lee white talks about the legal records act and how that affects donald trump. american history tv saturdays on c-span2 exploring the people and events that telthamerican story. at 6:45, sharad brown leaves a

bipartisan group in reading of martin luther king jr.'s letter for birmingham jail. in his book becoming fdr, the author talks about how polio transformed roove. exoring the american story. watch american history tv and nd full schedule in your program guide or watch online at c-span.org/history. robert kaplan's 21st book revolves around what he is learned from greek philosophers and william shakespeare. yale university press said quote, he employs the worksf ancient greeks, shakespeare, german philosophers, to explore the social subjects of international politics: order,

disorder, rebellion, ambition, loyalty to family, and state violence, and the mistakes of power. mr. koplin, 70, was born in new york city and graduated from the university of connecticut. author robert kaplan on this episode of ms. plus available on the c-span now free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. watch video on demand any time at c-span.org and try our points of interest feature a timeline tool that uses markers to guide you the highlights of our coverage. >> a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this, it looks

like this where americans can see democracy at work. where citizens are truly infirmed -- informed. c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. it the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. washington journal continues. host: we continue our discussion on legislation impacting lgbtq americans with matt sharp from alliance defending freedom. we've been around for 25 years. the nations leading organization defending religious liberty, life, free speech and a lot of the cases we are talking about

today. we represent women's to lose out on opportunities because of policies that allow biological males to take away those privileges. our goal is to protect the free speech rights of every american recognizing how some of these rights are under attack from some of these policies with gender ideology being pushed. host: we want to talk about a case we may hear about here in washington from the supreme court perhaps very soon. the case of lori smith. he was lori smith? guest: she is the owner of 303 creative, a graphic design company and she serves people from all walks of life.

unfortunately, because of a colorado state log, she has been compelled to create messages and website that celebrate events that violate her personal marriage beliefs. like we saw several years ago with jack phillips, laurie smith is subject to the same law and they are looking to see if colorado can violate her's free speech rights and force her to speak a message that violates their conviction and beliefs. host: what is you take away from the argument of this case and when do you expect to get a result from the supreme court? guest: we were encouraged by the court to take this case. the court of appeals ruled against it. the fact that the supreme court took this case and was very focused on the infringement what can the government be held

accountable for. for forcing individual to speak messages they disagree with. we are waiting the decision. so within a few hours we could get a ruling for lori and every americans right to free speech. host: those decisions usually come out around 10:00 a.m.. we had carl charles on previously and he had some thoughts on the alliance. considering how he described it is the alliance and lgbtq rights? guest: we are focused on protecting the rights of all americans in cases like lorries and others people who have their own beliefs about certain issues.

if the government can tell lori what to say or speak they can do that for anyone. we have seen lgbtq individual stand with our clients because they recognize that a government that can punish our clients can punish them. when we fight these battles for religious freedoms we want to make sure all americans are protected. host: what is religious freedom? guest: the freedom to live within the confines of their religious beliefs. it can be a deeply held sense of conviction. maybe they can't attach themselves to a church but that is why the supreme court has said that people are free to live and work consistent with

their religious beliefs and that means the government can't come in and for someone to violate those beliefs. they can't punish people for those beliefs. that is why we see individuals lose their job because their religious convictions about what days of the week are holy that they may or may not be able to work. host: talking about matt sharp with alliance defending freedom the phone lines as usual for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-800, and those who identify as lgbtq (202) 748-8003. yo the alliance is not anti-lgbtqs. the human rights campaign released a state of emergency statement earlier this month saying that lgbtq americans are in a state of emergency and they reference the alliance in their

statement. a coalition of groups including heritage foundation, family policy alliance, alliance defending freedom drafted legislation and recruited legislator to push -- they use junk science and fear mongering attacks against lgbtq to peddle their policies and try to justify discrimination in the name of religious belief. guest: my first response would be look at the type of cases we are working on. we are defending free speech rights, we are defending children. dealing with those puberty blockers is because of the growing body of evidence of the damage that these procedures do to young children. it is the reason why the u.k., sweden, finland are looking at the science, following children

being put on puberty blockers and they are seeing is one sweden study showed there are 20 times higher rates of suicide. they saw a real lack of concrete benefits and choosing to prioritize counseling and psychotherapy. that is what the states are trying to do is follow that science and for children and our states we don't want them to be put down this path towards harmful medicalization. we don't want them to be put on things that may not be reversible. there are surgeries that have lifelong irreversible consequences. that is why alliance defending freedom is helping draw flaws that are sound and healthy states protect vulnerable children from these procedures. host: this is scary out of central veg village -- central

village, connecticut. caller: given the amount of time you're devoting to this we could profit from some much needed context. what percentage of the american population is gay? what percentage is transgender? thank you for taking my call. guest: i don't have the statistics. i have heard anything from 1-2%. and as adolescence identifying as lgbtq seven-9%. we know adolescence go through a lot of phases of questioning a confusion that we want to give them counseling. we want to help these children going through these challenges and what we want to avoid is things that have consequences. when we talk about puberty blockers, the fda released a

warning about potential side effects of puberty blockers in adolescence. they have never been proven safe and effective for gender dysphoria. it is used for precocious puberty to help a child go through puberty at a normal time. that is why a lot of these other countries and even a growing number of doctors are raising concerns about the harms that they are doing and say let's children be children. let's give them the counseling may need but not medicalize them and put them on these irreversible drugs. host: the gallup organization put a report out to this question, what percentage of americans are lgbtq? they're finding a 7.2% is what they put out from that report from the fall of last year.

this is don and des moines, iowa. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have freedom. i was born a man. that was not a choice, that's a fact. pride is a choice. love is a fact. the bible goes by the heart. people need to read the bible and find out what they are. if they are man, woman or something in between. that is all i have to say. host: that is don and iowa, anything you want to pick up on? guest: he is expressing his religious beliefs and there are people who share that and people who have different beliefs. what we are trying to do was ensure every american regardless

of their beliefs, regardless of their religious background has the same freedom to speak their views without fear of government punishment and live consistent with those views and beliefs. that includes teachers losing their jobs because they don't want to be forced to affirm gender ideology or light appearance about their child struggle with gender dysphoria. we want to make sure that every american has the right to live according to their beliefs. host: the hill focusing on transgender americans, 1.6% is the number they cite from the university of california from 2022. those are the number to the caller who asked. this is janet from louisiana. caller: hello? host: go ahead janice. caller: don't try to change a male child into a female or a

female child or to a male. when they get older, they will find their own group and an effeminate male is ok and a male-female is ok. everybody is different and they go through different stages. it shouldn't affect the places that they work, vote and care for others. respecting care is what jesus taught for everyone passing by. i am a social capitalist but this isn't a choice so i consider myself another and i appreciate talking to you. guest: i know louisiana is one of the states looking in efforts to protect children. to allow them to have a natural childhood and that is what is

motivating these legislators. they see a lot of these children that may not conform. it could be a young boy that's more effeminate and a young woman that is more masculine and rather than let them be who they are and develop naturally, go through puberty naturally there is this push to medicalize them and you need to be on sex hormones and we hear more and more stories of young men and women, individuals who are pushed to words that impress her to undergo medicalization that are now saying that my body has been damaged. young women had double mastectomies he will never be able to nurse their own child and they are speaking out and sounding the alarm because they don't want any other child to be coerced into what they went through. they recognize the best thing we could do is give them counseling, love, time to work through this. we know from study after study

anywhere between 80-90 percent of children if you allow them to go through puberty and give them counseling a lot of this will resolve on its own and they will find comfort in their own bodies. the moment you put them on puberty blockers you are pushing the children to go on wrong sex hormones that have irreversible consequences and that's why they are trying to protect these children from these procedures. host: i'm want to come back to laurie smith. a question from michael thorton on twitter asking, cannot block business owners refused to provide services because they are white or vice versa? can a jew or muslim refused to serve a christian? i would like to know the answers. guest: lori serves everybody

regardless of their identity and background. we are focused on beliefs. it is not about the who it is the message that she is being asked to express. should a democrat website designer be forced to design a website for ron desantis? if they disagree with the message then the constitution protects their right to decline to do so. this is not about declining to serve a person but rather a message. the government should never force any american to support a message that conflicts with their beliefs about a variety of topics. they should never have the power to force any of us to say or do things that violate our deeply held beliefs. host: on the line for those who identify as as lgbtq. guest: hi matt and john. where is matt getting some of the sourcing from because of

someone who does identify as lgbtq and does have some knowledge and experience in this area this does not align with our experience and less than 1% that go through any sort of transition experience d transition. we are talking about 1% of 2% and making state laws to help that very small bracket of people rather than making state laws that protect the actual majority of lgbtq rights in this country. guest: we are looking at the studies coming out of the u.k., sweden and these other countries. there was one from dr. cass, the cast review looking at the

scientifically rigorous evidence about the benefits of puberty blockers when it comes to treating gender dysphoria. he found that it is unknown, we don't know the consequences of those. there is growing evidence about some real serious long-term consequences including increased suicide rates. that is what we are looking at and a lot of the lawmakers are looking at. these countries that have been doing these procedures for years and pulling back because it is not producing the help promise. what they are seeing as it's the psychotherapy and dealing with other mental health issues. there has been a growing discussion between gender dysphoria and autism. we need to prioritize treating

those issues because quite often when you treat those and get them medically appropriate care for autism or borderline personality disorder the gender dysphoria resolves and we can focus on the counseling and not the medicalization of children. host: let me come to another issue in the medical information behind it. mutilation of minors is a term we have heard this morning. our previous guess saying it is a scare tactic. genital surgery is not recommended until after someone turns 18. your thoughts on that? guest: that is simply false. the u.s. department of health and human services released a document talking about various puberty blockers of what they said is that when it comes to gender affirming surgeries, top surgery, bottom surgery,

typically used in adulthood or case by case and adolescence. we know from the test of fires, those who have been speaking out the dead have some of the surgeries that this is happening and that is why the states are taking these steps saying we don't want this happening in our state. we have a duty to protect children, protect them from medicalization from things that show no benefits. we haven't even talked about brain development and what it means to deny a child from going through the natural brain development. there being but divided by a desire to protect these children. host: this is miriam out of texas, a democrat.

caller: i think you are just confusing people. here in america we have all sorts of freedoms but yet, a person or a child that is growing up and having issues or problems with identity. they're not can be allowed to express themselves because the culture is putting laws that prohibit that child from questioning who he is. that is not american. we are supposed to try and figure out who we are and if a child is going through issues, a mental issue where they are becoming depressed because he

can't figure it out or maybe he knows but there's something wrong with his body. a parent should be allowed to have access to american medicine doubt is going to help his or her child and trying to balance her figure out all that kind of medical stuff that goes along with the body. host: a chance to respond. guest: we do want children to get access to services that are helpful to them. that is why when the states are looking at these laws they are doing so and a narrow, focused way. they want to prioritize counseling. let's focus on these non-medicalized counseling and psychotherapy that we know is helpful. we do want children to get access to that in these laws are just focused on the medical

side. the puberty blockers and surgeries it that have at minimum a lot of question marks. they're raising questions about the long-term damage that this does to vulnerable children. they are free to express and explore which is why these states are doing this. the moment you put them on puberty blockers year putting them on a one-way street towards going on to us -- to surgeries. a better solution is to lead children develop naturally. let's give them counseling because it is saved, it is safe, doesn't have irreversible lifelong consequences and allows children to work these issues out on their own and once they have the capacity to weigh the pros and cons of this they can make these decisions for themselves. there is a reason why we don't

allow liquor sellers to sell to children. whether it's voting or entering into contracts because we recognize the children don't have the capacity to understand the long-term consequences of these important decisions they may make. they don't understand the consequences, they don't understand as a 12-year-old to never be able to have a child of their own or be a lifelong patient to be on these hormones for the rest of their life. that is what the states are trying to protect. making sure these children have time to develop and once they reach adulthood can make the decision for themselves. from madison, virginia. guest: the medicare identity card specified the name, social

security number and male or female. i actually interviewed, i worked for processing disability crimes. i had a 27 year career i only had two interviews with people changing their given sex. the one was a male and he had difficulty getting medicare bills paid because the card said male and he had changed to a female. he called the office so many times from the emergency room bleeding to death and all the god-awful consequences of the surgery. they used to call it gender identity crisis disorder and benefits were payable to

somebody who had this and it was considered a disorder. it's not normal. i believe you can change the male body with its chromosomes and genes and physical attributes into a female. but now, the rights the people accepted as fact that a man can become a woman. host: matt sharp? guest: i think the caller is exactly right. our biological sex is written to every cell and it matters. it matters in sports. we know from countless studies about the physiological differences between males and females. there was a study about allison phoenix one of the most decorated female track and field

stars and her accomplishments are amazing. and yet, in a given year hundreds of high school boys beat her best record and that's a reflection that there are differences. one of the benefits of a women's category is allows talented women, the opportunity to compete and when. to be champions to be at the top of the podium to sleep an arms length away from women in its shelter that work fleeing sexually abusive situations and others. this shelter wanted to help this individual. this individual was a male identifying as a feel -- female, they were wanting to help this individual but not in a way that compromised the safety and security of the young women in

its shelter facility it served. we were talking about religious liberty earlier with colleges, with religious schools being punished about their beliefs about what it means to be male and female. being told they cannot get access to funding programs to serve their community. a religious organization helped provide meals to immigrant families and is now being cut out simply because of their beliefs. when we talk about why does it matter to protect the right to believe that biological sex is written into every cell of our body, when we do not, we see there are consequences in sports, two young children and religious liberty and free speech. host: matt sharp is a senior counsel at the adf legal.org. appreciate your time this morning. next, we will be joined by lee

white of the niol coalition for history. a discussion on the federal records -- presidential records act, the history of act at -- that act in light of the indictment of former president donald trump. stick around for that discussion. we will be right back. ♪ ♪ >> robert kaplan's 21st book revolves around what he has learned over the years from greek philosophers and william shakespeare. university press said kaan employees the works of ancient greeks, shakespee d german philosophers to explore the

central subjectsf international polits, order, disorder, rebellion, ambition, loyalty to family and state violence and the mistakes of power. mr. kaplan, 70, was born in new york city and graduated from the university of connecticut. >> author robert kaplan on the subset of book notes plus. book notes plus is available on the c-span now free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ ♪ >> on august 24, 1955, emmett till visited brian's grocery and meat market in mississippi where he was accused of flirting with the white store clerk, carolyn bryant. emmett till's 16-year-old cousin was with him when the incident happened and also four days later when emmett till was abducted. sunday on q and a, reverend

parker, co-author of a few days full of trouble recounts the events that led to emmett till's murder and efforts to get justice for his late cousin. >> i left him in his door, nothing happened while i was in there. shortly after, he was 14 and i was 16, came in with him and nothing happened while they were in the store. they came out of the store and once they were out a short time later, ms. bryant comes out of the store. he loved to make people laugh. he was a jokester. he whistles. he gives her a little whistle, he did that because -- in 1955 in mississippi, a black man whistling to a white woman, that was death itself. >> reverend wheeler parker junior with his book, a few days

full of trouble sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span qanon day. you can listen to q and a and all of our podcasts on our free c-span now app. ♪ >> a healthy democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this, where americans can see democracy at work, where citizens are truly informed a 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. because the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: a timely discussion on the law that governs the handling of presidential records. lee white is our guest.

before we get to the presidential records act of 1978, explain about the coalition and your group's mission. guest: the coalition is a nonprofit, nonpartisan consortium of about 42 different organizations. we represent not just historians but political scientists, k-12 history and social studies teachers, a range of different groups. we advocate on the hill for funding for history related agencies or programs like the national archives, park services, history programs, things like that. we are also heavily involved in records access issues since we represent historians who need access to primary sources to do their work. host: it is history coalition.org if you want to check them out on the web. the presidential records act,

likely hearing more about that as this document's case against the former president moves forward. where did it come from, what was happening in 1978 that we need a present to records act? guest: it was directly the result of the abuses we saw during the nixon administration. when president nixon left, he made a deal with the then -- national archives was under the general servic ainistration. he made a deal with them to take his tapes and everything with them and congress put a stop to it. congress realized there was a need to make sure something like this did not happen again, so they passed this law all the president records act. until that time, the records of a president were considered his personal property. he could take them with him, do whatever he wanted. in the 1930's, to give you more

background, president roosevelt came up with the idea of creating a presidential library where he could leave his records and his mementos and all of the things from his administration during his second administration, he started the idea. so that future historians and people could learn about the work he had done. that precedent was set and each, subsequent president decided i would like to do that to. congress passed the libraries act in 1955, setting parameters for subsequent presidents to do that. every president since then has created a presidential library except for president obama has decided not to, he was going to create presidential centers so the records will revert back to --normally the records go to a repository at the presidents

library. i am sorry, acronyms. the national archives and records administration. host: that is the independent agency. when we talk about a presidential record under the presidential records act, what qualifies as a presidential record? guest: anything created related to the business of the presidency. it covers the white house, the president, the white house staff, all of the sub agencies that are within the immediate purview of the white house. any business or transactions or documents related to the actual business of the government are presidential records, it is all encompassing. host: how big of a change was this in 1978 that the records a president makes that he jots down are no longer his, that they are the property of the united states? guest: while the president is in office, the president has the

authority to do somewhat what they would like to do with records. they can -- former president trump has said rightly you can declassify documents while you are president. you can destroy records if you want to, but you have to get to the vice of the archivist, you have to notify congress. that is not done that often. they can destroy bulk male and things like that. but, the moment the new president is inaugurated at 12:01 across the street here, the custody reverts to the federal government and the government owns those records, as well as the american people. host: because it is playing such a role in this debate over the former president records, does the president shall records act lay out a process for declassification? guest: that is covered by an executive order.

executive order 15326, if anyone wants to look it up. declassification is regulated by an exec of order, not a presidential records act. host: does the president shall records act make a distinction between classified records and not classified records? guest: no. host: who decides that the president shall records act has been violated? if there is some question over whether something has not been kept, who gets to make that decision? guest: i think in the case with the national archives, when, after president biden was inaugurated, the national archives new there were certain things that were missing like the kim jong-un letter. there were things missing. it is my understanding that when classified materials are sent to the president or the office of the president that they are tracked, they know they exist.

the national archives was going through, they are unpacking and are like, wait, there are things that are supposed to be here that are not here. they noticed. they sent letters to, the president's office the former president's office and said, we've got concerns there are records we think we should have that we do not have. do you have them? if you do, could you please send them back? they are very differential. if you see the timeline throughout the process, the archives was trying gently to prod them and they were sending emails to the white house counsel, the former white house counsel saying, could you help us out? there was not a big, in your face, we need this stuff tomorrow. they were giving them plenty of time to comply and get the records back to the archives. host: before the donald trump case, what were the previous, most high-profile cases involving the president to

records at? -- act? guest: i do not think this was -- number one, there is no enforcement mechanism in the president shall records act. president trump is being prosecuted under the espionage act for having possession of records that he is not entitled to have. there is no code section in the presidential records act that says a violation of this results in five years in jail or $20,000 fine or whatever. the only option the national archives have once they had played out the, we are not getting what we are supposed to be getting, was to report it to the department of justice and say have these records, we believe they are classified records, you need to get involved. host: had the national archives and records administration involve the justice department in any previous cases? guest: there had been a case where former clinton national

security advisor sandy berger had -- i believe he was to testify before the 9/11 commission, a little hazy on my memory on it. he asked the national archives if he could go in and look at his notes and records from that time period. while he was there, he stuffed them in his coat pocket and walked out. host: former president trump referenced saying the clinton case, while denouncing the indictment charged against him in recent days, this was an event in columbus, georgia this past weekend. i want to play this clip since we are talking past cases. [video clip] >> they do not mention the defining lawsuit that was brought against bill clinton. it was lost by the government, the famous socks case that says you can keep you -- keep these documents. they do not mention that.

these are the minor details. when i left office and was moving to florida, boxes were openly sitting on the white house sidewalk. everybody was taking pictures of them. this is not somebody smuggling boxes out, pictures of them sitting with people from gsa and other people waiting to put them on a truck. they were literally sitting outside of the white house, waiting for a truck to come. the truck come, it was there for a long time. they brought it down to florida and make it sound like it is a big event by operation, we did a poor job i will tell you. first thing you learn is, do not put them on the sidewalk in front of the white house. [laughter] >> as a former president, we were negotiating with the national archives and records administration just as every other president has done. the next thing i knew,

mar-a-lago was rated by gun toting fbi agents. we were negotiating. host: that was former president trump on saturday. lee white, some of the issues he brings up including the socks case. guest: the socks case is utterly, totally irrelevant to what we have at hand. in that case, president clinton was being interviewed by historian pulitzer prize winning tyler branch about his time in the white house. one of the exceptions in the presidential records act is that diaries, personal journals are exempt from the presidential records act. so, we are not talking -- in this case, we are talking about classified documents taken from the white house. we are not talking about an interview with a historian. we are talking about highly

classified, potentially dangerous documents if they get into the wrong hands -- it is apples and oranges, it does not apply. it is sort of like, dumb in a way. host: lee white is the executive director of the national coalition, talking about the presidential records act in this latest indictment of former president trump. if you want to join the conversation, phone lines as usual. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. this is david out of buffalo, new york. republican. good morning, you are on. caller: good morning, mr. white. how are you? guest: i'm good, how are you? caller: i am having a great morning.

a lot of my conservative friends keep bringing up hillary clinton, etc., etc. trump was in office for four years. i would imagine, back in 2016 the chant when i voted for him was lock her up. i imagine he did whatever he could in his -- and his doj looked into it. why bringing that up now, how is that helpful at all? it seems these are like apples and oranges. to the previous segment, trans rights are human rights and putin is not in control. guest: thanks for your question. a lot of it is just a flexion. -- deflection. if you do not have the law on your side, argue the facts. if you have -- if you do not have either, make a lot of noise. this is designed to distract

from the issue at hand, which is he took documents from the white house that belonged to the american people. that, when the national archives tried to get them back, he stonewalled them and the only remedy left to the national archives to get those documents back was to go to the doj. the doj made the decision to prosecute, or to take it to a grand jury. a grand jury of president jumps 99 trump's -- host: jodi asked this question, can the president have the ability to declassify any top-secret just by thinking about it? guest: absolutely not. there is no abracadabra, i'm going to make this a declassify document. there are procedures that i am not privy to because i have never declassify documents, but there are procedures you have to follow at the white house when you are the president to declassify a document.

you cannot just say, this document is declassified. i do not which camera i should put this up in. there is a document here that is up on the national archives website. i know our viewers can go there if you google presidential records act, go to the national archives website. you find this document here called guidance on presidential records. that is what the national archives gives to white house staff when they come on board to explain to them in plain english what their responsibilities are under the act. host: have you read it? guest: it is maybe 20 pages, but it is interesting because the introduction is written by then archivist -- welcome to your new job at the white house. please follow these rules. it is literally, soup to nuts,

this is the process you follow in dealing with the records you are dealing with. it is written at a 12th grade level. anyone can understand it. host: manwell park, california. this is will, line for independents. caller: good morning. i am reading from the teleprompter. guest: i am looking at the camera so i can see you. that is what i was told to do. host: the only thing that is in the teleprompter is your name, where you are from and the line you are calling it on. caller: all right, that is all i had. [laughter] host: kirk in florida, republican. good morning. caller: good morning, i had a question about the quote you mentioned, a missing korean document. is there an official list you want to call it that would

identify that as a missing document, and they are looking for all the documents on this list? second, where the documents that were at mar-a-lago, where they copies? i do not know if that is the correct word. were they the originals? that was my question today. thank you for your time. guest: i do not know that there is a list. i would have to check with the national archives about that. there is a list of records that were sent into the presidents, and where they were disposed of. if they went in one direction, they are supposed to come back. i think that is how the national archives knew there were documents missing, but the kim jong-un letter was something president trump had waived around and talked about repeatedly. they knew that one was missing, because it was probably one of the more famous documents of his

presidency. i am sorry, could you? repeat your second question host: does the presidential records act layout a timeframe that the national archives and records administration starts tracking these documents? you say they knew about the kim jong-un letter, it was a high-profile letter. are they making these lists as they go and checking them off post presidency? guest: i think the only records do not get sent to the national archives at the end. there are records that can go over during the presidency. i think part of just -- to digress, part of what happened that contributed to the chaos was, you had a present that still thought he was the president. normally when a president loses the election, the process starts within a couple of days of the election and the new administration is coming in. the old administration starts

packing up in november. in this case, you had a president who thought he wasn't leaving. i am guessing a lot of this stuff was postponed and they found out it is january, we've got three weeks to start packing this stuff up. host: the presidential records act of 1978, what did jimmy carter think of this act and what did ronald reagan think of this act? guest: jimmy carter signed it. it was not applicable to him. congress sets it up so it is applicable to the person who follows the president who signs it. host: it makes it easier to get signed that way. guest: that to. maybe if jimmy carter had not been elected to a second term, it might have been applied to him. i think the law said it would apply to whoever turned out to be president in 1981, who was ronald reagan. no other president has complained about it, every other president has complied with it.

actually, they want to get access to the document so they can start working on their library. one of the things the presidential act also calls for is that the records are not available for 12 years to the public. they have to process them and go through them. they are open to the freedom of information act request after five years, but the public cannot start to see a president's records until 12 years after they leave office. host: nora helps run the presidential library system. has a library or a former president ever wanted to put a document out in their library and nora says, no, you cannot have this document? guest: no. i do not know. i would assume if there was something that was classified that -- i honestly do not know.

that is a very good question. host: bethel him, pennsylvania. you are on with lee white. caller: i have one question or two. these national archives, when a president leaves office, isn't it their responsibility to just go take them all to avoid this problem? guest: the national archives responsibility? yes, the president is supposed to turn everything to the national archives. as of 12:01 after the new president is inaugurated, those records -- to the federal government and you to the american people. host: do you have a follow-up richard? caller: the fbi raided mar-a-lago, correct? why didn't they take all of the records out and end this thing? i do not understand that.

that is all i have to say. guest: they had a subpoena to go in and search the property, they did not raid mar-a-lago. they had a court approved subpoena. no, they did not raid mar-a-lago. host: portland, maine. this is jane, democrat. good morning. caller: thank you for having me. how are you? guest: i am great. how are things up in maine? caller: thank you for asking, pretty good. the lobsters here are awesome. thank you for all its king -- for asking. registered democrat here. there is some ambiguity and hopefully you can clarify. ok, here we go. in regards to what is going on with the interview, the questions you are taking, beside media, we watch certain news

stations. at this point, we are watching all of them to keep up with what is really happening, what is not happening. i am sure you know what i mean and everyone else knows what i am talking about. question, too little questions very quickly. question number one, in regards to win a president is finished with his term, at this point i would say her but we have not had one yet, with his term, i did hear the plan is for the president to make sure everything is resolved once he leaves office. with this issue with the ongoing records, classified documents being found, because that is going on right now with the indictment. host: i am running short on time. caller: sorry, dear. joseph biden was never president, but they did find classified documents, we saw in the news, in his car, the

garage, they found classified documents joe biden had in chinatown or something. he was never president, he was a senator and a vice president. can you please explain what is the difference here? guest: under the presidential records act, vice presidential records are treated exactly the same as presidential records. a senator and congressman, they own their records. they can do whatever they want with their personal property. the records for then senator biden -- he donated to the delaware center were his records from his 36 years as senator from delaware. vice president records are treated the same as presidential records under the law, and are supposed to be --the same rules apply to classification. host: has there any -- has there been any thought for folks to follow the same rules in terms

of keeping congressional records? guest: yes, those of us in the history community have been pressed to do that. most of them donate them to their alma mater or library in their state or district, because many of them create -- i believe mitch mcconnell has a center in kentucky, a lot senators and congressmen. a lot of senators create a center connected with the university in their state. host: what is the most interesting congressional document center, congressional members documents you have gone through, or who would you like to see? guest: who would i like to see? i believe ted kennedy has already donated his records. there is the ted kennedy center in nasa choose its, that would be interesting -- in

massachusetts. i think mitch mcconnell's records are going to be interesting. host: one more phone call. stephen has been waiting in do we, arizona, line for republicans. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. caller: my question is, every liberal that i talk to, they still believe in the russian theory and the impeachment with ukraine. what we see is, as a vice president, biden had these documents. it seems every time they get a free pass, it is not covered in the media and everything trump does is under a microscope. why are trump's documents, which he has only had for a year or two, more important than biden as a vice president who has had

them in his garage for six, seven, eight years? there can be important stuff there. it seems like they get a pass on everything. guest: with all due respect, the biden paper situation is still under investigation by the department of justice. they have not ruled one way or the other. they did clear former vice president pence i believe last week, but the biden case is still pending so he has not been given a free pass. the department of justice is still investigating it. we will see how that plays out. right now, he has not gotten a free pass. host: for more on the national coalition of history, history coalition.org is where you can go. lee white is the executive director there. we are going to have to ended their. guest: appreciate you having.me host: we will end the show in

open forum. any political issue you want to talk about, phone lines are yours to do so. go ahead and start calling in now and we will get to your calls after the break. ♪ ♪ >> visit c-span shop.org, c-span's online store and save during our father's day sale going on now. save up to 15% on our c-span products. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. scan the code on the right to shop during our father's day sale going on now at c-spanshop.org. ♪ ♪ >> book tv eve sunday on

c-span two futures leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 9:15, mary eberstadt with the catholic information center talks about the legacy of the sexual revolution in america and the overturning of roe v. wade in 2022 in her book, adam and eve after the pill revisited. at 10:00 p.m. eastern on afterwards, london center for justice president and ceo michael waldman examines the impact of the supreme court's 2022 rulings with his book, how thsupreme court divided america. he is interviewed by politicals reporter, josh gertie. watch book tv every sunday on c-span two and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online at any time on book tv.org. ♪ ♪ >> 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. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: about 25 minutes left in our program today. , in that time it is our open forum. any political issue, any state issue you want to talk about, phone lines are yours to do so. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. as you are dialing in, some situational awareness in washington, it is a supreme court decision day.

we are expecting decisions to come down in the 10:00 a.m. eastern our. we do not know what decisions will come down or how many, but those are usually released around 10:30 a.m. today at 2:00 p.m. will be a house pro forma session, the senate is not in today. they will be back after the holiday weekend on tuesday, vote scheduled for tuesday evening is the next time we are expected to see senators on capitol hill. today at 11:00 eastern on c-span, you can take a look with us at the latest on ukraine's counteroffensive against russia in the ongoing war there. u.s. ambassador to ukraine william taylor will be discussing that topic at the atlantic council at 11:00 he -- 11:00 eastern on c-span and c-span.org and our free c-span now app. for the next 24 minutes it is our open forum. any public policy issue you want

to talk about, give us a call. sandra out of florida, line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning and thanks so much for your show. the one thing i would like to try and get an understanding of, the people in this country, is why they cannot look at facts. host: what facts in particular are you referring to, sandra? caller: most every policy, most every ongoing court case, especially with the trump issue. the facts are laid out clearly. i do not understand why we are making this so politicized when our national security has been put in jeopardy. the american people have been put in jeopardy. this really is not a political issue. this is an american democracy

issue. host: that is sandra in florida. this is robert in florida, republican. caller: good morning. i was just wondering why, if all the other presidents when they left office, the national archive place provided them with a storage place near their residence to store these documents? i am wondering why they did not do that with donald trump. host: you think that would have solved this problem and we would not have had this case? caller: right. it would have been a simple solution, the documents would be where they were supposed to be. donald trump should have gotten -- charges for storing those presence when all the other presidents, obama, clinton, bush provided huge storage areas,

secure storage areas to store their documents within 10 or 15 minutes of their private residence. for donald trump, they did not do that. i am just wondering why they did not do that. host: i do not know much about the storage options that were provided for the previous presidents, but maybe i can find a story on that as we hear from jan in illinois. independent. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i think the most troubling issue is the fact that i went in and tried to read the indictment against president -- former president trump. it is a detailed document. when people talk about it in politicized, it is not. it is legal, even as the historian that tried to explain the records act, the whole thing comes down to classification. i do not think any president in the past has been allowed to take highly classified documents

back to their home or to their libraries for them to store. it has to do with the classification of documents. that is why they have that is supersensitive. when you saw some of the most sensitive documents that were actually exposed in that indictment, we are under threat. there are fbi and cia agents who probably provided some of that information, their own lives are in threat now. i do not understand why republicans in particular make this such a political issue, when if you look at the legal facts, they are staring you in the face in the indictment itself. that is my most troubling, i talked with a friend last night and i did not bring up his name, trump. when i saw her eyes it is like, you want to debate this? i said when you are among friends, it is better to stay out of politics. that is my. mainissue for

this week host: the 48 page indictment available on most major news websites, they have gone into the court system and downloaded it. it is paragraph three of that indictment, page two describes what was in those boxes. declassified documents trumps stored included information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both united states and foreign countries, united states nuclear programs, potential vulnerabilities to military attack and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack. -- could put at risk the national security of the united states. foreign relations, the safety of the united states military and continued viability of sensitive intelligence collection methods, that is the third paragraph of that document. this is max, san antonio, texas,

democrat. caller: i was listening to mr. white's conversation and he was talking about classified documents. classified documents are classified in original classified authority. to declassify them, you have to have a conversation with a general officer or a high level person in the executive branch that does declassification. they write a classification guide that says, this is what is classified, why, etc. there are procedures for declassifying. sometimes it is classified information provided by another government, and you do not want to declassify someone else's documents. you might endanger their resources and methods. host: are you somebody who has handled classified documents in the course of your work? caller: yes.

i know everything there is to know about handling classified documents from a career in the military for 30 years. host: max, what else stuck out to you about -- did you read this indictment? caller: i had the indictment read to me, some people were reading it online so you can tune on the audio and download it from several sources. host: what did you think about specifically declassified documents that you have concerns with? caller: i think the highest principle is that we do not have a government that can hide itself, we do not have a secret government. all of the classified documents come out after 35 years or so or can be continued, but it is important to look back at decisions made and information available at the time. from the kennedy administration during the nuclear period's

where we were thinking about going to nuclear war. all of those things need to be handled. we are fortunate to have the national records act, that organization that can keep things for historians so it is available to all the democratic decision-makers who vote in elections. host: thanks for the call from taxes. this is mark in ohio, republican. good morning. caller: thank you for having me. i just want to say, the one lady when you talked about classified and that is a problem, no president is allowed to have classified documents, what is -- what does the word declassify mean? the reason i called is the lgbtq movement and all those people, it is not about the man or the woman the transgender, who they go home with. it is about the kids. i will give you an example. my son, eight years old, said he

wanted to be superman when he grew up. i am afraid it is not going to happen and he is going to change his mind when he gets older. these people want to in dr. knight these kids to -- on to indoctrinate these kids. these kids will change their mind. you know what i mean? my son will never be superman. he will change his mind. that is all i have got to say. host: the story out of the washington post today, biden walks a political tightrope on transgender rights, interest appealed desire to help a gb dequeue allies lead to caution on the policy front. that story by merrill kornfeld in washington post. this is alberto in stockton, california, independent. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: yes, sir. caller: ok.

i will keep it short. i appreciate the last two callers. all my family lives in texas. i thought -- i am a hispanic american, in sixth grade i ran for president and i did not win. the best man wins. as for the border, my people would rather be in a facility then out there on the border. i am talking only people within 100 miles each direction. last, but least it is horrible to see the trash. i live in stockton, california and i am trying to do something about the trash and i am talking the trash in the river. so. let's build the wall and stop the fentanyl. host: this is christine, pennsylvania, democrat. caller: good morning.

i am calling because there is such a stark difference between what seems to be the top two presidential candidates. we've got one that was arrested twice, just another charge this morning from eugene carol that was put on the docket sometime in january there will be another trial. we have also got president biden who has created -- 12.6, probably 13 million jobs now, close to one million of those are manufacturing jobs. we've got infrastructure going in, wages going up, mostly for the lower class. we've got no one who will be tax higher unless you make $400,000 a year. we've got insulin at $35 for

seniors. the gop, i call them the gtp, shot down insulin for the entire country. that was the goal. host: with all that you laid out and the issues that you compare, why do you think country is so closely split and why so many people are dissatisfied with the leading candidates on both sides? caller: propaganda works. putin knows it, he is spreading it. propaganda hurts. people do not realize that. they are shooting themselves in the foot whenever they vote for a candidate who is a criminal. when they vote for a candidate who promised infrastructure never gave it to them, who promised jobs, never gave it to them. host: got your point.

wall street journal today, it is john mccormick who lays out how republican rivals to donald trump have reacted since the indictment, stepping up some their attacks with more direct criticism in that category. the former new jersey governor chris christie, former vice president mike pence, florida governor ron desantis and former arkansas governor asa hutchinson, nikki haley south carolina governor in that category of more subtle critique about the indictment. the barely critical,, they list senator tim scott the governor of north dakota and swami in that category. this is cindy in steel city, republican. caller: i just wanted to make a comment. i am not going to go into all the long things this person has called before me and said. oh, my god i am shocked. we are living in a nightmare

with this crime and inflation. the thing i am really shocked about is yesterday, that center shift in the 20 republican -- that is a disgrace. millions and millions, all the time that was wasted on this lie. it is a known lie. this guy gets off scott free. he has hurt the american people. i do not understand these politicians. it is totally disgusting, they need to have term limits because you cannot in your life -- they are human. they are going to be corrupt. it is an outrage what biden is doing and the billions he is giving to ukraine. do you think that has anything to do the bribing thing that is going on? that guy is a disgrace. this whole thing with trump is a big set up. all the successes he has had, you cannot deny them.

he was just president for four years. remember that in four years. it is shocking. they need to be booted out after four years. it is a disgrace. host: james in the land of lincoln, independent, good morning. caller: hi, how are you? i am calling about the previous segment with the guest from the american anti-freedom society or whatever it was called. you are -- host: you're talking about the presidential records act segment? caller: prior to that. host: got it, you are talking either carl charles of lambda legal or the follow-up segment on that we chatted with the alliance defending freedoms matt sharp. caller: that one, the alliance defending anti-freedom, whatever. during that segment, the guest was referencing some case

studies or reports from a piece of paper off camera. when we are talking about an issue like this that is so overblown, i am going to say, an issue of just -- you know, sexual freedom, gender freedom, it is so overblown and talked about so much. no reference to any actual report or study was really brought up or read on screen, that seems to be educational in nature. when we look at the actual numbers, we are talking about children who may be going on gender blockers, like 1500 kids or less in a given year. 1500 kids in the nation of over 330 million people. this one segment like this one discussed on air and those numbers are not mentioned, it

allows that narrative of some sweeping indoctrination across the country to continue to persist. it is very dangerous for our trans friends who are members of our society when it comes to just going about their lives. people are really inflamed by their existence, for whatever reason, and it poses significant danger to them. when we talk about things like top surgery or bottom surgery, it is exceedingly rare, under 500 surgeries are performed in this country. we are a nation of 300 million people. host: what about these numbers? this is according to the human rights campaign. in 2023, 525 bills introduced in 41 states that have to do with

lgbtq rights. 220 explicitly targeting transgender people, 76 of those signed into law. that is the numbers as of early june from the human rights campaign, this is an issue happening in statehouses. caller: right. exactly. this issue is blowing up in so many places to take away the rights of, we are literally talking about a very small segment of our community, in this country, full sue are brave enough to come out and recognize -- folks that are brave enough to come out and recognize they want to express themselves the way they recognize themselves. we have states across the country willingly wanting to take away their rights to express themselves. a very small amount of people and a disproportionately large amount of laws, attention, media segments. very dangerous.

we see attacks on transit youth, trans -- trans youth, trans adults on the rise. your segment provides an opportunity to provide the education about what this issue really is, that it is literally people trying to exist in this country. host: this is jean in santa barbara, california, democrat. just a couple minutes left, could be a couple minutes until we start getting supreme court decisions. caller: listen. i am sure you know the definition of cuprous. why don't you explain that to your audience? mr. trump is the quintessence of hubris, and he has inflicted problems on himself. when he talks, it is an amazing clown act of hubris.

if the audience understood what that means, then i think they would understand why he acts the way he acts. host: do i want to know what it means? caller: i know you know what it means. i think you explain it to the audience. host: help me out, gene. caller: you do not know what it means? it is overweening pride, it means you think you can get away with anything. when you think you are important, you are loved and you feel, i can get away with anything. host: hubris? caller: hubris. host: got you. caller: a word invented by the greeks to explain why people who are powerful think they can get away with anything, even murder. look at o.j. simpson. popular, wonderful guy, everybody loves him. i can kill those people, i can get away with that.

mike tyson, i can bite someone's ear in the ring and get away with it. when people exhibit hubris, it causes a downfall for them. host: got you. caller: they think they are so powerful and can get away with anything. host: let me try to get in nancy in florida, republican. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i have a couple comments on both your segments this morning. the first segment involving the trans kids, there is a group -- i do not quite agree with the name of the group, it is called gaze against groomers who are completely against the transitioning of young children. also, the presidential records act.

when the one caller talked about, why didn't the fbi take all the boxes when they went into mar-a-lago, but you are focusing on the word raid instead of answering the question? also, the socks document. the socks case with president clinton, and the lawyer that lost on that had a article in the wall street journal a couple of days ago. not siding with, but taking the point of view that president trump did have a right to those documents. that is all i have to say. thank you for taking my call again. host: that is nancy in florida. nancy will be our last caller in today's washington journal. a supreme court decision coming up possibly in minutes and the 10:00 a.m. our. we do not know what cases will be decided, but it is one of

those june decision days that always gets a lot of attention. 11:00 a.m. eastern, a discussion at the atlantic council with former u.s. ambassador to ukraine william taylor on the ongoing war there. you can watch that here on c-span, c-span.org and the free c-span app. we will be back here tomorrow morning on the washington journal at 7:00 a.m. eastern in the meantime. have a great friday. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] >> and a look at our live coverage on c-span.

at 11:00 a.m. eastern, former u.s. ambassador to ukraine william taylor talks about ukraine's counteroffensive at the national council. and a summit taking place nearly one year after the president signed the bipartisan safer communities act into law. you can watch those events live on c-span. you can stream them on c-span now, our free mobile video app, or online at-span.org. >> saturday, president biden speaks at rally for labor union members in philadelphia, hifirst official campaign event since declaring his attention to run for reelection in 2024. watch on c-span, c-span now, our mobile video app, or online at c-span.org. >> c-span's campaign 2024

coverage is your front row seat 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 now, our mobile app, or online at c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including cox. >> the syndrome is extremely rare. >> hi. >> when you're connected, you are not alone. >> cox support c-span as a public service come along with these other television providers, giving you a front row