and comments live in the lical white house order my award discusses the latest on the biden adniration's response to the israel-hamas war. also, rajan menon and michael doran on the latest on the israel-ham war and the potential geopolitical follow. also joinings, charlie sykes. he discusses the house speaker contest campaign 2024 and the israel-hamas war. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: good morning. it is sunday, october 15. we want to continue talking about the israel-hamas conflict. the israeli military ordered thousands of people to evacuate from the gaza strip ahead of a planned invasion. that was in response to the attack from hamas last weekend

that killed more than 1300 israeli citizens and soldiers. today's questions, but do you think about the biden administration's response to the israel-hamas? what me ould to the -- to the israel-hamas conflict and wha shod be done? republicans, (202) 748-800. demoats, (202) 748-8000. independents, you can call (202) 748-8002. you can send us a text message at (202) 748-8003. please include your name and where you live. you can find us on facebook.com/c-span. we are also on x and instagram. again, the israel-hamas conflict bubbled back up in a major way with hamas attacked israel last

saturday. and it continues to dominate the front pages. i want to show this morning's "new york times." it's got several articles on the front page. here is one with the headline "israel ready invasion to capture gaza city." it says the israeli military is ready to invade than the gaza strip with tens of thousands of soldiers order to capture gaza city and destroy the enclave's permit leadership, according to three senior leaders who unveiled unclassified details about the plan. the military's ultimate goal is to wipe out the top political and military hierarchy of hamas. the palestinian group that controls gaza and led last week's terrorist attacks in israel that killed 1300 people.

again, that is from "the new york times" this morning on the front page. i also want to switch over to today's "washington post." the "washington post" also has the israel-gaza conflict on its front page. i want to read an excerpt from his article as well. it says israel continued his military campaign in gaza on saturday, sagan it had killed a commander who was involved in last weekends hamas attacks as hundreds of thousands of palestinians in the enclave braced for an israeli ground invasion. israel's national security teams 's comments suggested the offense it was a certainty, saying israel could no longer accept hamas as a "sovereign entity in the gaza strip." continuing with the quote "

complete victory would be the only possible outcome of this battle, he said saturday. we will not only collapse hamas military and governmental abilities, but we will ensure they will not be able to revive themselves afterwards." again, that is this morning's "washington post." we want to hear more from you about your response to how the biden administration is handling the conflict, but first, i want to bring in my award -- maya ward. she is a white house reporter for politico to talk about the latest on this conflict. good morning. guest: good morning. host: so, the defense secretary and the secretary of state went to israel this week to show unity with that country. what was the message they hoped to send? guest: we saw some pretty

impactful pictures coming out of secretary of state antony blinken meeting with survivors. same thing with secretary austin. i think it was really reinforcing the president's message this week that the united states has israel's back. we saw a number of news that the desk a number of moves that the administration took. there is also this great deal of response to the president's multiple speeches on this both in israel and the united states in steadfast commitment and i believe he said unwavering support, and then he kind of urged congress to do more. host: what about some of the concerns the administration has with israel about to start its ground invasion? there have been concerns about civilian deaths and potentially a humanitarian crisis brought it

a regional war. how is the white house handling that? guest: it has been an incredible challenge. think about balancing the message we have heard from the president this week after this brutal, horrific attack. he is exposing his support for israel but we have also seen the pressure from some progressives in the party, ok, yes, we are supporting israel, but there is also going to be a lot of innocent palestinians who are affected as israel response to this. you have heard that a little bit from the president talking about a need to limit civilian deaths and get humanitarian aid and help into gaza they need and also having a path out for these innocent people as well, so you have been hearing that become

part of the message in addition to the support and really standing by israel in this case. host: what about the biden administration's message to israel and hamas quite frankly regarding americans was still might be unaccounted for? guest: yeah, that's the other tricky thing here because the president said we are going to do everything to get these americans home, but you are dealing with a situation where they do not know where these americans are being held. they truly have not known -- i believe as of friday, it was still 14 unaccounted for. that number has shifted. they are not putting u.s. troops at the ground -- on the ground at this point. they have ruled that out because they do not feel like it would help by putting them there because they don't know the location. it is challenging for a number of reasons.

so you are going to continue to hear the president say he will do everything in his power, but it will be a lot of behind-the-scenes negotiation. we will not be seeing all of what is going on out front. host: and let's give it to congress now. what are you hearing on what the biden administration may ask congress in terms of aid to israel, and what might be the timing? guest: there has been so much confusion about that this week. we got some clarity that it is going to come this week. we are expecting to see the supplemental eight request, but as of wednesday, there was this all house briefing with a few administration officials, and you have lawmakers walking away with multiple different impressions of what the administration was actually going to do. you had some saying they were going to definitively tile ukraine eight, taiwan, and border security together. then the white house called some lawmakers over on friday, and

over the weekend we were still getting signals of the intention to tie ukraine and israel together. the timeline as you know all too well, one thing for the white house to get their request over, but from what congress will be able to do with that, we are still waiting on a house speaker in this case, and even if we were not dealing with that situation, think about jim jordan. let's say he is able to early next week secure the speakership, i mean, he has expressed opposition to ukraine aid, additional ukraine aid. we are dealing with an incredibly challenging situation here. the white house is trying to tackle crises on multiple fronts, and i think something that really kind of previews how challenging this can be, during the all house briefing on wednesday, i was talking to a lawmaker afterwards, and he said

when that was brought up, tying all four of those issues together, it elicited some boos from republicans so i think we are looking at an uphill climb in multiple directions. host: staying on congress, there were members of congress, both republicans and democrats quite frankly, who had some concerns about the $6 billion that americans freed up from iran as part of a prisoner swap, you know, that the u.s. and qatar were initially denying access to. how is the administration pushing back on that? tell us what is the latest. what is the status on the $6 billion in iran funding right now? guest: the rhetoric about the $6 billion started coming out the first day, the second day after this attack happened, and i think you could see it was

really causing a lot of anxiety in the white house across from the secretary of state to the defense department to white house officials really trying to clarify as republicans and some democrats expressed concern. they were trying to make clear this money is just for humanitarian purposes and medicine. they were try to counter that message. i am not sure how effective that was in all circles, but the republicans in particular have really latched onto that and you will continue to hear that point made time and time again. like you said, they moved to free the funds so there is not further access right now, but in terms of countering that message , i think this is not the last we will hear about that $6 billion. i think that will continue to be a point, especially in gop circles that they continue to bring up in this conflict. host: finally before i let you

go, tell us what you will be watching this week from the white house when it comes to response to the israel-hamas conflict. guest: i am really interested when we see the supplemental funding request what is their push going to be like on the hill because like i said, you are tying incredibly complex issues together, and the president wants to get more aid to ukraine, the aid to israel. we are dealing with the southern border crisis that has continued to remain a political headache. you have lawmakers expressed the need to send funding to taiwan. why wait until something happens? let's get ahead of it and give them the stuff they need now. like i said, you are just tying incredibly challenging issues together. what is the pushback going to be like on the hill? what is the behind-the-scenes work going to be like coming from the white house trying to get lawmakers on board? what are those numbers going to

look like and are they going to be able to get everyone on the same page? host: the political white house reporter, thank you again for joining us this morning. guest: thanks for having me. host: and now we want to get to your calls. as a reminder, we want to know what you think about the biden administration's response to the israel-hamas conflict. republicans, call us at (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will start with sarah and hawaii -- in hawaii on the independent life. what are your thoughts? caller: well, good morning. i certainly agree with israel having every right to defend itself. my concern is that what is happening or what happened because of what hamas started,

that this is going to be a huge mess. i think a lot of civilians are going to lose their lives in that conflict in gaza, but i do want to also ask about or just kind of make a comment about israel not just has the right to defend itself, but also obviously has occupied the gaza strip for over 50 years and as occupation, they control the food, water, medicine, or any power that goes in and out of that strip. some people call it a large prison where people cannot leave. you have high unemployment with almost 50% of people have these lives that are not really good lives. they are terrible lives over there because of all the stuff. what i have a question about,

and this is what i would like the administration to address, is when the fighting ends, are any of the occupation issues or israeli settlers taking the land and building houses on them that is not theirs? is any of that going to be addressed? this genie is out of the bottle and i don't know if they can ever fix that. what lasted i want to say is from what i have heard and read, have asked was actually elected by the people -- hamas was actually elected by the people in gaza because there was so much corruption in their area at that time that they decided to elect hamas into power. host: all right, sarah. we appreciate your call and got your points. we will have to leave it there. next up is robert in worcester, massachusetts, democratic line. go ahead, robert.

caller: i can't understand how people cannot love the people in ukraine and israel. between donald trump, joe biden, and this nation. since the civil war, since reconstruction, we recall republicans and those republicans were called dixiecrats. and today, it is nothing like abraham lincoln. and i will tell you one more thing. in massachusetts where i come from, i go to the market and

people think i am wrecking the place. host: we appreciate your comment but we will stick to the israel-hamas conflict. let's go now to ohio on the republican line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i think the biden administration's response to the conflict was very decisive. i am a republican, by the way, but i am an american. i think it was immediate. ed what the administration has done -- and what the administration has done to focus on the conflict is good. however, i think the administration is ignoring what potentially could happen in our own backyard, and that is the southern border. so responding to the conflict in the region where it is happening is appropriate, but by the same

token, we have thousands of unidentified illegal immigrants crossing our border and getting away, penetrating into our country, and i think it is using a common sense approach, we would probably want to shore up the border right now due to the fact that there is so much hatred going on between israel and hamas and these terrorists that are trying to get across our border, so again, appropriate response by the administration, but we need to now look internally in our own backyard and shore up our border. host: all right. jeff mentioned the response from the administration. let's watch a little bit of video. this is president joe biden speaking about the situation in israel on friday. [video clip] >> the more we learned about the

attack, the more horrifying it becomes. more than 1000 innocent lives lost including at least 27 americans. these guys make al qaeda look pure. they are pure evil. i sent from the beginning the united states make no mistake about it stands with israel. the united states stands with israel. secretary of state blinken was in israel yesterday. secretary of defense austin is there today. israel has the need to respond to the attacks and defend itself. it is urgent for me to address the humanitarian crisis in gaza. at my direction, our teams are working in the region including communicating directly with the government of israel, egypt, jordan, and other arab nations and the united nations to support humanitarian cuts which

for the hamas attack to help israel. we cannot lose sight of the fact that the overwhelming majority of palestinians had nothing to do with how mass -- with how mass -- with hamas and the appalling attack. this morning, i spoke with family members of all those americans who are unaccounted for on a zoom call for one hour and 10 or 15 minutes. they are going through agony not knowing what the status of their sons, daughters, husbands, wives, children are. it is gut wrenching. i ushered that my personal commitment to do everything possible to return every missing american to their families. we are working around the clock to secure their release. of americans held by hamas. in close cooperation with israel and our partners around the region. we will not stop until we bring them home. host: again, that was president

joe biden speaking on friday with the latest about the israel-hamas conflict, expressing support for israel. let's go back to the fold lines. in fort lauderdale, mark on the independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. my comment is generally speaking, i think joe biden did a decent job responding to what is going on with the activities in israel, but the policies and what brought us to where we are at, his pandering and basically leading to hamas and iran created where we are at i sure one of your previous caller's comments about our southern

border. we need to close our border. please, close our border. that is what i have to say. host: thanks, mark. john is up next in monroe, north carolina, and product line. caller: yes, thank you for taking my call. i just like to say that president biden said in the statement there are human beings on both sides of the border and nobody is squeaky clean. thank you very much. host: all right, john. let's go to the republican line now. hope in bakersfield, california. caller: hey, good morning. host: good morning. what are your thoughts this morning? caller: i just want to emphasize first of all, thank you for taking my call, thank you for being there and allowing our voice to be heard.

i just want to we emphasize it is important for our border to be secured. i don't think that is just going to happen now. i think they are already here. so i think we are all in danger. secondly, it is so disappointing that biden still does not care for americans first, leaving them stranded in afghanistan and now in israel or gossip -- or gaza. they should be brought out because they are americans. it proves he is lacking in that area and putting americans last. he would go straight to ukraine and go there, but he does not help americans. i think that is a huge reflection of him as an american leader, that we are disappointed in him. and i think you -- thank you. host: all right, hope. let's hear from jimmy in maine,

independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i want to make three points. one, our intelligence could not pick up a was going on as far as this attack but yet the biden administration tells us that iran was surprised, so we are supposed to believe they could not see the attack coming but we are supposed to believe that iran was surprised by the attack that is number one. number two, it is ok to run a campaign from your basement but when the world is burning, and i mean burning, the border, ukraine, and israel, our president, he is all of our president right now, elected president, fairly elected, and the press which represents us, and he walks up the stage like he has to go to the bathroom. he will not take any questions whatsoever. as far as blinken and the intellectuals, the last thing i want to say, it is all in his head. they never fix anything.

nothing takes root with these people. i meant is getting one dollars a barrel almost for oil and this guy -- when trump was president, they were doing 4 million barrels a day. now they are given 70 million barrels a day. this guy thinks it is global warming. why is it not global warming over there? we got oil leaking out of the ground in this country. we can fix this stuff and go all electric in 20 years. just make gas one dollar a gallon, put a text or put infrastructure. there is nothing to fix it with the so-called intellectuals. host: all right, jimmy. glenn, glenn is next from lakeland, florida, on the democratic line. caller: hello. how are you doing? host: do we. what are your thoughts? caller: i am trying to figure out, what are we supporting? israel with the apartheid against the palestinian people

in that area in gaza? because apparently according to what i am listening to and looking at here, israelis have the means to actually control the resources that the palestinians actually have if they can turn off the water and electricity and resources they need, that tells me there is a problem here because you are practicing basically jim crow racism towards these people and i don't understand what -- understand why we are sitting here and supporting these people. they are trying to get the pasta needs to leave the area so they can go in and bombed the place, destroy the whole thing, but they cannot come back on because they won't have a home to come back to so i don't understand what exactly we are tractor support here. are we supporting apartheid, jim crow type racism against those people? also, it is not equal because on the palestinian side, you don't report about their kids getting killed and what happened to them. all we hear is israel this, israel that. but what exactly is happening

about sides of the story? why are the reporters in gaza reporting on that side? host: we appreciate your call this morning. i want to bring up this is "new york times" columnist bringing up a point that people like glenn might be raising. the headline, what does destroying guys are so -- destroying gaza solve? i want to read a little further down. it says israel has technical superiority, but what is the strategy? who will govern the rubble afterwards and how will the mass slaughter of palestinian civilians possibly lead to harmony with israel afterwards? get it is also true that israel faces a serious conundrum when it has a neighbor led by

terrorists and inhabited by teenage boys who applied terrorism. where does that anger come from, that openness to butcher even high school girls? in reporting in gaza over the years, i have come to believe that one source is the incitement hamas and some other palestinian groups creating a culture that glorifies "martyrs." so again, it is complicated. it is a long-standing conflict. and the latest developments, we want to hear from you about these developments and how you feel the biden white house is responding to them, and what more do you think president joe biden and his administration should be doing, if anything. as a reminder, republicans, your number is (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000.

independents, (202) 748-8002. we will go back to the phone lines now. on the republican line, ron is calling from san clemente, california. caller: good morning to you. you know, on a lighter side of things, your hairstyles change like the wind. i love it. funny as could be. ok, now back to something serious. as we all know, war is the lowest form of human endeavor. it is only the civilians and the innocents that died more than the soldiers really, and the sad part of this story is that in 1948, israel declared their independence and took up residence there in israel. 600,000 residents at that time in 1948. today, they have 9.2 million

going soon to 10 million people. the arabs, the palestinians have 2.2 million people. and the settlement incursion over many, many years, we are talking many, many years where these things happened. i can remember vividly when gaza was given its freedom supposedly. israel just bulldozed all of their settlement that was perfectly just fine for a residence by palestinians, but they just bulldozed it before they gave it back to the palestinians. the inequities are crazy and long. if we look at ravine, some thoughts, arafat's, all of these things in the history of israel, we see a variety of different policies and attitudes.

the bottom-line of the story is that there was supposed to be a two state solution to this problem, and at this point in time, i don't see anyone from the international community stepping up and saying, here is what is going to happen, all the israelis have been using martial law over the palestinians for several years. martial law. that means they guarantee the security. they watch over all of the infrastructure, and as a result of that fact, these people have been indentured, so, hey, we need an international policy group to go in there and make some changes that are going to be equitable for everybody. host: all right, ron. we are going to have to leave it there, but we appreciate your call. next up on the independent line in decatur, georgia, how do i pronounce your name? caller: yes, ma'am.

good morning. our founding father james madison once said in a country and continual war cannot maintain its freedoms. with that said, the united states, we spent 20 years in afghanistan, now we are in ukraine, now we are dealing with israel and the palestinians, and they never talk about israel has broken 28 international laws and nobody is holding their feet to the fire. this is causing the problem. people need to hold israel's feet to the fire for the laws they have been breaking. that is my comment. thank you. host: ok. up next, we have adam in jersey, -- jersey city, new jersey. caller: yes, the question is how the biden administration acted,

and they basically gave israel a blank check. we don't know what they said my close doors but they basically said do what you want in gaza. my thought is biden -- israel, everybody thought this palestinian issue was a nice little box and they had it contained, and that fiction broke open on saturday morning. where were we? where was america earlier, two years ago, when settlers were ethnically cleansing the west bank, shooting palestinians? and yes of course palestinians were shooting israelis, but we let them do this. the right-wing government in israel was as abusive and just hammering palestinians for 20 years. of course, what do you expect? you cannot just hold people down and expect them to do nothing. there is nothing, no excuse for what happened in south israel. it was abhorrent. there is no way out but peace. there are two people in this

area. it is roughly 50-50. the only way out is peace. there are israelis that will say this. hamas will not sink this and the right-wing government will not see it in israel, but biden did not do anything about this. they thought saudi arabia was going to have an agreement but they did not do anything. this was a nothing burger for most american people. and it is terrible what is happening in gaza and what happened in south israel. i don't know what the way out is, but it is tough. host: all right, thank you for your call today adam. our next caller is jay in chicago all the independent line. go ahead. caller: i totally agree with the last three callers. i think they hit the nail on the head. it is amazing to me how biden can be so biased. it just seems like we are in israel's pocket. the influence of settlers in

israel is just amazing. the media, it seems like it is all bought and sold and we should all be scared as america to see america reenact a colonizing attitude that they have always had since the founding of this country. i am very sorry about what happened in israel, but at the same time, the things that have happened to the palestinian people are appalling. over years, 20 years, these people have been controlling them. i am begging people to look at it in a different way. look at both hands on the spectrum. please do not just side with israel, side with the people. that is what i'm begging. keep your mind open and be compassionate. host: all right.up next, mohammed in los angeles on the democratic line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a few points to make.

one is that a caller called from maine a few calls back and mentioned iran is exporting 7 million barrels of oil per day. that is so inaccurate. the total number of nations in the world who produce oil and export don't add up to 70 million barrels a day so that is a ridiculous, and the caller should check their facts before making such ridiculous comments. i think iran's exports of oil are around two to 3 million barrels of oil per day and 11 has to be sold in the black market to china, north korea, and so on because there are heavy sanctions from the trump and biden administrations on the government of iran. that is number one. number two, what happened in israel was hamas doing to the israelis is tragic and horrible, not to be peaceful, but what israel is doing happy to the

palestinians is even more tragic, so we have here, and i am not being calloused about it, 1200 innocent israelis debt, which is a lot. one innocent person dying is wrong, but what they are doing is an ethnic cleansing of the palestinians, forcing over 2 million -- one million palestinians to move from one end of gaza to the other so they can do ethnic cleansing. the other thing is that we provide billions of dollars of military aid to israel every year. it has been going on for decades. is real but accounts is a very rich nation. they have a very formidable military, the israeli defense forces, and now here, the republicans, i don't know what happened to them that they want to appease putin. it is too much to give money to ukraine so that putin does not invade that country and swallow it up, but it is ok to give

another $5 billion to israel, which by all accounts can handle themselves. that is another thing. and the final thing is about $6 billion the biden administration gave to iran, which is sitting in qatar banks. how is this possible? iran took the money, give it to hamas, and within 24 to 48 hours, they attacked israel? this attack has been planned for a year and is a complete failure on the part of israeli intelligence. thank you for taking michael. host: all right, mohammed. let's hear from john now. john is in virginia, republican line. caller: yeah, one, i just had a question. i keep hearing about how it is an open air prison. what do they mean by an open air prison? that the people can't leave?

if you look at it that way, some of our inner cities are open air prisons. what i see it on the news like south chicago, where the people living there and some of their kids are getting shot through the bedroom walls and they cannot leave because they can't afford to leave, it sounds inhumane so i would consider some of our cities open air prisons if we are worried about that. i also don't understand, if it is so bad in israel, why is nobody upset what is going on in china and the uighurs? not only are they in prison, 2 million of them, they are harvesting their organs. you hear nothing about that on the news. all you hear about is israel and how much you have to hate the jewish people. how come it is not the chinese people? let's have a little bit of basic

coverage where we discuss these topics. thank you. host: all right. let's take a pause and hear from the israeli prime ministers netanyahu. this is him speaking on friday about the israel-hamas conflict and israel's intention. [video clip] >> it has moved the entire world. we are all mobilized, all united. much will be told about the act of heroism of our people in these dark days of sorrow and grief of that saturday. stories that will become part of israeli and jewish history. we will never forget the atrocity conducted by our enemies. i have spoken today with some of the families who have lost their loved ones or whose loved ones fate is unknown. there are world has come crumbling upon them. i know that. we will never forget these

horrific acts of our enemies, and we will never forgive and we will not let the world or anyone make these atrocities be forgotten. such atrocities, the jewish people have not experienced for decades. we are striking at our enemies with unprecedented might. i would like to emphasize this is just the beginning. our enemies have only started seeing the price, and i will not detail now what is yet to come, but i would like to tell you this is just the beginning. in my conversations with president biden and other leaders in the world and in many other efforts, we aren't rallying tremendous international support for israel. i met today with the u.s. secretary of state, and we are guaranteeing the continuation of the war with more artillery,

more ammunitions coming to israel. we will eradicate hamas and bring victory. it is going to take time, but we are going to come out of this war stronger than ever. may god give to our enemies who rise against us to be eradicated. host: again, that was israel's prime minister netanyahu speaking on friday about the conflict. before we head back to the phone lines, i want to read some of the responses we received on facebook responding to today's question. again, what do you think about the biden administration's response to the israel-hamas conflict? steverites, perfect after what haen last weekend, fully supporting israel and dismantlinthe terror network in gaza are the right things to do. even if you want a two state solution as st do, as long as

one is being used as a basfo terrorism ait the other, it will never happen. the pastian authority should want hamas out of god's eyes, to -- out of gaza, too. now i will get back to some more of the facebook comments in a minute. let's go to marietta, georgia, independent line. what are your thoughts? caller: good morning to you. my comment is regarding the zionist apartheid regime of israel. netanyahu is taking a playbook out of his older sister, this country. it is the same way the white settlers who came here to this country, how they approached the native americans, encroached on their land, and called them savages because they phot

to have their land restored. then we want to talk about how south africa, how they were called terrorists, how mandela was called a terrorist. it is really funny how colonizers when they seek to colonize people and the people take their right to fight for their land, then those people are called terrorists. this is wrong. but i don't expect anything less from this country and the people in it because we are devoid of any type of righteousness, any type of justice.it doesn't work. thank you. host: ok. i want to read more of the facebook comments now that i am working the computer correctly. momed writes, just as they condemned hamasor their attack on innocent civilians, they should also condemn the israeli military for their attacks on

civilians in gaza. also, shutting off water and electricity in gaza is a war crime under international law. glenn writes, the entire world seems safer under trump, and hopefully god willing it will be again. just a few more of those comments from facebook. we want to get to more of your calls. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. next up is raymond from florida on the democratic line. go ahead. caller: hi, how are you doing? host: doing well. what are your thoughts this morning? caller: first of all, the guy from california calling out the from maine. 70% of the stuff that people say on here, they have very little knowledge. my father used to say a little

bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. the guy from california said iran was selling black-market oil to china. that is not true. what happened was bidens's -- bidens administration wanted to and they have been selling that which is obviously funneling and getting to hamas. let's throw that aside. anyone can go back and forth with facts on each other, but the bottom line is what is going on was going on in yemen and all these places. those people are not listed years. they are houthis, terrorists. they want to eliminate all of the juice. you can say, what this israel want to do? we are surrounded by two oceans into allies in america -- and tw o allies in america. live where everybody hates you and wants to you.

netanyahu, do what you need to duplicate that is all i have to say. host: let's hear from paul now. paul is calling from fort dodge, iowa. independent line, paul, you are on. caller: yes. first of all, i am glad biden is supporting israel. he has been so weak in everything else in response. the one thing i would do right off the bat is i would announce as far as the $6 billion goes, it will not be there. i ran have had their chance. we have given them chances in the past and they have stabbed us in the back every time. i would demand that the hostages be released. i would demand knowing who they are, how many there are there,

and if any harm at all comes to them, whether they have been tortured or worse, i would take a page from ted cruz's suggestion, not that i am a big fan of what he does, but not only would i bob the oil fields -- bomb the oil fields, i would bomb their nuclear program as far as the wanting to get the bomb, and they say they want it for electricity, and that is not. or power, i mean. that is just not a. any of their sites, their development, i would wipe them out too. they say they denied they had anything to do with it. they are a major funder of hamas . i mean, it is obvious they have done it. as far as they also say the

leaders of hamas are living comfortably in qatar. i would bomb them too. as far as i'm concerned, if they are in dubai, i would bomb dubai. we have to get tough about this because it is just going to continue even after we stop them there if we don't completely wipe out hamas. it will happen. you know? anyway, that is all i got to say right now. host: appreciate your call. i want to bring up some video. this is republican congressman carlos gimenez, a member of the house armed services committee, and in this video, he criticizes the biden administration policy on iran. he was on foxbusiness last week. here is a portion. [video clip] >> now they are going to freeze

the $6 billion they were going to unfreeze for iran but the problem is not just the $6 billion. the problem is we have been lax, this administration has been in sentience and oil revenue have skyrocketed 70%. that directly funds these kinds of activities, hamas, hezbollah, so we are seeing the results of weakness around the world. i don't think it is any coincidence that we see russia and ukraine and now we see hamas and israel, and hopefully that is only hamas and hopefully not hezbollah or any other nation trying to take advantage of the situation. but again, it is the weakness of this administration allowing all of this to happen. host: again, that is the republican of florida, carlos gimenez, criticizing the biden administration its policy on iran, which many callers have mentioned they feel like that is also playing into the israel-hamas conflict.

we want to hear more from you. next up is bill in pennsylvania, republican line. you are on. caller: good morning. you know, let's keep in mind that there are innocent people who are dying on both sides of this conflict. the people are dying and died when hamas attacked, and the people in palestine are dying now that israel is attacking them. what i would say to people is we cannot solve this problem. someone has to get on their knees and ask the lord because this is a catastrophe. what i would like to say because mr. benjamin netanyahu is going and saying this is only the beginning. they are pushing 1.1 million

palestinians from one end of the gaza strip to the other. people that are carrying possessions in their hands, walking down streets while bombs are dropping. what i can say is this. these settlements that were attacked by hamas had fortified basements and rooms because these people knew they were in occupied land. they were in land that they have no right under international law to be living in. we have to accept this and the truth has to come out that there are international laws that israel is in direct conflict, directly ignoring, and until we as a group of nations hold israel accountable, we are like

-- in the united states has become like a military backup for israel. why? how many of our senators how many of our congressmen are duly israeli citizens? we don't even know, but i can tell you this, our secretary of state is jewish. the chief of staff for biden is jewish. we are not a fair judge in this. host: all right, bill. got your point. appreciate your call this money. let's move onto mike calling from odessa, florida, on the democratic line. what are your thoughts, mike? caller: good morning. this is a plain and simple situation. this was a brazen terrorist attack. if anybody did this to us, we would take them out with prejudice. that is the first thing that needs to happen. we must eradicate hamas. the israelis must do this.

israel gave them gaza and 2005. there were billions and billions of dollars sent there to help the palestinian people, who have a legitimate gripe by the way, but a lot money internationally was sent income including the united states and even israel. what did they do with the money? did they build schools? do they provide health care? no. they built tunnels and they built missiles. these people are terrorists. i am incensed with some of the commentary here from my fellow democrats that don't understand what has happened here. there is a lot of history and once this is done and hamas is eradicated, we do need to come up with a solution because it is a mess over there. but also recognize the palestinians have had many chances for peace. in the late 1990's, arafat

walked away from a handshake deal with israel and it was done. he had the radicals in his party that said we will kill you if you make this deal. they had their chances. in 2005, gaza was turned over to the palestinians. that is who they wanted. what did they do with the money? they squandered it on terrorism and terroristic activities. the other thing is if you look at the history, and by the way, i am no fan of netanyahu i think his right-wing government is terrible, and i think the upshot of this is they will be swept out of power, which will be a good thing for the region. because they were asleep at the switch on this attack. but if you look at the history, israel was formed in 1948, given to them by the united nations. in 1941, the grand mufti, the islamic spiritual leader, met with adolf hitler multiple times

to get hitler to come to palestine and eradicate jews. so this is not something new caused by netanyahu over the last 20 years. this is an ingrained mentality and his hatred of jews, which has a lot of -- there is just a lot of false premise. but when your spiritual leader is trying to bow up with the nazis, and that is a historic fact, please do your homework for those of you who don't understand that, there is a problem in the region. that is all i have to say. i hope the problem gets solved eventually, but right now, terrorists must be eradicated and wiped off the face of the earth. the last comment is if you allow terrorists to harbor in your buildings, in your schools, in your apartment buildings, and you don't actively root them out and rise up and knock them out of your building, then unfortunately you are going to suffer the consequences.

thank you very much. host: all right. let's go to new jersey. dave calling on the republican line. caller: i have been a registered republican since 2006, and i agree with mike totally. hamas is people. terrorism, that is what it was. that is what it is. eradicate them. let israel do its job, take care of that. and palestinians need a country, but my goodness, i mean, i live in new jersey. the population is the same as israel. i can't imagine we were invaded. that would be to we would want to nuke them, right? let's go. let israel kick butt. host: all right, dave. david is up next, operant, washington, democratic line. david? caller: thank you very much for

taking my call. i listened to the last two callers, and i have to tell you i totally disagree. i am a student of history. i would just put this out here. the jews that live in that region right now that we call israel are not native to that land. and they would not be there in that land if it were not for the u.s. and great britain in 1948, so to say they have a right to exist is true. every person has a right to exist. as we have in our constitution, everybody has a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but i say they don't have the right to exist in that land. those people that had been on that land for centuries. if you want to argue about whether the jews should be in "israel" or not, why don't you go back to 70 a.d. when the

romans kicked them out and tour the temple down? what you complain to the italians about that. they put the jews back into what we now know as israel. the israelis are squatting on palestinian land. they have a reason to be upset with the israelis. and they keep encroaching on land that is not theirs and then they want to cry when the palestinians, when hamas fights back. if this was south africa in the 1980's when south africa had the apartheid regime going on and the whole world knew about it because our media was right and focused on the truth, we protested. we made companies divest out of south america. we said we would not patronize the companies that put money into south africa. they left south africa. what happened to that regime? what is it so different in israel when israel has a propped up zionist apartheid regime in that area?

they persecute their own black jews over there that asked to come back from ethiopia. they persecuted them. host: all right, david, we got your point. appreciate your call this morning. we are going to move to new jersey. andrew calling on the independent line. caller: good morning, c-span, thank you for taking my call. we have a big problem in this country right now that we have to focus on, and it is the undocumented aliens coming across the border. as far as what is happening in the middle east, you look at the history of that region going back to 1948, prior to 1948, there was no state of israel. that land was given to them in a deal brokered by britain and the united states, and i don't have a problem with their right to

exist, i really don't. but to take something by force which does not belong to you, this is what they've been doing. and the media has not covered it because the mainstream media does not cover true stories. and they never will. again, i want to reiterate, let's help them against the thing with hamas. but let's focus on the united states with fentanyl that is killing our kids. thank you. host: and we are going to take a quick break, but after we come back we are going to continue our conversation about the israel-hamas conflict with hudson institute's michael --. and later we will be joined by charlie sykes, editor at large of the bulwark to talk about today's republican party.

♪ announcer: weekends bring you book tv, featuring the leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. cassidy hutchinson, former trump administration staffer and author of enough discussions being in the white house on january 6, 2021 and her subsequent testimony before congress. fun afterwards, wall street journal reporters on the history of the ar-15 and its influence

on american gun culture. there are interviewed by author and journalist paul barrett. wah book tv every weekend and nd a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at looktv.org. -- booktv.org. monday, watch c-span's series in partnership with the library of congress, books that shaped america. it will feature the common law by oliver wendell holmes june you, rick two decades before he would become supreme court justice. the book is from a series of lectures he given on criminal and civil law and other legal issues. controversial at the time. he wrote that the life of the law has not been logic, but experience. jeffrey rosen, president and ceo of the national constitution center will join us to discuss the book. watch books that shaped america featuring the common law, monday live at 9:00 p.m. eastern on

c-span, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. also, be sure to scan the qr code to listen to our companion podcast where you can learn more about the authors of the books featured. c-spanshop.org is our latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home decor, and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime. washington journal continues. host: welcome back to washington journal, where we are going to continue our conversation from the israel conflict. we are joined this morning with

the hudson institute's michael -- and defense priorities --. good morning to both of you. so michael, i want to start with you. tell us about your organization, the hudson institute and the general position you take on international affairs. guest: the hudson institute is a think tank in d.c., it is nonpartisan and focuses primarily on foreign policy and defense. host: and same for you, tell us about your organization which is defense priorities and your outlook on international affairs. guest: defense priorities focuses on defense policy and international affairs. it is committed to american security without overextending and getting caught in destructive long-term conflicts. host: and how are you guys funded?

host: that is above my pay grade, i don't get involved in funding. host: and michael, can you tell us anything about how hudson institute is funded? guest: we have diverse funders, private individuals and government, and no foreign money whatsoever. we will only accept foreign money from democracies that are allies of the united states. host: got it, that was a good way to get us started. i'm going to start with you, michael. what are your impressions on this continuing conflict between israel and hamas? >> my first big point is that it is not a conflict between israel and hamas. there is of course a conflict between them, but that is part of a bigger conflict between iran and israel. which is actually part of a

bigger conflict between iran and the united states. and that is how i think we should frame this. this is a move by iran in an effort to undermine the american order in the middle east. host: tell me, what you think are the root causes of this continuing conflict? guest: i would read it in a slightly different way. you can see the issues in a number of circle. hamas and israel ignited by the atrocities that hamas committed. then there's the israeli-palestinian. then there is the arab-israeli conflict and that it might go down to the iran-u.s. conflict. so this problem is very complicated. guest: this is going to be very

boring because we are so far in total agreement. host: we will see if that continues. i do want to let our viewers know that they can start calling and if they have a question for our guest or comments they want to share about the israel-hamas conflict. the numbers again if you are a republican, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. and independence, -- we will start getting to your calls in just a moment. i want to go back to you. united states moved munitions . d think the u.s. should be doing more? >> -- supporting the 26 -- i

think there is a substantial amount of foreign powers. and at the moment, when the israeli population -- these problems that come up -- the united states because of ties with israel. >> i don't disagree with what he said, but the issue here, the iranians delivered a message

that if they go in on the ground in gaza, if iran will intervene in the conflict, hezbollah will start a second front in the north of israel. and so the united states, we have those two groups there to dissuade and deter them. the real place to deter is in tehran. the united states needs to change it posturing entirely tour the iranians and the iranian system and it needs to make it more explicit that it has followed opens up a second -- hezbollah opens up a second front, they will pay the price for that. host: we will get to your call right now. again, republicans (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002.

democratic line, what is your question or comment? caller: my comment is a lot of times i get on these programs, they act like we don't know what israel has done to the palestinians. we most certainly do. and they want to know why we are sending so much money to israel when israel makes its own money. biden sent $25 million to them. why are they cutting off the water and the food? what is going to happen is if they keep making us think they are out to kill the palestinians, you can't just kill these people. that is like to me. those so-called terrorists that went over there and that israel people, which is not right, no doubt it was not right.

but that is the part that is throwing me off. they need to do something. they bombed the only way they could get out, i don't know why they did that. what are these people supposed to do? explain that to me and i will take the answer off-line. host: appreciate your call. michael, i will let you start. we are going to hear a lot of that. tell us what your response is to people who say what kim just said. guest: hamas once this. hamas and iran want this to appear to the world as a war between the israeli military and palestinian babies, and at the caller demonstrated, they are very successful at that. but i think we have to keep our eyes on the larger structure of the conflict here. hamas is using innocent palestinians as human shields. they have built their

infrastructure all across the gaza strip under the homes of the civilians. indy uses that as a base from which to go and attack israeli civilian shooting rockets from gaza, civilian areas from gaza into civilian areas of israel. those are war crimes. using human shields is war crimes. she mentioned it is clear that they bombed the south. it is not clear that they bombed the south, the israelis are denying that. they have been shown blocking the road south and yesterday, the leader told the people publicly don't go south, stay put. so they are using them as human shields, and that is the atrocity. host: i want to let you also respond because i know we have a lot of callers who have this question, concerns about the palestinian people.

guest: if i could address the colors question, -- caller's question, the sentiment among israelis is fear, anger, and retribution. how the government allow this to happen. that is, to allow them to get caught unawares. there is a big problem of what happens. at the moment, about half are displaced. -- consists of children. the per capita income. on top of that, as the caller

mentioned, essentials like water are being cut off. so there is no question. even if forces were to capture or kill the leadership, the head of the military of hamas, there is the question of what happens then? would there be a government-constituted --? early palestinians anticipate --. countries like egypt and saudi arabia, a peacekeeping force. even though they have no use for hamas, this is a very collocated

situation. things will get a lot worse before they get better. guest: i don't disagree with a single thing he has said. i am waiting to have an argument. host: we will keep going. ohio, independent line, go ahead. caller: yes, good morning to you, thanks for taking the call. i tell you, this has been going on for a long time. we all seem to realize that. the american empire should have done a lot more a lot sooner with that to solve this problem. israel is -- because of planes, trains and automobiles to secure a footprint, to secure the gulf state, the gulf region. but there never needed to be this open-air concentration camp

in palestine, gaza, and the west bank have become. it's only gotten worse at the world community just completely ignored it and of course, corporate western media ignored it and has ignore this for years, decades. the last 20 years have even gotten worse. you're concentrating on hamas. hamas was partly elected to the help of benjamin netanyahu. and by the way, 100 agents have been in gaza for a long time, and how did they miss this attack that was a pretext, a catalyst for them for israeli carpet bombing? mostly around gaza. host: i want to pause so that we

can let our guests respond. caller: number of agencies in gaza, the root of the question of how to address this problem. there is a problem to this right now and there is going to be in military operation. whatever one thinks is going to happen. generally speaking, they agreed that that is the --. can you have a political solution? the difference is what is unfolding. such animosity, any kind of

dialogue aimed at --. correct me if i'm wrong, that is going to be very difficult. to begin with -- when the operation gets worse, refugees, so yes, there is a political solution. the problem is the military operation settles. host: and we are receiving some questions from you guys also on twitter, andhione says what has this done to -- division?

referencing that attack on southern israel, nn israel -- southern israel. so what has this done to -- up division? tre any hope of diplomacy, cooling temperatures? can relationships be billed to help find the terrorists and israel, palestinian alliance? guest: so yes, it was carried out to cause division. you think about the people at the dance festival, i think it was 260 were killed, those people are from the most liberal elements of israeli society. these are not conservatives, they were targeted especially because outrage all across israeli society. and to provoke a ground campaign in gaza because that would

polarize israelis and palestinians, it would polarize the entire muslim now. it will ruin the normalization that was in place between saudi arabia, that was preceding between saudi arabia and israel. it already has ruined it. this is what iran wanted. and iran wants to embroil israel in a major conflict that will change the whole glover calm -- global conversation about the middle east and weakening israel, which is the primary rival to iran especially with respect to the primary regional threat to iran's nuclear program. so it is designed to do all of those things, and it is succeeding. hamas cannot be part of the political scene or to any kind of political understanding

afterwards. it is the same as isis, it is a genocidal organization that wants to destroy all of israel. it carried out an attack, it says that all the time and carried out in attack to demonstrate that. we can't see it as a representative of palestinian grievances. it is using civilians as shields in order to pull on global heartstrings in service of a heinous ideology that we all must reject. >> can i add something? what is the relationship between hamas and people in gaza? they have not allowed a single election. the connection at least as of

for debate. civilians got the worst of the. there is no distinction. that is a view that i reject because it holds all -- having no control over what they did. i think michael's indications, i think that hamas took this action expecting and perhaps even preparing for assault, but the burden of that assault, the heartache and bloodshed of that assault would be borne by the

civilian population that hamas purports to be defending. and that is the question in my mind now. what happens when that begins? how can the events be managed for the wider region? host: let's go back to the phone lines now. warrenton, virginia, republican line. what is your question,? >> i have a quick question and a comment. let me hear from both of the scholars here. the first preface i will say is that on all three sides of this conflict, you have the jewish mandate to take the promised land and zionism which is basically a religious movement

the abomination, the desolation in all the biblical new testament descriptions. you have the ideology that is very prevalent, and has been used to fuel a lot of violence and everything. on all three sides of this conflict you have kind of this religious fervor kind of fueling the media coverage and the violence and things like that. so i wanted to know what the american or anybody can do in churches or synagogues or in israel and palestine, in the arab world the kind of

counteract how these competing religious ideologies, which i would say our extra scriptural, like not really valid at their core, how do we counteract this competing a ologies. caller: it is important not to -- israeli jews and palestinians. and the effort to create some kind of -- has not been absent. what kind of station israel be?

because the solution included this vision that israel is currently. there a very big difference in hamas which simply does not accept it, believes it, all the while believing it is rightfully palestinian land. but 1988 recognizes --, and embarked on an effort to reach a palestinian state. i think for -- to speak of palestinians and bring a religious element which is certainly there, --.

host: we will move on to hunter. hunter is calling from bedminster, new jersey, democratic line. caller: thank you for the conversation. just a quick comment, prior comments about israel shouldn't exist because thousands of years ago it was held by the conquerors is just silly. should the united states give back america? anyway, the problem in the land around israel is occupied by arabs and the arab leadership and so forth. used as disposable ponds in efforts to eliminate the jews. expand the state of israel to prevent further uncontrolled arab population growth, and allow even more continue terrorism. as no other option. the united states have to accept

those arabs in their countries, but they don't want to because that continued their gold of sacrificing arabs on the half people. i think iran should have five days to have hamas return hostages and during that time the arabs in northern gaza can minimize casualties. they will blame iran for all anticipated deaths of their own people. if a fund the slaughter of babies, women and other innocent jews. that is my opinion and i would love to hear your thoughts. host: michael we start with you. guest: i completely agree that iran holds enormous responsibility for all that is going on here and we should not lose focus on that. they are very covert and how they do it. they are a strategic enabler of hamas and all these other malicious and they give them the training, the diplomatic support, the web delete in order

to carry out these attacks. they will fight israel to the last lebanese or to the last palestinian. we need to hold them responsible. i also agree with the collar, we need to shift the balance of power. i agree with what he says about annexing territory and reducing population and so forth. but we do have to deter iran, we have to deter hamas and hezbollah. in the united states has an important role to play in that. my concern right now is that in response to the very understandable concern about civilian casualties in gaza, the united straits is -- united states is restraining israel and if israel is not able to eliminate hamas or if it is forth to show the world that it is deterred, we will have israel

suffering the worst military setback in its history at the hands of iran and didn't do anything in response. the effect of that is that deterrence will be weakened and the american system will be tested all around the region. openly, iranians are looking at the balance of power between us and iran. the argument the iranians are making is even israel, america's closest and strongest ally can't stand up to us. and america won't let it stand up to us. that is the argument that we in the end have to be focused on. host: again, we are talking this morning with defense priorities -- and hudson institute michael durand. we are discussing foreign policy, particularly in israel. and i want to ask him about ukraine in just a moment but i want to remind you of online

because we have question or comments. republicans, dial (202) 748-8001 . democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. just to bring in the conflict, this international issue that america is facing is the funding. michael, where are you as far as do you think congress should pass more funding specifically to help ukraine? guest: absolutely. there is a concern in the country on the right and on the left that the united states is overextended and it needs to pull back. the question is how do we pull back? do we pull back likely pulled back in afghanistan were we just pick up and leave? or do we work to achieve a new

balance in a different way that doesn't require us to put american boots on the ground? we have in ukraine a very capable fighting force that is standing up to an american rival that is russia, and we have in israel a very capable fighting force that is standing up to our strategic rival in the middle east, iran. these are precisely the forces that we cannot afford to abandon. if you look at the middle east from the point of view of washington and you say how many american allies are there with the very capable militaries capable of holding regional order that is a pro-american regional order? there are really only two, turkey and israel. if we undermine or carryout policies that lead to the undermining of our islamic ally israel, we are basically on the road to abandoning the entire middle east.

if the callers think that allowing iran, china and russia to dominate the middle east with all of its vast oil resources, all of its vast resources vote affect the global balance of power against us, and harm our economy, i think they are wrong. host: and i want to bring you in . there is a new york times article that has outlined the money that the united states has allocated to ukraine. i want to read a little bit from that article. it says congress has approved -- dollars in response to russia's full-scale invasion in february 2022. nearly $52 billion of that has gone to -- and more than 32.5 billion to the agency for international development. most of the rest of the state department along with other departments and agencies

according to the center for strategic and international studies. my question for you, what do you think the u.s. has gained, and do you think it has been a worthy investment? guest: i will answer your question specifically and then i want to just -- these two conflicts. they are very different, but there are similarities that we have to think about. by my calculations of what the u.s. is doing, there is some question, about $6 billion that has been authorized but not yet spent.

-- will be left high and dry. now, the broader question, one of the reasons that i talked about the aftermath of war, i've been to work on ukraine three times now. i've been to areas a different part several times. the destruction that i have seen cannot be calculated in words. -- ukraine's population has been either internally displaced or in other countries. we will -- something along these

lines in gaza and if you have complete mayhem in the aftermath, you will not have any kind of stability there even as a minimally acceptable thing. even in israel for that, a huge opposition in the arab world. and i don't think the people of northern gaza will take kindly to this idea. i don't think it is the sort of thing the arab world would take on lightly. host: let's go back to the phone lines. pennsylvania, independent line. what is your question or comment? >> thank you for taking the

call. my comment, regarding the one sidedness of this whole thing. it is just a historical institution going on for so long. we need to go back to how it started. the land that these palestinians have been living on forever, that was taken away and given to --, so they could have land to live on, pushing the palestinians to a smaller place, and the ethnic cleansing that takes place. the inhumane treatment. it is all being given to you or running through your property by one side of the country.

now you are looking at just terrible war going on, but let's just look at just one thing. you have this going on in certain parts of the world. the cape of africa finally got people to recognize athletic -- ethnic cleansing, one-sided rule. can't live here, you can't do that. the africans have been there, the black africans have been there. and this one situation, how can america be a neutral in this situation? you need to understand history. brittany needs to step up. britain, america, germany, italy, france, the germans, what happened with the jews, they were the ones that were there. host: i appreciate your call but

i want to step in. i think we got your point and i want to let our callers, guests respond. michael, start with you. guest: the one-sided nature of the conflict, in my analysis the key problem here is hamas and iran and their total rejection of the state of israel. you can't argue with somebody who is raping your daughter, judy your kids in front of you. that is not the beginning of a political dialogue. that is a complete rejection of your existence. so unless we get rid of hamas and strip it of all its military capabilities, we are going to continue to have conflicts like this. and as i said before, there are big forces behind hamas, especially iran, and behind iran, especially russia and china and they are pursuing this

conflict because it undermines the american position in the region. host: let's go to frederick in alexandria, virginia. democratic line, you are on. caller: yes, i would equate this to inner-city wargames in that they are killing out of revenge. we need to follow the money, find out who is who. financing of terrorism. get those groups together to talk about a two state solution to the problem. that is the only way i can see this resolving. otherwise it is going to be life for life. they have to find out where it is coming from. whether it is iran, iraq, saudi arabia, wherever it is coming from.

they need to get together and talk about this and come up with a solution. whether it is israel backing off some of its land or somehow negotiate the end of it. otherwise it is going to be the same thing over and over and over again. caller: how do you respond? guest: two part of the discussion, one introduced by eve in the previous caller, the other one by frederick. i know, and mike knows far better than i, the history of -- in the west bank and so on. but the fact of the matter is, and even palestinians have articulated very strongly support for -- from the other palestinians.

israeli jews are there. the state of israel is there. any attempt to say that they must be eradicated does not work. so the question really is, is it possible politically to neutralize hamas by working on a resumption of natural process? i recognize that that would not be feasible anytime soon because of passions that are there. so we need to start with reality. you cannot have that discussion

with hamas that israel has no right to exist. that is not a position that all palestinians -- the idea that there are these monolithic blocks is not true. we have to look deeper. in military solution to the idea of eliminating the leadership, and a whole series of political questions and all of this. we can have a big discussion about what that ought to be, but i think it is undeniable that there is a political context to this. that is not in any way, shape or form justifying the attacks on innocent civilians ever perpetrated by hamas. host: i want to bring up a

question that we received on twitter. are we israel's only meaningful ally? what does the rest of the world think about this ongoing conflict? guest: we are absolutely indispensable and essential for israel and for order in the middle east. if we don't organize it and lead it, it falls apart. that doesn't mean that we have to do everything. as i was saying before, we can think about a new relationship with our allies where we ask of them to do more, but we have to be in the leadership position and in the enabling position. can i add one other thing to the previous subject? the one caller called in and i forgot his name, but he mentioned that religious extremism that results from this kind of attack, each of us kind of retreats into our various

boxes. that is what iran wants. it wants to carry out these atrocities that polarize everyone and force us to address each other according to what he is calling essential identities or centralized identities. there is another vision out there in the middle east, and it was the one that was represented by the effort of the biden administration to work with saudi arabia to normalize relations with israel. as saudi arabia and israel normalize, then the country that all muslims around the world pray toward everyday is working closely with for having friend their relations with the jewish people, that changes the relationship between muslims and christians, europeans and middle easterners. it creates a whole different atmosphere, the kind of

atmosphere where we can work toward political solutions on all of these difficult issues. that is the greatest threat to iran, and that is the reason why iran enabled hamas to carryout this attack, precisely because it polarizes them in this way. the only way he can get back to that other vision of working together across religious and national lines is by eliminating and weakening the extremists. host: i want to bring you into the second part of this question. what does the rest of the world think about this ongoing conflict? guest: much time do you have? let me start with outside the united states. as far as the israelis are concerned, a few things have happened politically that would

have to involve the united states. we're the only countries that anyone trusts to do it. the russians and the chinese have taken the position that the humanitarian catastrophe cannot be allowed to happen. that there has to be a political settlement. that it is entirely the fault of the united states. it ignore the underlying political problem. there is some truth to this. on a larger issue of the other arab countries, saudi arabia does not, either because hamas is very closely tied to this. as mike has mentioned, and tech iran. on the other rim, to do anything

while -- which hasn't even begun. as for the normalization of israel and saudi arabia, a very important development, i think for the moment at least, it has been torpedoed because whatever --, he cannot be seen to be endorsing globalization and good relations with israel. i am not saying that i necessarily agree with this, but they rejected launching this attack to deal with that normalization between the israelis and --. so there are many moving parts year, but i think it's important that the chinese and the russians think fundamentally

this is going to be a matter in which the united states is invested. there are two sides to that. one is the support for israel. the other is the more catastrophic military and situation. the united states historic identification with israel, there is no way that the united states will not be seen as in some ways responsible. the perception will be that. i think they recognizes this as a broad set of issues including the united states and the middle east. host: go back to the phone line. on the line from woodbridge virginia, we have jeff calling as a republican. go ahead, jeff. caller: i get up early in the morning to read the washington post. the column out there, the

editorial section. it looks like the day after. what i mean by that is if we've got rid of hamas and most of gaza has been destroyed in the aftermath, it looks like mbs and saudi arabia is the primary one who thinks he has some credibility. i think he has no credibility because of what happened with jamaal khashoggi and numerous other saudi arabians. i'm wondering what your guests ink of this. maybe i am being too hopeful. i think it is a very nonpartisan, non-jewish actor involved in this.

i think that would be an american, but for the life of me i can't think of who that might be. please respond. post: the caller just mentioned the washington post. the headline of the column is a war that must be waged with and i toward what comes next. -- with an eye toward what comes next. my head is swimming just from trying -- the monotonous position. if i understood the summary of the caller, what happens if israel's objective of militarily decapitating hamas leadership

succeeds? while it might succeed, it is going to be very difficult, hamas uphill battle because hamas in my mind almost certainly anticipated the reaction that it has triggered in israel, and they are well prepared for that. warfare is a very bloody business. gaza is very densely populated. there is a large man of destruction, many buildings and points for snipers and so on. so the question becomes what happens after? even the israelis will say that at the end of the operation, what they want is some stability.

my guess, based on what the caller says, that is the -- the issue that will be discussed prior to military issuance. ultimately driven by politics. host: you are right, i don't expect you to know everything, there have been a lot of journalists so you can't read at all. this column specifically is talking about, as you mentioned, how netanyahu should proceed. he writes about being thoughtful. he mentions president franklin roosevelt working with allies like winston churchill during world war ii, and they want to read a few paragraphs that say that netanyahu must be wise as roosevelt was to wage war in a way that allows for a stable pea

ce after his adversary's defeat. if you wait until the conflict is over to think about the day after, it might be too late. entity conducts a war that punishes palestinian civilians, you might lose global support and undermine his mission. you guys have talked about that a lot this morning. guest: now that i understand, can i just briefly say something? and i know that mark is waiting and you want to go to him. diplomacy and benjamin netanyahu. the problem that netanyahu has dealing with the west bank palestinians is that he himself tends to see the palestinians as something that can be managed without resolution.

he has two political parties. they believe that the west bank ought to be ultimately annexed to the israeli state. so that means more space for political solution. on top of that, some of them are increasing by the day. so the whole idea of how you have even a small palestinian space that is territorially owned in the west bank, diplomacy yes, but there are huge obstacles that are present. host: is there any way that it can be handled that avoids some of that day after questioning that we are already seeing even before kind of the mass invasion

of gaza has taken place? guest: i think the day after questioning, some people are engaging in in a sincere fashion, but others are raising the day after questioning order to restrain the israelis now, and i think it is very dangerous to think this way. we have iran threatening israel that if it intervenes on the ground, iran will intervene directly. so what they've planned here, apparently, hamas, iran and hezbollah together is a jab from gaza and then an uppercut from

hezbollah in the north, which is 10, 20, 30 times more powerful than hamas. we as the united states should be thinking about that conflict and how to control that conflict so that our ally, israel wins. winning here means first and foremost stripping hamas of all military capabilities. there is a political dilemma in gaza. how can we possibly create a political structure in gaza after the conflict that hamas won't dominate? nobody has an answer to that, but the immediate problem is stripping them of the military capabilities. we can work together with mohammad bin salman, with the europeans, with the united nations, with the israelis, with the palestinian authority after hamas is defeated, at the first

priority is to defeat hamas and prevent hezbollah from opening up a second front. host: we are going to take one more call. georgia, independent line. go ahead. caller: thanks for taking my call. i'm listening to the two gentlemen. now, when you look at it, you are seeing michael have the peace and stability. whatever they have been doing is not working. it is as easy as that. the world of seeing and everybody is seeing it. so they need to change their game plan.

cap the end of the day, we are having ordinary civilians on both sides. all these individuals that are here, the institutions, it is not working, whatever they are doing is not working. we are starting to see bloodshed on both sides of the aisle. so they need to fixed and how ty would fix it. host: we are running out of time, i'm going to stop you there so that our guests can have. a final word. rajan, your final word? rajan: to the caller, i don't pretend to be -- you are quite right, my job is to understand this as best i can. we will not be meddling into this process. host: michael, your closing thoughts? michael: the head of the snake is in tehran.

we, the united states needs to change the balance of power in iran. host: all right, we have rajan menon from defense priorities and the hudson institute's michael doran. thank you both for joining us this morning. a quick break. in about 20 minutes, we will be joined by charlie sykes, editor at large of the bulwark to talk about the house speaker fight and what it tells us about today's republican party, but first, more of your phone calls about the israe-hamas conflict and the house speaker bate. call in now. republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. ♪

>> this week on the c-span networks, congress returns with the battle over house speaker ship continuing. the senate will take up judicial nominations. the ncaa president and big ten commissioner will testify before the senate judiciary committee on name, image or likeness -- and likeness deals, the impact on college athletes and legislative proposals. on wednesday, the senate foreign relations committee holds a over the u.s. ambassador to -- holding meeting over the u.s. ambassador to -- holds a meeting over the u.s. ambassador to israel. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> live sunday, november 5 on in-depth, author and former aclu

president -- goings book tv to talk and take calls about civil rights, free speech, censorship and more. she is the author of defending pornography, and the recently published free speech, what everyone needs to know. join in the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments and text. live sunday november 5 at noon eastern on book tv on c-span2. >> c-span's studentcam documentary competition is back, celebrating 20 years with this theory -- this year's theme, looking forward while considering the past. we are asking students to create videos addressing one of these questions. in the next 20 years, what is the most important change you would like to see in america?

over the past 20 years, what has been the most important change in america? as we do each year, we are giving away 100,000 dollars in total prizes with a grand prize of $5,000. every teacher who has students participate in this year's competition has an opportunity to share in an additional reward of $50,000. for information, visit our website at studentcam.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to "washington journal." we are taking more of your calls about the israel-hamas conflict as well as the ongoing house speaker battle in congress. before we get to the phone lines, i want to bring up, this is from today's washington post. there is some analysis of that house speaker battle, written by paul kane. i'm going to start at the beginning to set the scene.

he writes house republicans live in a world where math is upside down. in this fantasy land, five can be as powerful as 217, eight as big as 433, and in a new twist this past week, 99 out of 223 can somehow be turned into a strong majority. this latest example came friday when representative jim jordan of ohio claimed the gop nomination for house speaker, despite a clear majority of the full house not wanting him to be there pick. -- their pick. i want to get to the end of his column today. this is on the complete other side of the page but this is how paul kane ends his analysis. it says all these minority rule moments turn the tables on a gop conference that used to assert

the quote, how certain rule, an unofficial standard often imposed by j has to, the house speaker from 1999 into 2007. it said legislation that did not have the support of quote, the majority of the majority would not get a vote on the house floor. now the majority of the majority no longer rules, given that both mccarthy and scalise had such support as jordan now does. instead, a small block, sometimes five or eight or 20, perhaps 99 has turned the math upside down, with the new quote, jordan rule, it is the minority of the majority that matters most. that is some analysis from the washington post's paul kane about that house speaker battle which right now, republican jim

jordan of ohio is the republican nominee. there could be a floor vote as soon this week. we want to hear more of your calls about the house speaker race as well as the israel-hamas conflict. republicans, your line is (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. first up is tyler in akron, ohio on the independent line. your thoughts. caller: good morning and thank you c-span. i listen to washington journal every day. the last week has really disappointed me in the coverage you have given to the israeli/palestinian conflict. it has been one side of coverage and i wish you would have a guest on from m to stay international or human rights watch, one of these international human rights organizations that has declared

israel as committing apartheid against the palestinian people. the united nations has even accepted this. it is disappointing that c-span has not had anyone on to describe this. you had a caller on earlier who explained this perfectly. they said what do they mean by gaza is an open air space? people in gaza are not allowed to leave. they are literally not allowed to leave. it is an open air prison. i wish c-span would have one of these even rights organizations on to explain what is going on, the daily conditions palestinians have lived under for the past so many years. thank you and thank you for taking my call. host: i want to remind everyone, you can always check out our archives on c-span.org. we are always looking to represent diverse opinions on "washington journal." next caller, anthony from pennsylvania on the republican line. caller: good morning.

just give me a few seconds to explain something and a possible solution to the idea of blowing up the gaza. last week was a horrendous inexcusable violent act against israel. it was older people, children and babies who were headed and killed. hamas took 120 hostages and no one is talking about these hostages. why don't the king of jordan, antony blinken, and everyone else who thinks that palestine is going to be invaded and wiped out, why don't they go talk to the hamas government and say give back the hostages, surrender and the idf won't go in and destroy gaza and maybe the gaza people can form a new

government that is not a terrorist organization. these hostages have to be given back before anything else, and that is being forgotten. that is not being talked about. host: our next caller is from california. carlos on the democrat line. caller: thank you for taking my call. this is the first time i've ever called. the first two callers hit the nail on the head. a lot of these things, especially michael doran, these are the same people that believed iraq had weapons of mass destruction. as a lot of our politicians seem to be in lockstep with create another war -- creating another war for the united states to go in and clean up everyone's mess, it seems that a lot of our

politicians and our senators, they are just all in lockstep. profiteering. the only people paying the price are the innocent people of palestine, the gaza strip, with nowhere to go. we have given these people 70 years of war in their own lands. it is so inhumane. i'm almost 65. we've only been through war after war after war. people need to check on their history to find out that it is wrong, all wrong. host: we appreciate you being a first time caller to "washington journal." let's go to oakland,christina ot line. caller: thank you for "washington journal." i have been a listener for decades, and i pay attention to

a lot. i'm 77 years old. i've been hearing a lot going on, for a long time now. when it comes to the israeli/palestinian conflict, the holocaust was horrible. i know, i visited auschwitz in 1975. my grandfather had the black book of poland. i remember the eichmann trials. all of that was horrible. but the problem is, when they came to a solution of giving israel a state, perhaps a two state solution should have been created at that time because no one in the arab country did the holocaust. the palestinians had to give up land that they were on forever, and they still are.

if i hear once more that -- and i know this sounds antisemitic and i don't mean it to be. i really don't. but if i hear "god gave that land 3000 years ago," then we better all move out of the united states because god gave that land to the indians. host: we got your point. we are going to move on to alan in california, republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning c-span. i'm looking at the solution, not the actual war in gaza right now. israel conquered from israel to the red sea, back in 1973. why can't egypt give up a piece of the desert, maybe 10 times the size of the west bank, and create a state in the desert for

the palestinians to go to? take the rocks, move it there. the whole thing. move it there. any important buildings that they cherish. move it. unless the two groups, get apart from each other, they've been battling forever. host: we will go next to johnny in daytona beach, florida. democrat line. caller: hello. i think the powers that be play chess and the republicans think they are playing checkers. we all have problems with the border and cocaine is coming on trucks and airplanes into america, not at the border with a starving person. they've been trending all these wars in hamas and israel, they are trying to make sure they

keep it covered who the true jews are. they don't want blacks to have knowledge over who the jews are, so the key playing games with the american people and the public. the powers that be are just try to keep stuff the way it has and war brings money to the republicans. host: all right. our next caller is philip in south carolina on the independent line. caller: hello. host: go ahead. caller: the only thing i want to see about the israel-hamas conflict is you go back to the bible and the bible says that -- i can't think of it -- but the bible says that the jews that are over there now are not really the jews of the bible in antiquity. in 1948, the powers that be put them over there in that land. that is why there is so much

conflict and why hamas -- none of the arabs want them there because they don't belong there. that is all i've got to say. host: anthony is up next, calling from new york on the democrat line. your thoughts. caller: thank you for your patience and please don't misinterpret what i'm trying to get at. when has a religion become a cult? there is no such thing, at least with regard to what god gave the jews or the israelis. jewish people are outstanding, beautiful people. i love them with my heart and soul but what we have in israel is a military outpost set in motion by the military industrial congressional complex. it is a money laundering racket. he who has all the gold makes all the rules. aipac and all the other liber -- lobbying groups that have been beating this drumbeat of bomb iran, it has been going on and it is ridiculous.

if you listen to richard nixon or any past presidents, you listen to what they say and they speak the truth. helen thomas told the truth and what did they do? they pushed her into the back row. the most dignified press corps secretary we had, and anytime someone speaks truth to power, they are pushed to the back. the list, it goes on and on. we are not being intellectually honest. this is a cult, this is cult behavior and god would not choose one people over another people. we are all in this together. this is one planet, one species and we've got to love one another and stop this nonsense because it really is. this is a cult mentality. host: we appreciate your call. let's go to new york now. sy on the republican line. caller: good morning. i would like to state that there

can be no peace with people whose charter is the destruction of the jewish people, particularly israel. the poo and other groups had no recognition or negotiations in driving the jews into the sea. there is no way you can make peace with people who don't recognize your right to exist. also people that are calling in, worried about jews being settlers, i would like to know how israel got there and who established jerusalem? the muslims conquered the arabs in about 780 -- 700 ad. people calling in have to realize that they are settlers on indian land. most of the states in the u.s.

were indian territories. if they are so worried about being settlers, why don't they just leave? this is indian land. same thing. host: appreciate your call. let's go to miami, florida now. pamela on the independent line. caller: hello. this is a very complex conflict. i would like all listeners to watch the movie, withdraw from gaza. google it and get educated on the situation. this is an islamist war against the only jewish nation in the world. 300 million arabs, 700 -- 7 million jews living in israel. hamas is an isis state inside gaza. the world joins forces to destroy isis and there is no

difference. anyone that does not recognize that hamas is a muslim brotherhood, isis, and iran backed entity, really isn't educated. get educated, learn about the conflict. israel is the only democracy and we need to support it, to destroy isis, which is only a couple miles from the border. host: all right. we are going to take a quick break and afterwards we will be joined by charlie sykes, editor at large of the bulwark. we will be talking about the house speaker fight and what it tells us about today's republican party. ♪ >> as part of our new series, we

are asking you what books do you think shaped america? >> i think the founding theory. >> to kill a mockingbird. >> you can join in the conversation by submitting your pick for the book you think helped shape this country. go to our website, c-span.org/booksthatc hangedamerica. in 30 seconds or less, tells your pick and why. be sure to watch books that shaped america live every monday at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> this year, book tv marks 25 years of shining a spotlight on leading nonfiction authors and their books. nearly 900 cities. 16,000 events. book tv is providing viewers

with 92,000 hours of programming on the latest literary discussions on history, politics and biographies. you can watch book tv every sunday on c-span2 or online at booktv.org. 25 years of television for serious readers. >> historian anthony roberts calls kenneth randel the manuscript whisperer. his new book is about traveling the world, during his career, buying, selling significant iconic historic letters and documents from the renaissance to present day. the title of his book is safeguarding history, trailblazing adventures inside the worlds of collecting and forging history. one of the stories he tells his role in determining whether the hitler's diaries published in

1983 were real or fake. >> historian kenneth randel on this episode of book notes plus, available on the span now free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to "washington journal." we are joined by charlie sykes, editor at large of the bulwark. we will be discussing the house speaker contest, campaign 2024, the israel-hamas conflict and congressional news of the day. good morning charlie. guest: good morning, how are you? host: wonderful. thank you for joining us. let's start with this house speaker race. i want to ask, has anything about how things have played out since the government shut down the vote -- the vote to avoid a

government shutdown, it seems like an eternity ago, but it was just a week or so ago. has anything about how the house speaker race has played out since then surprised you? guest: of course. it is amazing. we are seeing somebody we have never seen before. we are seeing a house of representatives remove a speaker, go without a speaker. we've never seen this kind of absolute dysfunction. it is a reminder that being a republican speaker of the house may be the single worst job in washington, trying to preside over a fractured caucus, including people who are frankly not interested in actually governing. it makes herding cats look easy. on one other level, it is one of those things where it is shocking but predictable in the sense that republicans have been

enabling and promoting political suicide bombers. people who do want to tear it all down and blow it all up. they have been sneering at ideas like compromise and bipartisanship for a very long time. the incentive structure in the republican party right now is not for people who sit down and do the hard work of governance and statesmanship. it's about people who can get the most clicks, can appeal to the outrage and entertainment wing of the republican party. to a certain extent, it is surprising, but it also feels kind of inevitable. this is what you get when you devalue the hard work of governance, and embrace people who frankly think of politics as performative, a caucus filled with marjorie taylor greene and loewen -- and lauren boebert and

matt gaetz and paul gosar. what the people think was going to happen when kevin mccarthy made one concession after another to people who made it clear that they had no problem not just shutting down the federal government but shutting down the house of representatives? host: we want to get to phone calls in a moment. i will let our viewers know what those numbers are one more time. republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. you can also send us a text message, (202)-748-8003. with your questions for charlie or your comments about any of the news of the day. we will get to them in a moment. while we wait on some of those callers to come in, charlie, what do you think this speaker conflict, chaos, how will that

impact the 2024 election and what other variables are you looking at as we start turning towards 2024? guest: those are excellent questions and the answer is no one knows because we are experiencing something we've never seen before. anyone who says they know it is going to happen in the house right now is making it up. the fact that they went home over the weekend without having a speaker. if you eliminate all of the possible things that could happen, like akeem jeffries is not going to get elected. if you eliminate all of the impossibilities, then whatever is left no matter how improbable is public going to be the answer which gets to your question of how does this affect any 24? we don't know except that it is not a good look for republicans right now. they won the majority in the house of representatives.

this was their opportunity to say if you entrust us with power, this is what we can do, this is the kind of things we can do to make america a better place. instead, republicans have turned on one another in the most vicious way possible, and what you are seeing now is a republican party that looks deeply unserious during very serious times, and of course hanging over all of this is donald trump who has been the chaos candidate. if it continues to embrace this kind of chaos, this kind of performative warfare, this is what you were going to get. i don't think there is any republican in america that really thinks that you want to go into 2024 with a house of representatives in absolute chaos under the leadership of someone like donald trump, at the same time. in some ways it reinforces the

bizarre nature of our politics right now. host: i want to get more about donald trump but let's take a call. john in california, democrat line. what is your question or comment? caller: of the 18 republicans that are in congress now that won and biden districts, i would think the one that has the highest differential, could potentially caucus with the democrats because the primary threat is really low for that person, knowing that the district over all is biden. host: charlie? guest: in theory that would be true but keep in mind that the primaries are often a completely different world than the general election. this whole question of is someone going to caucus with the democrats or will democrats

bailout the republicans, it is interesting but when i said before that you rule out what is impossible, what is improbable, no matter how improbable is probably going to happen, so is it possible that you could have centrist republicans saying we need to make a deal with centrist democrats, they have the balance of power. the caller mentioned 18 republicans elected in biden districts. right now we have seen the power of the matt gaetz, the freedom caucus group. they seem to have the balance of power. but the reality is that there is a centrist majority as well. if you did have republicans who say this is crazy, we are not going to do this, we need to have a bipartisan governing majority in the house, there is a possibility that you could make a deal. it what's -- it would look something like -- let's elect --

it will always be a republican speaker, maybe even the acting speaker, patrick meehan -- patrick mchenry. in the short term, let's make sure we have a continuing resolution. we do not shut down the federal government. we have floor votes on aid to israel and ukraine. then perhaps changing the rule about making it clear that both political parties will be able to make presentations and motions on the floor. i could see that happening. the problem is that the vibe in our politics is so divided and tribal right now, are we still capable of making political compromises in order to keep the congress running? i don't know that as the caller mentioned, there are a number of republicans -- you don't hear about them much -- who were elected in districts that joe biden won and they are looking around and going, is our future really going to be jim jordan? are we really going to go around

with matt gaetz and burn this place to the ground? maybe that is not how we want to go into 2024. host: let's go to ellicott city, maryland. linda is calling on the republican line. caller: good morning. i appreciate you taking my call. my concern with what is going on with the speaker battle is that there is so much focus on the republicans being extreme and drastic as a whole, and i see that the democratic party has held hostage to so many issues that have caused chaos in this country, the border for several years, the deficit. i guess we are into the trillions. i think a majority of americans

would prefer that we have a balanced budget. and the border actually closed. because it is causing problems, financially and the budget spending is going to get worse. why not the centrists in the republican party move towards what matt gaetz -- forget who they are, but the idea of trying to resolve those issues. balance the budget, close the border. fix some of the other major issues. it is not going to happen if the centrist republicans have more control because they are going to give the democrats what they want in the interest of passing whatever. that is what mccarthy was doing. host: linda i want to break in because i want to give charlie time to respond.

she represents a lot of republican voters. guest: we will see. the idea that matt gaetz wants to solve any problem is delusional. this is a reality check and a lot of republicans in congress are recognize in this. matt gaetz is not interested in fixing problems or getting things done. he is interested in advancing his own personal political agenda or whatever it is. first of all, the guy that has shut down the house of representatives is not moving to fix the immigration problem, the crime problem, or the deficit. can i say something on the deficit as someone who has been a long time fiscal conservative? when i was on the radio in wisconsin, i probably had 100 shows with paul ryan talking about the debt crisis and the need to close -- to eliminate the deficit. i guess i have to remind people, what did republicans do with the deficit?

what did the trump administration do? donald trump added something like $8 trillion to the national debt. it is interesting that republicans talk about a balanced budget but when they actually have power, they don't behave that way. republicans seem very interested in alan sing the budget when there is a democrat but when they are in power, they blow it up. there are a lot of problems in this country that need to be solved. we have a crisis in the middle east. we have problems in ukraine. we have to deal with crime in america and inflation. going along with somebody like a political narcissist like matt gaetz, who has basically shut down the congress of the united states, does not get you closer to fixing any of those problems. the people who say, ok, these problems are terrible so let's blow it up and drain the swamp and do all these things. what do you end up with? you end up with what we have right now, a congress that is

unable to act or pass any legislation whatsoever. host: our next caller is james in waterbury, connecticut. independent. caller: thank you for taking my call. the statement that this gentleman just said, to go along with matt gaetz would be not a very good idea. the democrats in lockstep completely voted with matt gaetz, and the entire freedom caucus didn't even go completely against kevin mccarthy. i really put this on the democrats because not even one of them would vote for kevin mccarthy, to keep him after he just made a deal to keep the government open. he did work to try and keep the government open across the aisle. he made the other people mad, matt gaetz, and the democrats

went 100% along with matt gaetz and the eight republicans and shut the government down. they made it dysfunctional, made the house not work when ukraine needs the money, we are going into world war iii right now. this is basically on the democrats. they voted 100% with the eight republicans to get rid of the house speaker. this is their fault. host: charlie? guest: i think it is absurd to say it is the democrats fault. republicans have the majority. republicans are in charge of the house of representatives. kevin mccarthy had the same majority as nancy pelosi. no political party has ever behaved the way the republicans behaved in ousting their own speaker. the argument that the caller is making is an interesting one. he's basically asking, should democrats have bailed out kevin mccarthy? should they have bailed out the guy who played the role he

played on january 6? the election denial, pushing for the evidence free impeachment of joe biden. it is somewhat naive to think that democrats would bailout republicans at the moment republicans have shown they are unable to present a governing majority. one of the fundamental principles of congressional politics is the majority has to act like the majority. the majority has to run the house. the republican majority cannot get the job done and now you are saying should democrats give up -- forget everything kevin mccarthy has done? should they forget all of the issues of the times when he has misled them and bail him out right now? that was asking a bit much. having said that, there is going to come a moment, where the democrats are going to have to say, we will have to cut a deal with some of the republicans to keep the lights on.

which republicans are there? i think there are red lines. if there are republicans who voted to throw out the votes of millions of americans, i think that is disqualifying. if there is anyone that actually supported or continues to support donald trump's big lie about the election, that is disqualifying. but there are republicans they can do business with, and i think that would be the best case scenario. among a lot of bad case scenarios. you have decent honorable people from both parties say ok, let's take the extremists and let's marginalize them. let's make them irrelevant and cut a deal of some kind. maybe that will happen. if they do, it will be very countercultural in america today. host: i want to pivot to the 2024 presidential contest, particularly the republican primary, where poll after poll,

state after state shows former president trump with a commanding lead, even after his indictments. comments he made this week, calling hezbollah smart and saying israel wasn't prepared for the hamas attack. he did walk it back but let's look at what he said. [video clip] >> has below is very smart. they are all very smart. the press doesn't like what they say. president she of china. he controls it with an iron fist . i said he is a very smart man. they killed me the next day. has below, they are very smart. they have a national defense minister, or somebody, saying i hope has blood is not attack us from the north. so the following morning they attacked. they might not have been doing it but if you listen to this jerk, you would attack from the north because he said that is our weak spot.

whoever heard of officials saying on television that they hope the enemy doesn't attack in a certain area? unless it is a con job, you know what a con job is. you are waiting there and ready and you want them but they weren't ready. say what you want. israel was not ready. this was a terrible thing that happened. they weren't ready. host: that was former president trump earlier this week. on friday he did put out a new statement to try and clean it up a little bit, saying there was no better friend or ally of israel then when he was president. i want to bring up the new york times recently had a piece about how no matter what republican groups try to do running anti-trump ads, they find that little is working to shift the thinking of republican leaning voters away from trump. the sub headline says with over 40 ads and $6 million spent, a group tied to the club for

growth is no closer to an answer, a memo to donors says. some ads even gave donald trump a boost. i want to read an excerpt from this article. club for growth president david mcintosh said even when you show videos to republican primary presidentmp saying somethingf otherwise objectionable to primary voters, they find a way to rationalize and dismiss it. every traditiona postproduction add attapresident trump either backfired or ed n impact on his ballot support and bili. this iludes ads that primarily featured video of him saying liberals were stupid comments from his own mouth. i want to ask you. what are your thoughts about this contest and what does it say about the state of the republican party, that trump is

not just the front runner and the leader but in a lot of voter's eyes can do no wrong? guest: this is the world we have been living in for several years now, watching what has happened to the republican party as it has gone from a party that pretended to take ideas seriously, to being basically a cult of personality. you have seen this after the indictments. a brief comment on the comments about israel. his admiration for the worst most brutal dictators in the world, vladimir putin is his buddy, xi is top shelf and a genius, hezbollah is so smart. this is -- it ought to be a reminder of how deeply unfit this man is to be the leader of the free world, how terrifying it is to much of the rest of the world to think that this man might be the commander-in-chief, might be in a position of leader of the free world once again. it is just one comment among many in which he has reminded us

of this. to the point about how none of this moves the needle, i think this comes to a shock -- comes as a shock to many conservative republicans. this is not against -- this is not about right versus left. you have people in the desantis camp who are asking the same questions. they believed that at some point after the indictment, they be there were some quotes after the indictments in georgia, surely that would begin to peel support off. when you had someone indicted for paying money to a point star, that may not have been enough. but what about the violation of the espionage act? what about racketeering or conspiracy to defraud the u.s. government? none of that has really changed the dynamic. i think this is something that a lot of republicans who have gone along -- and i'm thinking about very conservative republicans who support ron desantis who are

looking at this and going how can this possibly not the could difference? maybe after six years of appeasing this man, of rationalizing his behavior, of defending his behavior, of enabling his behavior, this is what you've got. you didn't have people standing up and saying please do you see what is going on? the other extraordinary thing is the number of people who have been in the trump administration, who sat in the oval office, his attorney general, his secretary of defense, his secretaries of state, his national security advisor, his chief of staff. all of them are saying this man is a threat to democracy and to the world. this is not liberal democrats. these are not switches. these are people who were named by donald trump and were they are in the administration and trying to sound the alarm. they are not getting any traction.

this is a really extraordinary moment. having said that, it is one thing to be dominant in a republican primary. it is another thing to go in front of the american people in the general election. i think one of the things you will see in 2024 are more of these republicans who were there in the room, who were working with donald trump, saying look, we know who he is. we know how he thinks. we know what he will do in the future, and this is too dangerous to go ahead. that is going to be a factor in the 2024 election. whatever doubts you have about joe biden -- and i have a lot of doubts about joe biden and i am certainly not a liberal democrat -- but it is extraordinary to watch the behavior of donald trump and realize that voters are going along, when so many prominent conservative republicans, who again, worked with him, for him, are saying

wait, red sirens, red warning lights up. host: let's go back to the phone lines. steve in virginia on the republican line. your thoughts. caller: yes, thank you for taking my call. a couple comments for mr. sykes. first, as far as the democrats and their role in displacing kevin mccarthy as the speaker and the possibility of looking for a more centrist republican, the speaker actually negotiated and agreed with them and the democrats -- matt gaetz was incapable of removing him without the votes of the democrats. to imply that the republicans were the only ones that had anything to do with that process i find disingenuous. secondly, as it relates to his

comments as to why people in the republican party, why all these people after all these things that trump has done, that he doesn't understand or the washington bureaucracy doesn't understand how he could continue to be the front runner for the republican party and all the republicans have to be nuts, and all the current washington establishment calls them maga republicans, the point is there is almost half of the entire population that voted, that voted for trump. the question is why is the country so unhappy with the current political washington establishment that they are willing to look for anyone, anyone that will disrupt the current corrupt washington, d.c.

establishment? it doesn't matter whether you are republican or democrat, they are looking for someone that is going to make changes and he is obviously not on either side, supported by the washington establishment. host: i'm going to stop you there. guest: he kept saying the same thing over and over again. the washington bureaucracy, the washington establishment. i am in wisconsin. i am not in washington. i understand it is easy to say that this is just the insiders. there are republicans all over the country looking at this and going, i want changes, i want changes and look, you have alternatives. they have other candidates who are out there, who are quite conservative, who would agree with some of the actual policies without the baggage. it is not irrational to say let's have somebody who was an outsider who is a conservative

republican who is not an indicted felon, who is not flouted the law or obstructed the law, who did not try to overturn the election. there are some of us who believe that the fundamental principles of the constitutional democracy is the peaceful transfer of power. we've had a peaceful transfer of power throughout american history. the only time we fail to have a peaceful transfer of power was when donald trump tried to overturn the election. this is why many of us -- not because we are part of the washington bureaucracy or part of the establishment. it is because we are americans and we believe in things that conservatives claim to believe in, including the constitution and our republic. this whole notion that it is just the insiders who object to him because they are trying to protect their power -- there are people who want to protect the constitution and ink that may not having a chronic liar, someone who has flouted the law, who has made it clear he would dismantle much of american

diplomacy and our national security apparatus if he became president, maybe we should look at somebody else. there are alternatives. this is the question. faced with the chance to take an offering, to have somebody who did not try to overthrow the government, who did not steal classified documents or lied to the department of justice, who did not try to overturn election, why would voters not want to do that? that is an interesting question. i think it reflects the extreme polarization of our culture and the extreme degree to which we have become a divided nation that has separated itself into alternative reality silos. my sense is the fast majority of americans are smart and decent people and they deserve a lot better than donald trump. one more comment. i wonder how many of the people that support donald trump for president of the united states

would hire him to run their company. that they would trust him in any position of responsibility, in their child's school? if there is any corporation in america that would put donald trump on their board of directors or would make him the ceo? if there is any university that would make him their president. think about any other organization, including the u.s. military. what they trust donald trump in a position of responsibility? yet we have reserved the lowest possible standard for the presidency of the united states. i think that is a bizarre thing and it is legitimate to call it out. host: let's hear from milton calling from baltimore, maryland. democrat line. caller: good morning. mr. sykes, that was heavy. that was a heavy comment and thank you so much. my comment is on the israeli/hamas war.

it is two statements. i think what the solution should be, would be and will be in the near future, is -- i'm at the end of my rope. i'm tired of hearing about settlers and indians fighting each other over land. it is time to end that nonsense. but the solution is, when people say the gaza strip and west bank, no. there should be a state of palestine and a state of israel. there was a guy on last week who said they would not even recognize his passport from the gaza strip because it has to be state-sponsored. that is the solution. it has to ba.2 state solution -- it has to be a two state solution. thank you very much. host: your thoughts? guest: i'm not going to try to

solve this problem this morning except to say what a horrific tragedy we are seeing unfold. the atrocities that we saw committed a week ago remind us how fragile life is, how fragile the world order is. what israel experienced last week was the equivalent of 9/11 in the united states, but at a higher level, the number of people killed. hamas is an organization that is absolutely not interested in solving this problem, they are not interested in peace. hamas is an organization that is committed to the destruction of israel and the slaughter of jewish citizens. they have to be dealt with. having said that, this cycle of violence was set off by this. israel needs to react to what happened, just like the united states tended to react.

hopefully they won't do it in such a disastrous manner, but it has to make sure they do not give hamas what it wants because what hamas wants is more bloodshed and atrocities and outrage and that is the cycle we are in right now. host: mark in ohio, independent line. what are your thoughts? caller: i have a question for charlie. after 2016, i think we all need to be more wide-ranging in using our imagination. could we be seeing the beginning of a split in the republican party? in the same way that -- with the whigs, abolitionists and people who were ok with slavery cannot coexist forever and it seems reaganites and trumpists cannot coexist forever. nafta was reagan's idea for crying out loud and trump thinks it is the worst deal ever. reagan thought nato was the

greatest military alliance in history and trump thinks it is horrible. you could go on and on. these people can't coexist forever. could we be seeing the getting -- could the house clown show right now be the beginning of the fracturing of the republican party? guest: that is an excellent question because the republican party is deeply divided on these things. the problem is that the non-trump faction has been cowed and has been willing to make concessions. they have seen what has happened to people like liz cheney, deeply conservative republicans who stood up to donald trump. she was excommunicated and driven out. other republicans have decided to sacrifice principle because they don't want to lose their positions or her -- or there has been this thought that the fever would break and this would go away. this division the caller has been describing has been there from the moment donald trump came down the golden escalator.

the question is, can what is happening in the house be a turning point? will you have non-trump conservatives finally stand up against trumpism? maybe. think about how many off ramps they have had, how many opportunities they've had to move on, how many alternatives they have had and it has not happened. the other question is is the republican party going to go the way of the whigs? we have seen political parties that have ceased to exist because the divisions are just too great. there are fundamental divisions in the republican party. unfortunately our two-party system is so deeply ingrained that it is difficult to see how that happens. although i don't rule it out, because right now, the republican party is very divided on culture, on policy, on personalities.

i think for a lot of republicans, they are simple he hoping that maybe when donald trump leaves everything will go back to normal and i don't think it is going to happen. they're going to have to make it happen. the question is, when will they stand up and take that position and as somebody who has been trying to encourage them to do that for the last six or seven years, i would welcome that but we have not seen it yet. host: jeff in kentucky, final caller, a quick question or comment? caller: i just want to thank mr. sykes. i'm pretty much lockstep with what he says. if more people in this country would listen to him, the jim jordan thing, basically a guy that is just trying to burn down the house, in my opinion he should be indicted along with trump for january 6. it is a shame and a disgrace that a man like that could

possibly be speaker of the house. it is such a frontal democracy and i would hate to see it destroyed by the republicans who just want to tear us down. i think joe biden has a real opportunity to win again. i respect you sir. i love listening to you talk. you're a smart man and i just want to thank you. host: we appreciate your call. charlie, any closing thoughts? guest: let me leave on a positive note. i think this is a much greater and better nation than our politics reflect, and the question is at what point will americans say this clown show is

not who we are and not what we want to be, and that will be one of the central issues in 2024. host: charlie sykes, editor at large of the bulwark. thank you for joining us. that's going to do it for "washington journal." we'll be back tomorrow morning at 7:00. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]