[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy visit ncicap.org] ♪ >> good morning, it's monday, september 9, 2024 as the house returns at noon eastern. senate is in at 3:00 p.m. and we're with you for the next three hours on the "washington journal" and we'll begin by

looking ahead on tomorrow night's debate between former president trump and vice president kamala harris. we want to know this morning what question do you want to hear the candidates answer tomorrow night? what would you ask? phone lines by political parties. democrats, it's 202-748-8000, republicans, 202-748-8001, independents, 202-748-8002. you could also send us a text at 202-748-8003. if you do, please include your name and where you're from. otherwise, catch up with us on social media on x, it's at @cspanwj, on facebook, it's facebook.com/cspan. and a very good monday to you this morning. you can go ahead and start calling now. we're a day away from the debate but plenty of preview stories on the front pages from the "washington times" this morning.

the headline there from the third blow with the harris debate. vice president faces scrutiny. the front page of "the washington post." the question being asked, will courtroom skills help harris make the case. and the "new york times," the headline there, harris's rhetorical combat faces its biggest test, along with those preview stories being today's papers and plenty of conversations about it. yesterday, it was pete buttigieg on the state of the union. this is what he said the vice president has to do tomorrow night. >> well i think the main task would be to make sure americans understand the visions. that's going to be challenging. i competed with her for the democratic nomination and i've had the honor of her debate

against mike pence. she is a very focused and disciplined leader but it will take superhuman focus and discipline to deal with donald trump in the debate. it's no ordinary proposition. not because donald trump is a master of explaining policy ideas and how they're going to make people better off. it's because he's a master of taking any form or format that is on television and turning it into a show that is all about him. but the less we're talking about him and the more we're talking about you, the better it's going to be for the vice president because she has laid out an agenda, things lake making sure that tax code is fair and protecting a woman's right to choose. it's an extreme fully challenging task in the face of all of the distractions. whatever outrageous things that he says and says because they will require her to respond and

you can't allow him to change the subject and her vision for america's future. host: he mentioned the vice president's debate back in 2000 against mike pence. during that election, it was moderate era of that page. sue savage page of "u.s.a. today" about that experience of being the moderator of that debate and what she learned about kamala harris. she writes in the vice presidential debate, harris held her own. the prosecutor in demanding that pens stopped -- pence stopped interrupting her. she stuck to her talking points when she was dodging the actual questions that has been ask to ask again by the moderator. we'll delve more into that column. also, plenty of discussion about

what donald trump needs to do on the debate stage tomorrow night. it was john cornyn who was on "fox news sunday." this is what he had to say. >> i think he needs to listen to kamala harris talk. something she's been reluctant to do unless she's reading a teleprompter and we've seen the polls very close but mainly, she's coming off as a sugar high after the coup d'etat that was committed against joe biden and of course, the convention. so i'm looking forward to a repetition of the good debate performance that president trump had with president biden and i think he's up to it. host: john cornyn on "fox news sunday." the debate is tomorrowht. starts at 9:00 p.m. abc. we're going to simulcast it c-span. full coverage of that debate beginse c-span at 8:00

eastern wit our predebate show. it's a 90-minute deb following that debate, we'll take calls, get your reaction yocan watch coverage of c-span now, it' mile app. you can watch c online at sp.org. c-span2 is where we're going to vet. again, the house is this and the senate in as well. sol those, of coue, take precedent on c-span and c-span2. look for our simulcast on c-span2 tonight. this is john in brooklyn up first. we're asking the question what would you ask the candidates in tomorrow's debate? john, a democrat in brooklyn. what do you think? caller: hi, jon. i would like to ask this question for all. do they know the process? the process to of using nuclear

chemical to get that all and the effect it has on environment. and i would like to ask them both. for trump, stopping the regulations and not knowing what to do because it takes time to know. trump's stopped a lot of regulations that takes time to find out what it is. and i stopped calling climate control. i'd say pollution. people don't understand pollution. but climate control is out of the world. so i like for them, ask them if they would use pollution as to the climate control -- host: i got your point. bill, in indianapolis, republican, what would you ask tomorrow? caller: what would i ask? i would put this question to kamala is what would you do to secure our elections going

forward in two forms, not only balloting and voting but to curve and slow the manipulation of the american people with the partial truth and the lies that we get out of the media that are just very blatant with intent and everybody knows that it leads people who have their eyes open. and how can we control that a little bit to slow the manipulation by the press? caller: this question is -- i would like for kamala to ask the moderators to ask trump to repeat the oath that he took to become president and did he upheld it on january 6? and if not, why not?

because he definitely did not. host: gwen, how much do you think january 6 will come up tomorrow night? caller: probably a little note. they're not going to fact check. but they will fact check kamala. they're not going to fact check trump. host: why do you think that? caller: because he gets away with not being fact checked. and they need to ask him about the oath that he took to become president and whether did he up hold it on january 6 to storm the capitol. host: donald trump has complain about abc, said that the network has biased coverage of him. why do you think they would fact check kamala harris and not donald trump tomorrow night? caller: they do. they fact check biden. they fact check kamala. they fact check everybody but they don't fact check trump in

front of his face. they may talk about it but they don't do it directly. host: that's gwen in detroit. in sense of who's going to be moderating that debate on abc news, it's david muir. we're simulcasting it on webb west, on c-span2 is where you can watch and our free mobile app and we'll have programming calls before and after. this is carla in new york city, republican. what question would you ask? caller: i'm actually a democrat. i called in on the wrong line. so i don't know if you're going to take my questions. host: go ahead. what question would you ask? caller: if mel labbe o'-- or his wife or ivanka, were faced with

pregnancy knowing the optics of donald trump, somehow, i doubt that they would -- somebody in their family that they would bring that pregnancy to term. this guy really has a habit of do as i say, and not as i do. he is a total hypocrite in every sense of the word. i would really like to see his face when the moderators ask him that question. host: the lead story is about the new "new york times" siena survey. always gets a lot of attention when it come outs. a survey of likely voters finds donald trump leading kamala harris 48% to 47%. that's within the polls, 3% point margin of error. there's a story coming about it. more than 1,600 likely voters

surveyed between september 3 and 6 in that poll. we already talked about january 6 and the issue of abortion. that poll taking a look at which candidate is more trusted on both those issues and two other that's come up a lot. on abortion, kamala harris is trusted more than donald trump, 54% to 39% saying that they think kamala harris would do a better job on that issue. on the issue of democracy -- again, these are all from the latest times siena poll that just came out. this is bruce in palm harbor, florida, independent. what questions would you ask tomorrow? bruce, are you with us?

caller: why -- how is the ex-president going to put in all these new or facts or why didn't he do that when he was president when that's so important to him? i don't think anything's changed in our country as far as the background, the fabric of america. that would be wit. and for kamala, i would say the same thing. you know, what's she going to do that hasn't been said or done before and how is she going to obtain those things? that's it. host: this is charles in south

carolina. caller: my question would be what -- why did he after all of these lawyers supposed to be smart, educating themselves, all these years and is justified representing a person that has no more or less, a person who finally admit hes on by a whisker. now, he look everybody in this country through all of that and all of a sudden, he says oh, i lost. so, people still want to support him. i'm just trying to figure out if -- what's the most important? is it your family or is this person themselves? i just don't get it. i think a lot of these -- can't read, comprehend. the alcohol is what has them. get off of that and -- [indiscernible] host: lee in south carolina. this is phillip, republican.

good morning. caller: yeah. thank you for taking my call. my question is about the border. i would ask kamala are we better off than we were four years ago? if her answer would probably be no, because if we were, we would be an illegal. thank you. host: spencer in l.a., independent. what question would you ask? caller: you got the same name and taken people's houses left and right and then doing the same thing and you've got these hackers taking people's money and they should do something about it. and i want to hear from both of those people who's running for president. host: you're talking about personal information security online? is that what you want to hear about? caller: yes. the hackers. they got hackers checking people with money and getting away with

it. and then i want to talk about, you know, my son got the same name. and he used all my information and take the house away from me. host: this is pat in willis, texas, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. host: what question would you like to ask? caller: ask kamala how fast could she send her -- using her immunity powers. host: and what do you think the answer would be, pat? caller: as soon as possible. we need to rid america of this. host: that's pat in texas. how do you think the democrats are going to do in texas this year, pat? caller: actually, i'm a precinct chairman in my county and it's looking kind of blue. the women are coming out really strongly. we have republican women that are no longer interested in

doing sent toed with the republican party. there's a huge uprising in texas. it would be different results. there's a lot of activity at the local level to replace a lot of blow level republicans. the women are coming out very strongly. ted cruz is a very likely person. host: what is the job of a precinct captain? caller: i support voters to get out and vote. and our polling shows a really strong awakening. they've been -- with the biden situation but once he steps aside, kamala stepped up. it's a huge outpouring. i'm not seeing very many trump

signs in my county. i see a lot of blue signs up. host: and where is -- caller: it's -- host: where -- what is the usual voting pattern of willis? caller: it's by make congo and it's north of houston and it's primarily a poorly educated republican community. [laughter] they vote against their own best interest all the time. host: that's pat. go ahead. finish your comment, pat. caller: it's changing. it's changing. host: pat in willis, texas, this morning. plenty of your comments via social media as well. what would you ask the candidates if you were the moderator in rrow night's presidential debate? this isrodoug in fair tax, virgin, saying i would like to

see kamala harris answer the question why she thinks she can fix the ony when her and biden have had the last four years in fix the economy and give the american people without give the american people the run-around. this is alfredo in michigan. if trump would accept the results from the election. and what is the presidential immunity ask harris if bidenomics is working, why does the economy need to be fixed? and one more from eric, what is your plan to revitalize industry and trade? so the question this morning, we just want to know what questions do you want to hear asked tomorrow? karen in wolf freehan state, republican. go ahead. caller: i would love for donald

trump to ask because i doubt the moderators will. did she ever mail money to the home of lauren or the owners, the c.e.o.'s of authentic campaigns to their personal home. i would like her to explain her stage campaign events and that openly discriminate against and hate republicans. i would also like her her to explain her ties in the brewing company in wisconsin who also openly discriminate against republicans. i would like for her to explain

her stance on immigration once and for her. is she the border czar? who is responsible for the brazilian woman who was murdered in northfield township michigan where she just visited, where joe biden just visited. nobody mentioned the woman's death. i wanted her to explain -- host: karen, that's several questions. you got several other people waiting. earl in charleston, south carolina, independent. what question would you ask tomorrow? caller: good morning. tomorrow, i would ask former president trump is there any case that he's clearly won where people have come out of and said yes, you are innocent. i know -- [indiscernible] and

then i would ask him why do you have to show american blacks that he -- don't quite liked them. who was he -- what is he trying to prove to people? he put on a show with that. and i would ask kamala what is she going to do about traveling around the country if she wins? would you truly feel safe traveling around the country and when is she going to come to south carolina if she wins? thank you. host: what do you mean about feeling safe traveling around the country? caller: well, you know, it's going to get real dangerous and stuff if she wins. it's a lot of people that, you know, just -- i mean, you see the news already. about people shooting on the

side of the road. there's been a lot of stuff said about kamala. and she got a lot of enemies and stuff. so, you know? i don't know. i hope she can win and be safe. host: carl in south carolina. blitz in south carolina, staying in south carolina. go ahead. caller: yes. good morning. i would like both of the candidates to answer the question what will be their policy on banning or getting rid of the sales of these weapons? it's not that people want to take away people's guns but these type of guns are the major source of a bunch of mass killings. so that's what i would like to know. what would be their policy on these assault weapons. thank you. host: wes in south carolina. this is from "new york"

magazine, a prereview the debate. taking a look at how each candidate is preparing. kamala harris is getting ready off the campaign trail at a hotel in pittsburgh. they write what she's been doing mock sessions with an advisor playing and reportedly, even dressing up as donald trump. part of the harris team strategy is to help trump defeat himself during the event which will be a lot harder without a mic of the mic will be turned off after the candidates answer their questions the story going into a bit more on harris's debate prep. and donald trump has done debate prep represented by matt gaetz. former democrat tulsi gabbard who went after harris during the 2020 primaries is also helping trump compare along with others according to politico. multiple reports, allies and

advisors have been warning him against launching personal attacks on kamala harris during that debate. that reporting again, from "new york" magazine. this is frank from texas, a republican. what questions do you want to hear asked tomorrow? caller: yeah, jon, i wouldn't mind asking her a few questions. one would i guess be how come she hasn't met with the gold star families of those 13 marines that were murdered because of her and biden's horrible decisions? she hadn't even met with them. with the gold star families. and also, i wouldn't mind asking how come she has not help biden stop the fentanyl that has brought in by china and the drug cartels bringing over this border down here has been going

on it's already killed 100,000 to 150,000 americans and she has done nothing to stop it. and i was also wondering how come she didn't influence or find a way to stop them chinese balloons crossing all the way from south america when they knew it was coming from almost 2,000 miles out in the ocean. they knew it was coming yet they allowed it to go all the way across america. and did nothing about it. and also i wouldn't mine asking her about why she stabs netanyahu who was a great, great leader in the back. they said they're going to help israel but at the same time, they stabbed netanyahu in the back. you know, he's trying to defeat those murdering killers from

hamas and hezbolla and they threaten him all the time about withholding equipment and all that stuff and when he's trying to do the right thing and destroy these killers. host: frank in texas. this is richard in california, independent. what question would you ask? caller: hey, i'm asking as a veteran. i was in the military from 1968 to 1972. i know a little bit more about the system. i want to ask trump, pumpkin head, what happened to the documents that went missing? the top secret documents that went missing? where did they go? what's they intend to it? were they going to return or has he already sold them or giving away to hide more credit secrets that he has? and if i can ask one more question. host: what's the second question

there, richard? caller: does he have anything -- to say other than stupidity? host: the moderators will ask that question? caller: kamala would debate to an empty podium and come up with -- they it wouldn't make any difference whether we're there or not or if she gotted in an empty podium because he doesn't make any sense. host: that's richard in california. back to kamala harris's last big turn on the debate turn. in 2000, the vice president debate, it was october 7 that she squared off with mike pence. this is talking about key moments and what she learned about kamala harris sitting there with the two of them and she goes to that moment several

times in which kamala harris tried to get mike pence to stop speaking over her. you'll remember her saying mr. president, i'm speaking. she said that at the nine-minute mark when he interrupted her answer about the trump administration's response to the covid-19 crisis. well, turf weigh in, pence began. i'm speaking. it was effective and presumably preplanned tactics that mr. vice president honorifics made him sound respectful. she knows that the ground was different with the candidate's microphone muted. it might do more to unnerve donald trump who has struggled to find a comfortable footing in challenging harris than what is shown against joe biden in. the 2020 debate, pence interjected the comment when harris was talking about taxes.

he begin i'm speaking, she repeated with a don't test me glare in his direction. if you want to read more, it's in "u.s.a. today." vernon, suffolk, virginia, democrat. good morning. caller: hi. how are youcaller: hi, how you ? host: doing well. caller: where are the veterans, how come and on the -- guessing the russia question on that, will they address that in the debate? host: what do you mean veterans outcomes? caller: yeah, like towards veterans that need assistance, like homeless in getting those benefits that are needed, when

they address that, when are they going to do anything about that? host: billy, hoosier state, good morning. caller: i like that bit about the deficit on kamala harris and joe biden and the democratic party, mainly it's on account of their the ones where if the democrats and republicans follow them the whole way with all of this candy, this $10 trillion spending effort after covid, we know that the covid was, was, was planned deal by the democrats. they, they, they funded it.

they funded almost $13 billion, $13 million, i mean, over, found she did, over in china. why was we involved in funding that in the wuhan lab over there? nobody seems to understand that the democrats is, is, is the main reason that we have the wars going on. they funded, they stopped all the sanctions on iran and let trump, trump ahead iran and almost broke. we wouldn't had any wars going on over there with israel.

host: all right, that's billy in indiana. good morning? both? caller: good morning. question for kamala, do you recommend that americans lock their front doors when they go to sleep at night? obviously, her answer should be yes. the following question should be -- then why do you keep the front door to america open at the borders and let people into our homeland? why do you do that? you failed at the border. simple question to all democrats, do you lock your doors at night? if you do, you are a hypocrite at the border, you are supporting people that like open borders. if they say they don't support locked doors, they are liars. they are either hypocrites or liars. host: any questions you would

like to hear asked to donald trump as several outlets have pointed out that this will be his seventh presidential debate? is there a new question for donald trump? >> i hadn't thought of one, but how about something like thank you for keeping inflation low during your presidency and tell us how you are going to do the same in your next presidency. host: do you think moderators do a lot of thinking and debates? caller: probably not. i just wanted to ask all the democrats if they lock their doors at night and if they do -- host: got your point. in this segment of "washington journal," we are asking what you want to hear in the debate. abc news is hosting the debate. we are simulcasting it on c-span two. we will have plenty of coverage

before and after that debate for you and it is expected to be another debate with a lot of viewers and eyeballs on it. the title for the most watched debate currently held by the 2016 contest between trump and clinton, it drew about 84 million viewers in their first debate. the other top watched debate is the 80 million who watched the 1980 debate between reagan and carter and the 73 million who viewed the first 2020 debate between biden and trump amid the pandemic. looking for your questions on soci media, patricia is writing in with two questions, what personal integry characteristics do you possess and have always guided you? what does patotm and fidelity mean to you? have you always put these practices into critical characteristics of the president in the usa?

one more for you, larry in new jersey, the question, why do we continue to support the netanyahu destructive and nonproductive response with no regard for the hostages? you can begin to text and tweet your questions. we hope that you will call as well on the phone lines for democrats. this is william across the river in alexandria, virginia. democrat, good morning. caller: to both candidates my question would be that it's been reported that social security will have a shortfall by 2030 five and benefits will have to be cut. i propose lifting the cap on all salary income. i would like to know if both of the candidates would support this action and if not, what would they do? no general answers, i want them to be specific. that would be my question to both candidates. host: you are not the only one

who has said no general answers, please be specific. do we get many specific answers from candidates at debates in the modern era? caller: no, all they say is i will save your social security, i won't let them, the other side, cut your social security. they've been doing this since reagan was president. he's the first one that was talking about social security shortfall and ever since, both sides have done zero. host: there will be no live audience at this debate, just like the trump biden debate in which joe biden subsequently left the presidential race. do you think that's a good thing or bad thing caller:, no audience? caller:it doesn't matter. the answers are what counts. that's just a distraction, people hooping and hollering. like i said, i would like specific answers and with no

audience that would save time with all the clapping and moaning. host: and the traditional audience -- moderators telling the audience to not respond and occasionally having to turn around and tell audience members not to do that, you think it is a distraction? caller: yes, it leads to grandstanding on both sides. they played to the audience. that is why there are no cameras and a lot of court rooms, people's are playing to the camera. host: do you think there should be cameras in the supreme court, william? caller: no, again, they perform as it is. having the audio is enough. people start performing. my wife was a court reporter and she said, she was a court reporter for 26 years. we believe, she believes that lawyers really do perform. if we put a camera on them, they get dressed up, new suit, new haircut. look at a d.a. when they make an

indictment. they perform, they get all new suits, long eyelashes, fingernails done, shined their shoes. they perform to the camera, they've been doing it forever and it would just get worse. host: not to go too much farther down this rabbit hole, but were cameras a good idea in congress? caller: yes, yes, in general yes, i watch c-span and in general, yes. but when you have those hearings? my goodness, they perform with the five minutes back and forth, each senator or representative getting to perform for five minutes? they should have one person on each side like in a court room, ask the questions, one person on each side. not everybody gets to make a little performance for five minutes. that is the biggest waste of time, it's annoying, but they love it, the politicians love

it. they get to perform for five minutes. host: william, thank you for the call. about 20 minutes left in this segment. conrad, philly, what question would you like to hear asked tomorrow night? caller: i would like to know from both candidates [indiscernible] lobby for them? seems like [indiscernible] not going to get nothing out of either one of them. host: i'm having trouble understanding, you are wondering if they work with lobbyists? caller: yeah, i was saying -- does anybody lobby for the people, the senior citizens working in walmart without enough money to pay their health care or they have to skip their medicine because they don't have enough money to pay? i just want to know, these two candidates, do they lobby for the people?

because it looks like walmart, mobil gas, electric company, all these corporations tell them what to do. they tell the politicians what to do. they write the bills. i'm saying this for both candidates. we don't have nobody lobbying for us. the only time they lobby for us is election time. once they get that, they don't come up. anything about your needs, have you heard any of them, trump, harris, biden, the people walking the concrete every day haven't really gotten anything from no president. the most they ever gave us was a stimulus check two years ago and when you got that on monday, comcast cable bill went up on tuesday. come down to the ground level. the only time they need it is election day. the day after that, they change their phone numbers. throw them all out. host: conrad in philadelphia.

yes, independent line, go ahead. >> good morning. i would pose my question strictly to president trump. my question would be, the rhetoric that he uses in his rallies to disparage democrats as being scum, as being a threat to this nation, if he is elected president, what does he expect all of those people who didn't vote for him, what does he expect those people to do? just to acquiesce to whatever the person decided they wanted to do?

will he threatened to go after them? host: annette, south holland, good morning. caller: my question for donald trump's why did the former president honor his oath of office when on january 6 he sat in his office and did nothing to stop the insurrection? i believe that was a dereliction of duty on his part and i would like to ask that question. host: do you think you will hear that question tomorrow? chance it will come up? caller: possibly. 50:50. host: what do you think about abc news? caller: i hope it does, no one has gotten an answer yet. he has refused to answer when it is posed to him. host: karen, u.s., florida, good

morning. caller: yes, hello. i have to say that i agree with a lot of the democrats. until someone told me to watch fox and newsmax. then i realize how much they were lying and manipulating the truth. when susan page praises kamala for her nice speaking, why isn't she speaking now? she's running from the press, saying what she wants. they are discussing frauds. and wake up, america. start watching the other channels. the press are liars. host: do you watch much of cnn or msnbc anymore? do you try to get a sense of what's being said in comparison? caller: yes. morning joe? morning joe is incredible.

the lies, the manipulation. you have two tune in to fox news and newsmax, alright? you are going to hear the truth. i want another debate. one is not enough. abc, fine, try fox news ok you coward? -- ok? you coward. host: donald trump has been on the debate stayed several times, but trump and harris have not met, this is not a rematch. this would be their first meeting on a debate stage and republican consultant, liz mayer , former spokesperson for the john mccain campaign, said that kamala harris and donald trump, having had no previous interactions, could play a role. the last time that a national debate of this magnitude took place with two candidates who genuinely did not know each

other was when sarah palin faced off against joe biden as they ran for vice president that year and you will recall that in st. louis, palin asked -- can i call you joe? due largely to her fumbling his last name and it made a big difference, he told usa today, looking back on that 2008 debate. there will be a lot of comparisons happening before, during, and after the debate. we will see what the reaction is, of course, and we will be covering it all on c-span. asking you this morning that if you were the moderator of the debate, what question would you ask the candidates? this is canon in louisiana, independent, good morning. caller: good morning to you, how you doing? host: doing all right. caller: i had no idea that they

were doing lobotomies in key west if you are only watching fox news? you don't have to interrupt me, i may get to it. host: let's not insult other callers. caller: it happens all the time but for some reason you don't correct them, you've got to be consistent, know what i mean, when it comes to people of color, especially, i would appreciate it if you tried. you don't have to wait to represent people of color. nonetheless, i would ask these three questions. one, have either of you ever had bone spurs and how were they treated? two, have either of you ever bankrupted a company? three, have either of you been convicted of a felony and inappropriately touched a woman? thank you. host: in louisiana, jill in iowa. democrat in woodward, iowa, go ahead. caller: i would like to ask him

what specific school district it was that he thinks is performing gender assigning surgery on students during the school day without their parents permission. i saw that comment the other day. the other thing i would like to ask him is what is patriotic about beating capitol police officers with a flagpole, which we can watch on video personally from january 6. then i would like to know why he is fueling transgender hate so much when, according to the ncaa, there were 40 transgender athletes out of 500,000 college athletes. you are really stirring up hate against a really small minority that doesn't need it. their life is hard enough. the other thing about watching fox, you know, just ask yourself

why didn't they show any of the speeches from republicans at the democratic convention? they started showing those rallies for all of those years and then when he started losing it, accusing biden of being off reality, they quit showing them. kind of interesting. host: that's jill in iowa. tar heel state, jeff, republican, good morning. caller: yes, before trump destroys kamala tomorrow night, i wanted to thank you and ask how all the idiot morand runs always vote for democrats with those sick in the head homosexuals and transgender's voting democratic? host: all right. this is lydia, new york. caller: i have a question for donald. why in 2020, if he knew that

there would be a deadly virus that would kill the american people, why did he keep that from us? he knew that we were going to die. the people [no audio] host: still with us? caller: that would be my question. host: all right, this is pam, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a couple of questions, here. i would like to say that i have always voted democrat, but i'm not doing it this time, i'm voting republican without a doubt. my question is, what are they planning on doing or how do you explain all of these missing children? over 300,000 children have just magically disappeared? from what i have heard host: -- what children are you talking about, pam? caller: the migrant children who

came across the border. host: when you say magically disappeared, what do you mean? caller: from my understanding, these miners that just came across the border, most of them unaccompanied, have just been bussed off to so-called sponsors in other states and now they are unaccounted for. what has happened to these children? the rumors i'm hearing are not good. host: that's pam, illinois. bruce, democratic line, good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to find out if the candidates could tell when and in what amount they would increase the federal minimum wage, which hasn't been raised since july of 2009. second question, do they plan on getting rid of daylight savings time in all states?

the third question has to do with the treasury department and whether or not it will ever issue denominations of $500 and 1000 -- $1000 bills again. thank you. host: i've got to ask, why are those second and third questions in your top three? caller: well, the reasons for daylight savings time seemed to be a very big waste of time. if people want to get up one hour earlier work two hours earlier, let them do it on their own time rather than having the nation set its clocks back, you know, in the fall in then spring forward in the spring. seems like a huge waste of time and energy that benefits no one. the farmers, if they want to get up and start raising crops one hour earlier, let them do it.

please don't punish the rest of us who have no desire to do so. host: and the large bill denominations? caller: well, we were told initially that harriet tubman would be on the $10 bill. this has not happened, because i think president trump when he was in office decided to veto that legislation. and then the next thing is a lot of people would like to see larger bills because many times rather than having 10 $100 bills, there could easily be a $1000 bill that you could receive at the bank. the same would be true for the $500 bill. host: kramer, maryland, independent, good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to ask kamala harris to define what a woman is. we are supposed to ask and

respect and understand what the transgender czar, even though they don't know what they are and what they want to be. second, would she donate her $400,000 family back into the kitty like trump did when he was in office? host: that was kramer in maryland. a few minutes left, a little bit more about the rules of the debate. we talked about some of this already. no opening statements, trump and harris are not allowed to ask each other questions. each candidate will only be allowed a pen, pad of paper, and water bottle at the identically sized podiums. no prewritten prop notes. candidates get two minutes for each answer and rebuttal, one minute for follow-ups and clarifications, responses. at the end of the debate they will have two minutes for a closing statement. trump will go last. he got to choose after winning a

pre-debate coin toss, apparently. arkansas, republican line, what question would you as tomorrow? caller: yes, sir, there's a question. i looked it up in research, online. i think harris was a call girl in college, wasn't she? host: what do you mean, stanley? caller: i think that's how she made her living? host: gary, go ahead to, what question would you ask? caller: i would like to ask both candidates to explain what a tariff is and how it works and how it would save money for the american consumer. thank you. host: donnie, north carolina, what question would you ask? caller: host: good morning. host:good morning, donnie. caller: i would ask miss harris

if she knows what article four, section four of the constitution says. i would ask every caller that. and i would ask you. host: you tell me, what is article four, section four? caller: every citizen in the united states is guaranteed a republican form of government. host: so, what do you mean by that? what do you think that means? caller: it means we are a republic, not a democracy, and i'm so sick about hearing about democracy. it makes me want to puke. host: what's the difference? caller: the difference is republican, you govern yourself, you don't have the government telling you everything to do, you govern yourself. whereas democrats is mob rule. the louder horn gets the noise. gets the attention.

the rest of the people suffer for it. that's why we are a republic. because people should govern themselves. the government is to protect our country from foreign and domestic problems. they are not in our dr., not in your everyday life and telling you how to breathe and how to live. i'm so tired of it. i'm just tired. i wish y'all would stop and tell the truth to the american people. i just do. host: when you say i wish you all would tell the truth, who is you all? caller: all of these callers? your station? every news station. it's hurry up, look over here so you don't really know what's going on. but in all in general it is the government trying to impose themselves on every aspect of

our life. you know, kids cannot even open a lemonade stand without a permit. it's ridiculous. that is not america. america is you make your way through the life the best you can, wherever you are. if you want something in this life, if you have aspirations, you work for it, you don't bank the government for it. host: donnie, jack -- josh, good morning, republican line. caller: i would ask two questions. from kamala, i would ask her to explain in detail what are the three main things that trump will do to destroy our democracy. for president trump i would ask -- how will reducing energy costs help the american citizens and the world? thank you.

host: time for maybe one more call. jack, the buckeye state. what question would you ask, if you could ask a question tomorrow night? caller: i would ask president trump why he changed his position on abortion. he boasted about how he had changed it. how he was responsible for the antiabortion act or bill. and today he, he's changed his position on it. host: how much do you think we will hear about abortion tomorrow? caller: well, i think it will probably be a subject that brings a lot of controversy and we will probably get a hold lot of questions about it. i think it's a major issue in this debate. host: that's jack in ohio, our

last caller in this segment of the "washington journal" this morning. today, congress is back from its august recess and we have another potential government shutdown looming in a matter of weeks and we will get a preview of what's ahead for congress with a capitol hill reporter. later, senior reporters deliver investigations on the assassination attempt on former president trump. around, will be right back. >> watched the abc news presidential debate simulcast live tuesday on c-span two at the candidates go head-to-head in their first debate since securing the party nomination. coverage begins with a preview

show at 8:00 p.m. followed by the debate at 9:00 p.m. eastern. the abc news presidential debate simulcast live tuesday on c-span 2. c-span, powered by cable. attention middle and high school students across america, it's time to make your voice heard. the studentcam documentary contest is here. this is your chance to create a documentary to inspire change, raise awareness and make an impact. your documentary should answer the question your message to the president, what issue is most important to you for your community, whether you're passionate about politics, the environment, or community stories. studentcam is your platform to share your message with the world. with 100,000 dollars in prizes including a break -- grand prize of $5,000 this is your

opportunity not only to make an creativity and hard work.or your scan the code or visit studentcam.org for all the details how to enter. the deadline is january 20, 2025. the house will be in order. >> c-span celebrants 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979 we figure primary source for capitol hill, providing balanced, unfiltered coverage of government. taking you to where policy is debated and decided all with the support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting powered by cable. washington journal continues. host: when congress is in session would like to take a look ahead on capitol hill and to do that we are joined by our

capitol hill reporter. on government funding and a potential shutdown again with september 30 at the deadline, the house has so few workdays between now and then. what needs to happen in that time to avoid another shutdown scenario? >> friday house republicans released the bill to continue funding until march, and it would include the safe act with republicans, especially conservatives have been pushing for. we heard senator schumer yesterday saying it is kind of a nonstarter. democrats are looking for kind of a three month deal to push things to negotiate. they are in a fight between chambers. >> the safeguard american voter eligibility act, it requires proof of citizenship to register to vote in july. 198 mostly partisan party-line

vote, democratoong in favor. no senate lanned as of yet. it wroduced by chip roy. why is this suddenly joining in on a government funding bill? >> republicans kind of forth of the senate hand on this as an important topic. warning when you are not a citizen is already illegal so there is kind of a redundant l and nonstarter for them definitely something that conservatives would be pushed on. host: so if it is a nonstarter, then what happens with that said, 30 deadline? guest: keep in getting the republican bill through the house maybe kind of a challenge. we will see if they're able to get enough votes tonight and i'm sure there will be kind of a standoff between chambers and that is what some moderate republicans would probably expect.

if you days to go, so we will see how it all pans out. >> explain some of these terms. when you say they are going to with it tonight, what does that mean? >> try to encourage members to get behind the legislation, get a fuller picture. >> and you reported on mitch mcconnell and the save act of this legislation. how was he factoring in? >> i think they know that it is not going to go anywhere over there. eventually we will probably see a cr that ends up passing the house. host: again, when you talk about the length of the cr, there is no limit yet on how long they should go on for. they can essentially the government run on autopilot previous funding levels. why are the sides not agreeing on the timeframe?

guest: republicans like to punt it to next year, conservatives said they would like to see a more conservative deal. democrats would like to see things punted to december. if there is a lame-duck fight, they feel like they can get more wins out of that. >> why do democrats feel like they can get more out of a lame-duck fight? >> feeling bullish on where things stand with where harris is in the election. right now this timeline is their best for negotiating things out. right now they've got democratic control of the senate and republican are feeling good about picking up seats in the senate. that could be a factor. host: congress is back in at the august recess. 3:00 p.m. eastern for the senate coming in. we are talking about what is happening ahead. we like to do this on mondays when congress is in session. (202) 748-8000 free democrats.

(202) 748-8001 republicans. independent, (202) 748-8002. science potentially putting up a government shutdown which the they business, what else is congress looking to do before they go home until election day? guest: it is china week, and bills. it's unclear whether that is going to get through there, but that they focus definitely as long to be for sure on the government funding. last night we saw the house foreign affairs committee released the afghanistan report, so that will be a big focus today, something they are hoping to bring up ahead of november. also the trump shooting investigative committee are hoping to hold hearings this month, so a whole array of issues there. host: no lack of stories to write about. you wrote yesterday about this afghanistan report. who put it out and what is new

about this report? guest: michael mccall put out this report, and this is kind of the culmination of a three-year investigation were initially, during the palau from afghanistan, there were some bipartisan concerns. republicans feel that there wasn't enough coordination and planning before pulling out troops, that it is responsible for the deaths of 13 service members and things could have been handled much differently where it could have gone smoother. >> one of their republican investigators on the house foreign affairs committee ended up resigning from the committee as congressman mccall wasn't doing enough to hold the military leadership responsible, that he was focusing more on the political side of it. will that be addressed in this

report, did this report have more focus on the military leadership when it came to pullout? >> i've talked to chairman mccall about it, he wanted to make sure that it was a fair and nonpartisan investigation, so the report would be taken seriously. that was a big concern for him. host: a 354 page report, is it available for anybody to read right now? guest: they made it public last night, and it touches on an array of issues. host: how does the reporter cover that when a page -- 354 page report gets drop and you got to cover that? guest: looking for the highlighted talking to members about it. host: can you give members on the phone on a sunday night or is that something that the committee wants their members to come out and talk about? guest: it was definitely a lot of texting last night. host: is that one of the main

way to communicate with members these days? guest: for sure. host: as they are texting and things are happening, referred some frustration from leadership when that happens we are talking about the had in washington. it is actually the month ahead, looking ahead to the end of september and that potential government shutdown (202) 748-8000 four democrats. (202) 748-8001 four republicans. (202) 748-8002, independents. this is elaine in connecticut, republican. you are up first. caller: i was just wondering, i was watching c-span which i watch a lot, and liz cheney was being interviewed and i think her and her father should put their hats on and go back home and stay home.

what she did was she said trump was a pig on national tv and i said isn't there any censorship? i think she has so much hatred in her heart, and she isn't a republican because i am republican and i don't think like her. it's so bad. i mean, she switched to the democratic party, that's what she did i think it is just a sin the way they pick on trump because obama, clinton, and the whole bunch of them all did the same thing and biden in afghanistan, 13 a very young, wonderful men. lona i mean, politics is just getting to be too much. host: when you say the term isn't there any censorship, can you explain what you mean when you say isn't there any censorship? that is not something we hear a lot from people. what do you want to censor?

caller: to call trump a pig? host: so you are just saying insults should be censored, people should be here when somebody old another person. -- insult another person. caller: i don't think you should insult somebody like that like if residents. host: that his grace in connecticut. the cheney endorsement of kamala harris, any reaction that you saw on capitol hill. guest: a lot of republicans say they don't feel it is going to move the needle, they long had a contentious relationship. we heard liz cheney kind of come out and say that her father would also endorse kamala harris and they were kind of hoping it was moderate and swing voters that would move things toward their direction. host: this is usa today, one of

the colonists. a liberal in good standing and i never imagined i found myself admiring the good sense of former republican vice president dick cheney. he talks about that endorsement. he said together, dick cheney and liz cheney creek information structure for other republican voters to back harris and more importantly for them, read the party of donald trump. democratic reaction to the cheney endorsement? guest: i think they are very excited about it. you will see her point to her former criticisms of the vice president, the primary and her losing matt, but democrats, her father is obviously prominent figure may feel that her voice is a very important one to have out there. it could push moderates and swing voters toward voting for democrats in november. host: abdul in california, independent. good morning.

caller: good morning. i am just now seeing what is going on with michael mccall. and you know what, after 20 years, we fought them there and over 50,000, almost 38 countries were involved. why bring this issue back? people don't want to fight. somebody can answer it because in the united states, over

100,000. you know who are they? i know personally a lot of them. $100 million, these people. we support them. these are republicans. young people get blown up day and night for 20 years. host: got your point. to give you some background on this report, asking about why mccall is coming up with this report now. guest: this has been under investigation for three years and they interviewed a number of administration officials and subpoenaed a number of documents. he said he will continue to do everything in his power to get secretary blinken to testify and they will be a press conference later today were you supposed to walk through more findings. host: let's walk viewers through the cover of this report.

house republican interim report, a strategic failure assessing the administration about, stand rall. above that are two pictures, one from the withdrawal from afghanistan, one from the withdrawal from vietnam. the quote underneath it saying people being lifted off the roof of the embassy according to president joe biden on july 8, 2021, and then they put those pictures side-by-side. and then below the title of the report, including secretary of state antony blinken. whatever happened in afghanistan, deterioration and security, we have discussed this before. i do not think it is going to be something that happens from a friday to a monday, but i would not necessarily equate the departure of forces in july or august or early september with some kind of deterioration in the situation. that in june and of the

evacuation in august. and this from mark milley, more likely than not to develop over the course of time that will allow some reconstitution of al qaeda and or isis. put this into context what they are trying to highlight. >> one of the major themes is republicans of the criticized the white house and the state department and the acting ambassador to afghanistan for not heeding the warnings from the pentagon arguing that they should've had more of a plan sooner amid the evacuation plan in the days leading up to it. i think that is kind of a major theme they are going to lean into. they put this report out there to try to get it in the media. host: what is the covid test story? guest: the ambassadors her

testimony from some of his staff that after the evacuation happened, the ambassador had tested positive for covid and proceeded to allegedly have a staffer take a test for him since he was still testing positive. host: this is ross wilson at the time. guest:guest: something that republicans are highly -- something that republicans are highly criticizing. that kind of further demonstrated with a field was a lack of leadership. guest: i reached out, he has not gotten back to me yet. host: this is kathy in pennsylvania, republican. you are up next. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i just want to know why congress was allowed to go on vacation with the looming shutdown of the

government. to me that is just ridiculous. they need to do their job. thank you. guest: they were kind of trying to work their way percent of the spending bills, the individual spending bills and get their work done and ultimately they didn't have the support there. congress traditionally has their august recess to go back and hear from their constituents and do district work. so they are fact, they are hoping to get it done in the next few weeks. host: how far did they get through their homework, as it were, their spending bills? with the house being controlled by republicans, the senate by democrats, was there ever a serious pass for the normal process, the regular order? guest: a handful of them, the ones that were able to get to the house were never reconciled with the senate. just a lot of anticipation for

the past few months now. host: who are going to be the main voices to keep the government open or shut it down? guest: i think it will be a lot of schumer and johnson trying to get things done now that the house and senate appropriations kind of put out there bills. host: can on a potential shutdown, there was a mention of this happens, republicans used to get blamed for a government shutdown. why is that? guest: sometimes the conservatives say it doesn't give them quite as much heartburn as democrats and more moderate members, but i talked to a lot of moderate republicans especially in a tough election year who are concerned about that and confer assurances that that won't happen, that they are not going to be here october 3, and they definitely need those votes. host: the washington times today, the headline of the

piece, the save act or shut down. the save act is that legislation being proposed where you have to present idea when you register to vote. and this is what the editorial board of the washington times rights more levelheaded realized that failure to pass appropriations legislation is less consequential now than it has ever been in the past, the largest are on autopilot and several employees sent home during a shutdown know that they will automatically receive full back pay whenever the government reopens. most americans will be affected by a shutdown and they likely have no idea how broken the voter registration in this country has become. leveraging the situation can lead to some needed change, an argument for a potential shutdown. how big is that voice inside the republican conference? guest: you will also talk to republican to note that shutdowns could be more expensive than keeping government open and that government employees say they do

feel that not having a paycheck, especially in the month leading up to the election can be a huge problem for them. host: austin texas is next, line for democrats. question or comment. caller: yes. my question i have, what happened with afghanistan, trump is partly responsible for that also, because he negotiated with the taliban by himself without afghanistan's president or anybody else. so the failure of pulling out on the biden administration was a failure to, because he had to pull the people out. so trump is also responsible for that action. they need to understand that. thank you. guest: i've spoken to democrats

and you will hear from democrats in the white house was a trump kind of laid the groundwork there and i think there will be a lot of blame cast on him. a report shortly after the withdrawal kind of made a similar argument. host: yesterday, how often does it mention donald trump. guest: not much. i need to do a deeper dive today . host: is there discussion about the negotiation leading up to the biden presidency guest: and withdrawal? it definitely does a deeper dive into the biden administration. host: idaho, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. this morning what i would like

to get is a question on here. we are talking about a government shutdown over the appropriation bill. i don't think anybody out here understands that every time, every penny they are talking about is going to be borrowed money. they run on a $2 trillion deficit which encompasses every nickel that we spend on the direct operating cost of the united states of america for one year. right now, the united states is in the latter stages of an economic death spiral. in 2023 we spent $700 billion on interest. 2024 is going to be $1.1 trillion. he rolls over and rolls over and rolls over. and not one question in your previous segment for the

candidates even getting close to asking that question. host: i think there is one that talked about debt and deficit but to take your point, what you think needs to happen here ahead of this particular funding fight, or do you think it is going to be the same old? caller: every nickel they are going to stand is going to be borrowed. in 2023 we only took in $4.4 trillion, of which we spent $3 trillion on mandatory spending. host: i've got $5 trillion being taken in in revenue this year, but the federal budget deficit approaching $1.9 trillion, you add up all the deficits over time, that is the total of u.s. national debt. currently $35 trillion. the u.s. debt clock is where you can go for those numbers. anything you want to comment on

from that? guest: the topline numbers are still kind of being negotiated out. a resolution kind of keeps spending levels at the same level. host: texas, independent, good morning. >> thank you, c-span, for taking my call. i wanted to clarify some comments i heard about that afghanistan thing and that includes a little historical thing. and that went back four presidents. we can go back four presidents and our government that that war went on. in the middle estimate of money spent in the war is $2 trillion. and if you take that, that middle estimate and you divide how much we spent per month, we were spending $9.6 billion per

month to run that war. i understand that a lot of people want to paint everything with a big political brush, but we can't overwrite the fact that how much money we spend, how many lives we lost over that 20 year war and what we gained, which was basically nothing for anybody, and probably, nobody ever says this and, like your guest to comment on this, biden probably could see what was coming down the road and knew that we couldn't be involved in ukraine and we couldn't be involved in all the other conflicts we are involved in in the middle east. look at what is going on in the middle east. he can probably see what is coming down the road and that is why he acquiesced to what trump wanted to do and what trump had negotiated and we have to get out on the date that trump had negotiated. remember also that trump wanted

to bring those negotiators to camp david. that was the original plan. i'd like your guests to comment on all those things. host: we will certainly let her do that. have you ever heard of the cost of war project? caller: no sir, i haven't. is it something i can find online? host: it certainly is. google cost of war project. it is out of the watson innertube -- institute in brown university. what you were talking about is a lot of what they go into, trying to find a summary of the cost of the war that had happened since 9/11. just some of the summary for you, over 940 thousand people have died in post-9/11 wars that have taken place to direct war violence and 38 million people have been refugees or displaced persons. it federal price tag is over a

trillion dollars in the u.s. government is conducting counterterrorism activities in some 78 countries around the world. and a lot of what they do is trying to account for these things. something you might be interested in reading. guest: i just know that we have people fighting right now. sailors and airmen fighting right now for us overseas. i don't how you can classify it as part of the price of being a superpower. i have a grandson serving in the military right now and they couldn't be prouder of him, but i think that is part of the thing of being an american. we have to do what we can to support our troops and i not sure all about -- about all of that. thanks for taking my call. look forward to hearing what your guest has to say. guest: the white house has been

adamant the field bringing troops home and out of afghanistan with the right decision. that is kind of where they stand on that and i think you will continue to hear from republicans they created a national security risk by document and what is behind and it kind of leaves a gap in intel gatherings. host: john from memphis, tennessee. democrat, last caller in this segment. caller: good morning, c-span. my question for today is will congress try to -- bigger for trump and knowing that he is not capable to run this country? will they do a better job the

rest of the year, because they've been nothing all year. thank you. guest: i had a hard time hearing the first part of that question. caller: he wants to know if congress will do better about how they speak about donald trump. guest: congress and the house of representatives, they all kind of got their opinions and we will see how the rhetoric continues. host: who are the one or two or three members of congress that you want to talk to first when they come back here? guest: i will be looking at leadership and see what the latest is. kind of see with the big plans are for the week. host: you can read about it and the coverage of it in axios. we always appreciate your time. guest: thanks for having me.

guest: host: coming up in about 40 minutes on the washington journal, we are going to take you deeper dive into the various investigations around the assassination attempt on former president trump. until then, it is our open forum. any public policy or political issue you want to talk about, phone lines are yours to do so. go ahead and start calling in now and we will get to your call right after the break. >> this is the second in a two-part series with a washington-based attorney who has written books on george marshall and louis johnson. now comes his fourth book which focuses on franklin roosevelt's final days through the sudden transition to the presidency of

harry truman. spending the years 1944 to 1948, his newest book looks at the struggles of a relatively unknown missouri senator harry truman who had served the u.s. as vice president for only 82 days before fdr's death on april 12, 1945. >> ascend to power on this episode of book notes plus. book notes plus is available on the free c-span now mobile app or wherever get your podcast. >> since 1979 in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress from house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated in decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely

unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> if you ever miss any c-span coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights. these point of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on selected videos. this tool makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on point of interest. washington journal continues. host: is where we are on capitol hill today. the house is in at noon eastern, the senate at 3:00 p.m. eastern. coverage on c-span and c-span two. gavel-to-gavel, that is always

when they come in. other events happening today that you can watch, the center for global development at the university of chicago having a discussion on the pandemic and climate repaired miss. -- climate preparedness. that is what we are going to go to after this program. also, connecticut senator christopher murphy discusses geopolitical challenges facing the u.s. at an event hosted by the atlantic council. that discussion, 11:30 a.m. over on c-span 2 and c-span.org and the free video app. with that, it is open forum. any public policy issue, any political issue you want to talk about, now is the time to call in. (202) 748-8000 democrats. (202) 748-8001 republicans. independents, (202) 748-8002.

we will start in oregon, line for republicans. good morning. >> good morning. i wanted to put out there when i heard on tv this week about kamala harris in san francisco when the children were being sexually assaulted by priests, and the victims were contacting her asking for help and she completely ignored them so the sexual assault continued. host: on tv where? caller: i'm not sure which station it was for one of the victims was joey and he said she just completely ignore their questions and they were begging for help, so i just wanted to put that out there. host: what station do you normally watch, where you likely have heard that story? caller: i want all of them. i cycle them.

i get all the news. thanks. host: john in pennsylvania, democrat, good morning. john, are you with us? bob, arlington texas, independent. caller: good morning. i want to say that i was amazed last month when the democrats were leaving that convention up in chicago and they were singing that merle haggard song about drinking free bubble up and eating rainbow stew. seriously, i'm worried about the selection, and what i'm worried about is the fact that the press is going to give democrats a free pass. they are just going to joke about biden hiding in the basement. well, kamala is hiding in open

forums. she's absolutely ignoring everything and it is amazing that everybody ignores it. the press needs to give up their credentials if they don't do the job that they should. host: if there any press that you trust? caller: the only person i trust is brian lam and i've been trusting him for 30 years. some this just a jerk. i used to live in houston, they are just real estate developers and such that are just jerks. he had the money to back of his message and he was willing to do it. most people don't do that but we have been trusting the press for too long and this absolutely none of them that are credible. host: here's what the new york

times says about the state of the race right now. their survey that is very closely watched, that national poll of likely voters, within a three-point margin of error saying that is largely unchanged from the poll taken in late july just after president biden dropped out of the race. a little bit more into that survey, 28% of likely voters said they felt they needed to know more about kamala harris while only 9% said they needed to know more about donald trump these voters when taken with the 5% of voters who said they are undecided or to lean toward either major party candidate paint a portrait of an electorate that could be more fluid than it seems right now. some said that they still hope to learn more before solidifying their decisions and two thirds of both who want to know more said that they were eager to

learn about the policies specifically and we will see how many questions she ain't donald trump get about their policies in tomorrow nights highly anticipated debate that takes place at 9:00 p.m. eastern at the national constitution center in philadelphia. abc is the hostweill be simulcasting at on c-span 2 and also taking your phone calls and talking about the debate bot before and after words on our c-span networks. so hope you join us tomorrow night for that. the debate itself, 9:00 p.m. eastern. maryland, democrat, good morning. >> good morning and thanks for taking my call. i'm a published journalist and my question today would be for miss kamala harris. i'm a registered democrat. i do plan on voting for kamala harris over trump, however i do have some concerns about censorship and freedom of

speech, freedom of the press. recently, i heard kamala harris's on the potential of banning trump's x account. trump says a lot of vile things, and as long as he's not inciting violence or making actionable threats on his account, i see no reason to censor his opinions, his voice. has he done it the past? he definitely has. but if we go ahead and censor this guy it just makes him a martyr. so i really do have concerns about kamala harris and at large overall, the democratic party taking initiatives and making moves to censor people. i'd like to ask people this question, is it free speech if there is a consequence to it? that is all i have to say.

thank you for taking my call. host: you are a published journalist, what kind of journalism the you do, political reporting, local news? caller: usually political op-ed reporting. i haven't done it in a while but my latest piece was in the afro newspaper, it was called biden and african-american voters. it was about how i did plan to vote for biden and i did vote for biden, but i had concerns about him taking the black vote for granted. host: so you do more opinion writing. caller: yes sir. host: what is your response to those viewers not just today who have called in, but we did a whole hour on the future of journalism last friday when ag sulzberger of the new york times published that op-ed in the washington post. what is your response to the viewers who say that the press has become too opinionated, that

it opinion journalism now, not the type of news they say they want? >> the press is definitely too opinionated, but i tried to call in on friday regarding this, all you have to do as a reader and american is look to the press of communist or dictatorship countries. yeah, our press lacks a lot, it has a long way to go and it is too opinionated, but if you visit the press outlet for these timeliness countries, just be grateful for what we have in america. in china, every single story they publish about the chinese government has to be positive, it has to be spun in a positive light. same for cuba. every single story that they publish, it has to paint the government in a positive light.

so while i press over here can be crappy, c-span is great because it is not opinionated. these other countries are not even able to speak ill of their government and the press. so i do appreciate that about what we have here, and yes, we do have a long way to go as journalist. i hate seeing typos and professional newspapers, but we have a lot to be grateful for in this country because we are allowed to criticize our government. host: do you make a living as an op-ed writer, journalist alone? caller: i probably could, i am a freelancer. i only do it now just to prove that i've still got it, like musselman and then i just work a day job but one of these days i may make a push to do it full-time. host: what is your day job? caller: a little bit of this, a little bit of that. host: republican out of new york, good morning.

caller: i just like you critique your interviewer. she didn't go into detail about what was in the shore act. she said that the reason the democrats are against it is because it is redundant. if it is redundant and it doesn't mean anything, then why take it out? the reason that the democrats want to take about this because there's enforcement provisions in that installation. there is cheating going on regarding registration, there will be prosecution involved, and also i want to critique what you said about afghanistan. there were provisions in the agreement that trump made with the taliban that they were certain things that they had to meet, certain requirements before the americans with pullout, and the afghani's did not live up to that part of the

agreement, so president biden had every authority to say no, we're not going to go along with this, and he didn't because he wanted to pullout on the anniversary of 9/11. that is where the failures are with the media. the devil is in the details, and it's very important that these details be decided for the american people so they understand exactly what is going on. host: i think you are referring to the save act, to safeguard american voters. caller: you are correct, that's right, i'm sorry. host: a question about whether this is going to be an issue that caused a government shutdown, do you think this is important enough to potentially shut the government down over? for go to the mat on this ahead of that funding deadline? caller: i think they should.

we've now just let in over 10 million illegal aliens, and supposedly there were already 12 million illegal aliens here in the country, and for instance, the state of virginia encouraged i think 6000 voters that were illegally registered in virginia. and texas also. so when you're talking about elections where a few thousand votes make a difference in whether somebody wins or loses, it's very important. that's why this should be passed and i think the republicans should go to the mat with it because it is very important for this upcoming election for president. thank you. host: this is michael in oklahoma, independent. go ahead, michael, you are in wilburn.

caller host: host:: yes, sir. what is your question or comment? caller: my comment as we are going from bad to worse with kamala harris for the last four years. telling us biden was sharp as a tactic he was lame as a dock, that is all. you have a good day. host: mississippi, this is rose, democrat. caller: good morning. host: >> on your mind? caller: i'm calling this morning because i'm just so tired of all of these republicans getting online talking about democrats this and democrats that. it's just that we need to stick together and, live this end, labatt. we know anybody that has done as much as trump does not need to be in the white house and so that's what we need to think about.

and people that are in the middle class, whether you are white or black, you had better think before you vote because he doesn't care anymore about you if you are right that he does me, and i'm black. that's what i wanted to say. host: rose in mississippi. about 20 minutes left in the open forum. interesting story from the wall street journal today, and story noting that a judge on friday cleared the way for americans placing bets on the outcome of congressional elections via a prediction market startup, opening the door to legalize wagers on u.s. elections. u.s. district judge at the district of columbia sided with a start of company and throughout a 2023 decision by the commodity futures trading commission that had blocked that company from this congressional control contract. the company will make it

congressional control contract available to users for trading this week and will move quickly to lift other kinds of political event contracts according to one of the cofounders of the company. so betting on the outcome of congressional elections. this is lonnie, also in mississippi, republican. caller: how are you? host: doing well, what is on your mind? caller: the abortion issue. host: ok. caller: i believe that anyone that has an abortion, you are killing, killing is murder. if you do not have the abortion, you're going to have a baby. and when you don't deliver this baby, that is killing. so anyone that believes in the 10 commandments cannot have an abortion with a heart.

and also, if you do, how could that person put their hands on a bible, the sworn into office if you do not believe in the 10 commandments? how can anyone vote for someone that does not believe that way? that's my question. host: how much do you think we are going to hear about abortion tomorrow night at the debate? >> i don't know, but i would like trump to ask this question. if she's going to place her hands on the bible, if she does, why? if you don't believe in the commandments, that is what the bible says. host: got your point. that is lottie in mississippi. jimmy, independent. >> i'm calling into say i am not voting for trump or the moderate

republicans. donald trump went to the police union and said watch out for the killing that is going to happen. watch the cheaters in this election. mr. trump, you've got 34 felonies. you like to make fraud against banks. he started in insurrection. you are dividing this country and we all have the same organs. just different skin color. so why are you creating all these problems among american people? we are one shift, there are no separate shifts. we are all here in america, we are all americans i used to be a

republican when reagan was in office, but no way in hell i would vote for donald trump. thank you. host: that's jimmy in michigan. this is the story you may have seen in other news outlets as well. former president trump accepting the endorsement of the nation are just lease union, indicating he would pursue policies to bolster police immunity and encouraging the use of stop and frisk, the fraternal order of police national board of trustees is who trump was addressing that day. this is richard in san diego, democrat, good morning. you are next. richard, are you there? then we go to wanda in california, republican. go ahead. caller: i was thinking about

e.g. care, i think she is -- e.g. carol, i think she is a big liar. people always talk about trump and women but they never talk about kamala and willie brown who was a married man. and i have a question for c-span. how often is axios on c-span or quoted on c-span? it seems like every day to me. why don't you quote somebody else, why don't you have tucker carlson on? i think he with excellent guest. host: you can actually search the amount of times he had news organization on because all of their videos are available at c-span.org and the free c-span video library. you are brought him to do that at any point. this is ronald and oyster bay, new york, republican. morning.

caller: morning. first, i'd like to ask you a question regarding your location, there. the red carpet that you have there we broadcast from, does that show a map of washington, d.c. area? host: it is a map of washington, d.c., thanks for noticing. the potomac river down there. yes. >> the comment i would like to make that unfortunately, i do not think that c-span is nearly as objective as they claim to be. in other words, regarding elections to my knowledge, not one time did you ever have a guest saying yes, i believe that the 2020 election was genuinely

fraudulent to the extent that it affected the outcome host:. i've interviewed people on this program that have said that. caller: well, if that is the case, i really commend you for that, because i think it is important, really, to have things totally unfiltered. and i think that is excellent that you did that. i wasn't aware of it. also, covid, my knowledge he didn't have any doctors that were talking about the dangers of the vaccine. at the time you only had the conventional view that this was safe, wasn't going to cause problems, it would help people without any unfortunate side effects. that was not the case. host: i guess i would say i remember segments in which we interviewed people who were concerned about side effects and

concerned about the effectiveness of vaccines. when you have a seven day a week program that is three hours a day and guests on every day, you're probably going to have a guest that has said pretty much everything at some point. it is hard to say we've never had a guest on that has said x, y or z. i bet you can go into our video archive and find somebody saying that. you are concerned about objectivity? caller: oh, yes. and by the way, this woman blindly points out that the heritage foundation asked about whether they expect to have a free and fair election coming up. they said the changes r0. it is a shame because unless we have people checked for citizenship, voting with paper

ballots, no computers, then we will be able to trust her. india has a billion people and they voted in one day. and unfortunately as long as we have this totally corrupt system that we have now, we won't be able to trust the results because they can be hacked, and they have been. host: do you plan to vote? caller: yes i do. host: you're calling on the republican line, i'm assuming that you are going to vote for donald trump? caller: i think that's a good assumption. host: did you trust the result of the election in 2016 when donald trump won? caller: yes i did. yes i did. it was such a surprise and such a surprise to people.

they didn't expect that to happen. host: you don't sound like he trusted the result of the election in 2020, correct? caller: that's correct. host: did you trust the results in 20 in which republicans won the races? caller: i'm not sure. i'm not sure about that. host: you think some republicans won in 2020 and democrats actually had more votes, is that what you are saying? caller: that may have been the case in some instances. there's so much that has been going on with hacking and despite computer companies saying no, we don't have people from the internet coming on, unfortunately they do. they have had and they will

have. host: that is ronald new york. this is thomas in maryland, democrat. good morning. -- go ahead, sir. caller: good morning. the way that the debate is being portrayed, it's being portrayed as, like, kamala harris doesn't have strength or intelligence, and that donald trump is just going to walk all over her. we know for a fact that women in this country are dominating in almost every area of politics, business, medicine, education, even in the military. so, i would like just to ask you , like when most of the republicans call in, they have a

negative spin or will go back into the past and talk about afghanistan or whatever. this is 2024. i'm not even going to talk about trump's crimes or alleged crimes, because everybody in the united states has their own opinion. but this election here is not even about joe biden. it's about kamala harris and donald trump. we must not forget the fact that that is what the election is about. it's not about the side issues. the economy is going strong, we all know that. we all know that prices are up and we all have a different opinion about why they are up. we all want them to come down,

you know? we also know that a president cannot say, "sell a car for $40,000," in the car company will do that. a president cannot say -- drop the price down. we all know that presidents don't set prices in this country. we know that. we have been in this economy and in this type of capitalist country and nation for years. we all -- prices went up every year since i was a little boy. i mean, i can remember when you could call on the phone for $.25. pay phones. we have to be willing to accept that we are changing for the better, not for the worse. that's thomas in maryland. jean, independent line, good morning.

good -- caller: good morning, god bless you guys. the people calling and who would like to hear questions in the debate, i don't, the money, i can't even believe it. my most important thing this year in this election and has been for the last 3.5 years, i am in an organization called zoe international trying to find the missing children. i think it was january 27 of this year. they talked about the half-million that came across the border. according to the government there were 485,343. internationally, it's 46 point one million, billion, i lose the b's and m's.

25% of these children are less than six years of age. we have found houses where children less than 10 years old were being prostituted. when someone tells me they care about the children, i have lobbied people, written letters, and except for a few, no one is talking about this. i would like to hear an answer. at least someone on your show could come talk about this. it reminds me in the bible of the story of rachel. the children were no more, not only the children have been smuggled. our children, our young people are being told the most vicious lies. i pray for all of our children. these children have been trafficked and are in serious condition. a lot of them will never make it. thank you. host: you mentioned an organization you are involved

with, how did you get involved in the organization? what was your inspiration to start working on this issue? caller: because that is what the lord tells me to care about, the least among us. i started searching around to see who is looking for these children and we do actually have some, now, i don't do republican democrat, people are who they are, god decides in the end, but i talked to some republican people, a senator out of tennessee, and our own local congressman helped me find this information. it is not only zoe international. there are many groups out there. there is actually a pastor in a large church in texas, i just found this out from a local parishioner that is raising money to buy these children from the cartel. they found that some of them

have been sold five times or more and they are buying these children. this is what we need to focus on, but life of our children. we will always be arguing about the money. we will always be 11th hour on that. our children, we need to focus on our children. again, i say god bless you and thank you. host: from pennsylvania to irving, texas, james, republican, good morning. caller: i'll be interested if trump changes his views on biden mott -- biden mx.. -- bidenomics. i went to the grocery store, the prices have skyrocketed in texas, at least in my reach. i use my, the comments that i

use on my sister -- host: all right, democratic line, good morning. caller: i just want to remind the people that call in every day that the immigrants that were coming in to the united states did not attack the capital, ok? until that is settled, we will have this problem. also, the biggest problem we got is capitalism. capitalism is ok. but you have to control it. just like you want to control the social programs, you got to control capitalism, ok? make it right for everybody. host: what's the right way to control capitalism? caller: the right way?

congress controls it. that's their job. host: ok. that's miguel. this is scott. seattle, republican. good morning, just about eight minutes left in open forum. caller: hello. c-span? host: yes. caller: what are, when you read the article on gambling, i've been putting together, you know, trump has been carrying about 80 million votes over the last three voting cycles. what happened in this one, though, is biden was carrying only 45 million votes. and of course, donald trump carries 80 million votes in his back pocket.

so, they had to do something. trump, so they got rid of biden. now when i figured out, odds-wise, if kamala harris, if she's carrying roughly 80 million votes, shall have to pick up another 20 million votes from now until voting time. so, that, what it does for me is when you put that together, trump is running about minus -- i would say 110. you bet 100 and they will lose 10 bucks on it. kamala is going to do about plus 110. host: are you saying she's the

better bet at winning? caller: no, no, she still in the negative. she still got to make up 50 million, giving her a negative -- you are going to have to bet. you bet 100 to win 10, but you are betting against the don't side. host: gotcha. donald trump's favorite is what you are saying. caller: price, so from the gambling thing all in all trump is still running about, the odds are still three plus and kamala harris is three minus. host: scott, do you do much gambling? caller: me? i am "the" gambler.

host: what do you mean? caller: i spent 30 years i've as gambling or working in the industry, i know everything about everything there is to know. host: do you think it is a good idea, if this continues, making it argue -- making it available to bet on congressional elections, is that a good thing? caller: it's still happening, regardless, no matter what. if they do make it legal, all the better. we just came through the sports betting thing, you know, where you can sports bet now. gambling moves forward, always moves forward. no matter what, it's going to happen, you know? fortunately, trump is not a good

gambler. i like him. right now, i don't see where kamala is going to pick up. she's running about 60 million votes. you know, trump runs 80 million in his pocket over the last three voting sessions, you know? host: all right, that's scott. paul, pennsylvania, independent line. caller: i would like to hear from the candidates tomorrow like talking about the national debt and all the spending programs the united states has. for example, our defense and social programs. how can we tackle it such that we can have both? host: that's paul. this is ruth, bakersfield, california, democrat, good morning. caller: just listening to the show, the faded act is a waste

of time and money. what would it take for everyone having to go out and get their birth certificates to prove they are citizens? otherwise, it's just a waste of time and just to throw them both -- throw more things in the ring . bidenwon in 2020 and i pray that kamala wins in 2024. we will do this. freedom forward. host: spokane, washington, donald, good morning, republican. caller: good morning, john. thank you guys for taking my call. i just wanted to ask if it's possible -- a couple of months ago, maybe a year ago, you had -- i believe it was a late-night show for c-span? tom homan was on. he was explaining a lot of the things that the harris and biden

administration got rid of concerning border policies, especially when it comes to trafficking people like women and children. one of the things is -- hole on -- one of the things is dna testing. so, they would swab the children and then if someone came across with 20 kids and said it was all their kids, when they would swab them, they would find out obviously that the dna did not match. so, that is when a lot of the trafficking slowed down. and then as soon as harris and biden came in, that was one of the things they got rid of. that is what tom was leading to. that's why we have hundreds of thousands of children that don't even know who they are, where they are, or whatnot. host: this is the former act and

director of ice who you are talking about? caller: yes, sir. it was on c-span. if you can show that the people? he named four or five things. i thought it was absolutely one of the most important things. they always say that trump put kids in cages, separated families. but when you look down to it, the people trying to smuggle kids and whatnot, they stopped doing it. they slowed down a lot. they knew that they were going to, you know, get swabbed for dna and things like that. you won't just benadryl 20 kids, say they are all yours and then off you go. if you could show that to people? i know it was about a year ago and he was on the stage asking questions. i can never find it on your website. it's a pretty good website, but there is so much on their. it's the few things he pointed out. host: search tom homan on our

website, there are three events since february involving him. last year there was a heritage foundation discussion on border detention policies and practices, july 31 of last year. maybe that's the one you are talking about? also, from cpac last year he appeared, but i think the one you might be discussing is july 21, 2023. look that up in our c-span archives, if you want to watch that again. appreciate the call. sal, illinois, independent, good morning. caller: the reason i'm calling, we need to get back to voting like when i was younger. you show up, you show a driver's license and a utility bill, you prove who you are, no mail in. that was only for the military. if it is an elderly person, pick them up in a van and bring them to the voting.

it's gotten so corrupt. i remember when kennedy was coming up. chicago, already the most corrupt city forever in this country. what i watched today is so out of hand. i have grandchildren and it's like there's no future for them. corporate america controls the game. this government does not work for the people. it works for corporate america, the military industrial and what they want. i think it's a sad state of affairs. we are doomed. we are going to go to a socialist communist capitalist type of country? i don't know the answer. maybe we need another civil war in this country. host: all right. reginald, california, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: doing well.

what's up? caller: you are pretty good at fact checking quick and [indiscernible] i heard [indiscernible] host: it's tough to do fact checking on the fly. probably not going to be able to do it as you ask, but what's on your mind? running short on time. caller: i understand you might not be able to answer, but in the four years that ivanka trump was in the white house, they earned a total of $650 million with her husband? host: are you talking about her earnings from the federal government salary? that seems high. caller: that is very high, it's why i'm so shocked. it's between the two of them within the four years. that's an incredible amount. host: that's more than any

government official would ever be paid, reginald, but you are welcome to go ahead and fact check things yourself, that's why we ask people what news sites they trust, so they can go ahead and do that. you are welcome to do that. dave, republican line, dandridge. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: i'm doing well, dave. caller: i fell last night, bruised my knees, i'm sort of resting up right now. host: sorry to hear that. caller: thank you. that's not what i called about. i've always been a republican. my dad was a republican. although i had voted for democrats, especially when i knew that they were right. [coughs] excuse me.

i'm looking at the election and i honestly believe that the supreme court rulings -- a lot of people think that the supreme court throughout abortion. i don't think a lot of voters realize that they simply turned it back to the states. but unfortunately, that's going to costs trump millions of female voters. host: do you think it was the right decision, dave? caller: no. that's one time that i think it should have been left alone. i think a lot of people, especially in very conservative states overlook the fact that a woman's right to have a child is her own business. i don't think it deserves being in the hands of politicians.

it should never be in the hands of religion. i honestly believe a woman has the right to decide whether she is going to have a child or not. a lot of these pregnancies are incest. accidental. you name it. i think the woman has a right to handle that. i'm not standing up for abortion. i'm not standing up against abortion. honestly, i honest to god believe that it's her right and her decision. 90% of it is her decision. 10% is her family and friends. host: that's dave in tennessee. our last call her in open forum. stick around. 40 minutes left. we will talk about the various investigations into the assassination attempt on donald trump. we are going to be joined by ellen gilmer for that

discussion. we'll be right back. ♪ >> this is the second in a two part series with a washington-based attorney who has written books on harry hopkins, george marshall, and louis johnson. now comes his fourth book, assent to power, focusing on the final days of franklin roosevelt from the sudden transition to the presidency of truman. spanning four to four to 48, his newest book looks at the struggles of a relatively unknown missouri senator, harry truman, who had served the u.s. as vice president for only 82 days before the death of fdr on april 12. 1945. >> that's on "book notes plus,"

available on our free mobile app or where ever you get your podcasts. > c-span now is the free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what's happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the biggest events of the day with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips. you can stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal," find its schedules for c-span networks and c-span radio and compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. download it for free today or visit our website, c-span org/c-span now. your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere.

>> watch the abc news presidential debate simulcast live tuesday on c-span two as the candidates go head to head in their first debates in securing their party nominations . coverage begins with a preview show at 8 p.m., followed by debate at 9 p.m. eastern. the abc news presidential debate simulcast, live on tuesday on c-span two. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics, powered by cable. friday nights, watch the c-span 2024 campaign trail, a weekly roundup of c-span campaign coverage with a one-stop shop to discover what candidates across the country are saying to voters along with first-hand accounts from political reporters, updated whole numbers, fundraising data and campaign ads. watch the c-span 2020 four

campaign trail, friday nights, 7:30 p.m. eastern, online at c-span.org, or download it as a podcast on c-span now, our free mobile app. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> "washington journal" continues. host: bloomberg government reporter ellen gilmer joins us now with the ongoing investigations into the assassination attempt on donald trump. between the secret service, the fbi, start off with an overview on who is investigating what aspect of this right now? guest: it's a huge landscape of an investigation and the fbi is investigating the actual shooter's motive. the secret service is investigating itself, what went wrong. they call it mission assurance review, how to make sure this doesn't happen again. president biden ordered an

independent review, it is being done by a former secretary under obama, janet napolitano, and it has had officials from both sides of the aisle. and then congress is doing its thing with bipartisan task forces and those are probably the biggest ones. host: which one should we pay the most attention to and which ones are you paying the most attention to? guest: i'm closely tracking the independent review ordered by the president and we will start to see results from that later this month. a lot of people, the assassination attempt happened in july, a lot of people have had it swept into the news cycle, but it will start to be a big issue again as we start to see recommendations from this group of experts. and then the task force in the house is gearing up to do all of

its work and will have results in september. host: what's the biggest question we are waiting for and what results have we already gotten? guest: there are countless questions. some of the biggest findings so far include that they didn't have proper -- they call it over, someone keeping an eye on the high points of view. a direct line of sight to the former president, including the roof, obviously, that the shooter shot from. they did not have that properly covered. they didn't have a drone in the air to look at that. they didn't have a nearby water tower covered. there are some pretty obvious failures in the security plan. and that reliance on local law enforcement officials without the proper kind of communication channel set up. they didn't have interoperability and they were

not connected by radio, they were not in the loop with the other officials helping. host: why? guest: great question. i think we will start to learn more about that as the investigation plays out. some people say it's poor planning. others say it's a matter of funding and a lack of resources. interoperability, radio systems, it's a long-standing issue for law enforcement. this happens all the time when you have agencies and at different departments working together under these systems, but it can be done more smoothly than it was, so the question is why did they plan so poorly? why didn't they get everyone in the same control room, for example. the question of funding will continue to play out in congress as well. host: shooter motives, what do we know at this point? guest: not a lot. in terms of social media accounts, ideologies are not super clear, not partisan,

generally opposed to people in power and wanting to make a mark. host: you talked about this a little bit, but the timeframe of how long these investigations will take and when we expect answers. what are they telling you? guest: independent review, later in the month about the overarching thing. bipartisan task force in the house, the december 13 is the deadline. they had just been on recess and they are taking another month-long recess in october to campaign for november. that is going to be tight. they are kicking off with -- they have already done some work and are likely doing a public hearing at the end of host: this month. host:where will that take place? guest: on the hill, in the house. the special task force was established in july after the assassination attempt by unanimous vote. it's got real bipartisan backing . in the house they will likely do more hearings, somehow squeeze

them in in november after the election before they release the report in december. host: several weeks ago, the secret service director, kimberly cheadle resigns, richard ronald rowe becomes acting director. what else has changed in the secret service? guest: ronald rowe was the deputy director when it all happened, it's not like he's new to the scene. he was kim cheadle's deputy. they have tried to focus more on transparency. one of the biggest complaints in the week following the shooting was the lack of answers from the secret service, who didn't even participate in the day of press briefing that the local law enforcement and fbi did. that's something they are trying to get out there more. they did one last month. we will see if that continues to be the case. they are trying to be really public.

they also made changes in how they work with local law enforcement. security plans now have to be approved by different levels of supervisor and are subject to more oversight. host: here are your phone numbers. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8001, republicans. independents, (202) 748-8002. ellen gilmer is our guest, talking about these various investigations. if you have questions about where these are, start calling in. taking viewers back to late july, ronald rowe testified about the shooting. a bit of a tense exchange. i will let you fill in the details. [video clip] >> you knew you had a security situation in the person who has sent to trump on stage, have they been released? >> no. >> when you knew that the locals

were working serious security, that person who knew that, have they been relieved of duty? >> sir, i refer you back to my original answer that we are investigating this on mission assurance -- >> what more do you need to investigate to know that there were critical enough failures that some individuals ought to be held accountable? what more do you need to know? >> exactly what happened and i need my investigators to do their job. >> people didn't do their job. >> i cannot put my thumb on the scale. >> what do you mean? >> you are asking me to make a rush to judgment about somebody failing. i acknowledge -- >> is it not prima facie that someone failed? >> school, this could have been a texas school book depository. i have lost sleep over that for the past 17 days. >> then fire someone who will be held accountable.

>> i will not rush to judgment and people will be held accountable. i will do so with integrity and not rush to judgment. >> i can't believe that you are -- >> unfairly persecuted. >> people are dead. >> we have to be able to have a proper investigation into this. >> earlier you said there had to be protocols followed and unless there was a protocol violation, people would not be disciplined. i think that if your protocols don't provide for the fact that a former president is shot, when an american is killed, when other rally-goer's are shot at and critically wounded, if that isn't a protocol violation, revise your protocols. >> this is where you and i agree. it was a failure and we will get to the bottom of it. host: that was five weeks ago. explain what's happening there and what has happened since. guest: the acting director is

explaining that they haven't yet relieved people of their jobs because of what happened to because there is a whole process for many government employees, or at any company, there's a whole process where they have to investigate what happened and who messed up. since then, some people have been placed on administrative duties. does it mean that the investigation has concluded or that the outcome of their investigation has concluded, they are no longer on the front lines. host: pulled off of active cases. guest: not protecting the president, former president, or any protect these. host: how did congress feel about ronald rowe writ large? guest: people have more confidence in him because he struck this tone. that was obviously a tense exchange and you will see a lot of that, but it's nowhere nearly as contentious as the house oversight hearing with former

director kimberly cheadle. that was just hostile the entire time. host: books being dropped, as i recall. guest: exactly. member saying she needs to resign and she did so the next day. they are more willing to give ronald rowe a chance, but they will become more contentious with him as well if he comes back to the hill this fall. host: ellen gilmer is our guest, of bluebird. this is alex, d.c., republican, you're up first. go ahead. caller: background on me, i used to work for the federal government, i left, i wanted to give some insight into what i think is going on here. the biggest thing is that the federal government that's a lot of money, make mistakes, then they come back and ask for more money and congress gives them money. there is never pressure to improve the processes. what we need to have happen is

two things, congress [indiscernible] when things don't go well or the executive branch breaks the investigations. two, we need the media to take a much more scrutinizing look at the executive branch. a lot of the failures lately have been failures of the executive branch. be it afghanistan, this assassination, the biden stuff -- you can go through and know that there were a lot of things that were known in terms of corruption. that's all the public information. host: alex, what agency did you work for? caller: department of defense. guest: why did you leave? caller: i wanted to serve the country and it felt dishonest. there are a lot of good people working there, but the higher you go, the more politicized it gets. if you don't want something to work, you put bad people to it,

the money never appears. congress doesn't understand. what they understand is that they have five minutes on television and they might channel some frustration and the reason they won't change is they will not withhold money. there has to be pressure for performance from congress on top level people. the people underneath can be pushed around anywhere they want. host: what do you do now? caller: i work for a think tank here. they would probably never take me, but i think that things work -- i hope that things work out in the country gets the leadership and people deserve. these are challenges and in a lot of cases, either if it's from here or from china, they are not being assessed at all. guest: i think the questions about funding are compelling. secret service has funding of $3

billion, higher than it has ever been. there are a ton of agencies that are chronically underfunded. i don't know that the secret service would be considered one of them. have asked for more money for certain things. they have senate appropriators asking a lot of these questions that were brought up by the caller, including how exactly are you using the money that we have been giving you. these increases, are you using it effectively? arguably, not. if it includes not having drones, counter drones, technology and use during the campaign rally would have been helpful in identifying the shooter's activities beforehand. you will see that battle play out on capitol hill. today, this week, it's pretty high-stakes before a potential government shutdown. we will see a lot of arguments continuing to go. host: you covered congress for a

long time. what did you think of that description of an agency that screws up and comes to congress to say that we need more money to not screw up again and congress just throws money at the problem? guest: it's very typical for the agency to come to congress and say i need more money to make sure never happens again. i wouldn't say that congress necessarily always throws more money at them. often they focus on the questions the appropriators and secret service have been asking, digging in on those details. you might see a fairly thoughtful attempt to respond to funding needs this time around. host: to that point, the interaction between republicans and democrats, not politicizing assassination attempts, how has that happened? what have you seen and observed as members have worked together? guest: earlier we talked about

the bipartisan task force in the house with a unanimous vote from everyone there that day, that doesn't happen a lot. it says a lot about the mandate to do things in a nonpartisan way. we will see who -- how that plays out. the people they chose our lawmakers with experience in national security, intelligence, people bringing a lot of experience to bear. but there are some questionable members of the task force. you will see things that heated sometimes and you will see members disagree, but at the end of the day, the question is, when they predict a report or whenever they produce findings or recommendations, is seen as solid, trustworthy, reliable, something everyone wants to act on, or is it per trade as a partisan exercise undermined by arguments that it is partisan? host: why are some members

trying to launch their own investigation outside the task force? guest: the task force was to consolidate the investigations that had already started, but we are seeing numbers -- eli crane, matt gaetz, andy biggs, others have worked together to pursue their own line of inquiry and are relying largely on whistleblower accounts. they are clearly, you know, doing their own investigation. the task force is designed to be doing all the work. they are clearly not in step with the plan but at this point they are also trying not to be too adversarial about it. i spoke to some members about the alternative investigation a few weeks ago and they said they view it as complementary. they are not criticizing the work of the task force. let's see how that plays out. host: do we know if they are pursuing fundamentally different lines of question or evidence? are they doing it because the

task force is in asking the right questions? guest: i think it's more of a protective measure. they are worried that the task force will pass the right questions or won't take seriously enough alternative views. i spoke to some task force members about how they are handling these conspiracy theories and they said -- look, our goal is to be all open to alternative views without going down a rabbit hole. that's open to interpretation. the other investigations host: are likely addressing that. democratic line, florida, you are on with ellen gilmer caller: good morning. an investigation into an assassination is entirely appropriate, whenever they get around to doing it. my congressman, byron donalds, had a meeting i guess back in august and i was going to go down and ask him this question

that i will ask you now. i did make it down, maybe you can ask ellen. in the summer of 2023, the fbi came to mar-a-lago to retrieve documents that the ex-president would not return in didn't belong to him. earlier this summer, 2024, the ex-president made the outrageous claim that they had come there to assassinate him. so my question is, which would have been for mr. donald as well , why don't they investigate that? here you have the ex-president saying the fbi or other federal law-enforcement agencies came to his residence in florida to assassinate him. ok? he's made the claim. he's the ex-president. why won't they investigate that? guest: clearly there are plenty of investigations going on into

the actions of the former president, but as far as investigating his rhetoric on something like that, that's not something any federal agency will spend time on. you could argue that maybe they should, but that's not the case that they want to investigate any remark that might be seen as inflammatory or misleading. host: did donald trump sit down for an interview with the fbi about the assassination attempt? i forget. guest: i don't believe that has happened. host: so, what's his relationship with the fbi and christopher wray right now? do they have much interaction? host: that's a great question. the fbi and chris wray have had a contentious relationship with donald trump and with a lot of congressional republicans recently, congressional republicans saying that the fbi has been weaponized. that could come to bear to some extent in these investigations.

i would say that in the immediate days following the assassination attempt, we weren't working on anything like that. from the trump campaign they weren't ready to cooperate, figure out the facts and keep everyone safe. host: decatur, illinois, independent, good morning. caller: good morning. as the bullet ever been recovered? the bullet that was fired at mr. trump? guest: yeah, they have completely investigated the entire crime scene. the fbi confirmed that the former president was hit by either the bullet itself or pieces of the bullet and they did that through ballistics analysis and looking at the scene. host: i know that there were reports that trump would sit down for a victim interview and i didn't know if that had happened. guest: i haven't heard of that happening. host: alabama, democratic line.

what's the pronunciation? iknell? caller: yes, i wanted to ask a question about former president trump, got shot. a black man carried a white lady across the stage, had blood on his shirt. he passed her to a security guard. and then when they was helping trump off the stage, it was one of the secret service ladies, she pulled a gun out, pistol out real quick, then put it back in. but, what was all that about? the next thing, the man that got killed -- two got killed, the shooter and another man, did they do autopsies to see what

did it? host: you are asking if they did autopsies? caller: yes. guest: i don't know the particulars about the scene you are describing at the beginning of your question. as far as autopsies go, i don't know the particulars of autopsies on the bystander. they did autopsy the shooter's body. the coroner has released a body to the family and it has been cremated, and outcome that has raised some questions, some lawmakers thought it was too quick for a situation where there were so many questions. host: back to the secret service, it was 2003 when the secret service and the department of homeland security from treasury, has there been any discussion about reorganizing the secret service,

but their mission is and should be in the wake of what happened in july? guest: yes. it was established in 2003 in the aftermath of 9/11, a massive reorganization of government with a lot of agencies coming together at a lot of them have been wishing they could leave ever since. host: why? guest: new department, growing pains. 20 years old now but that is still relatively new. a lot of public scrutiny and unpopular work. when you think about the mission, border security, tsa, counterterrorism, it's sticky stuff and they often get a lot of public scrutiny. agencies that used to be -- the secret service use to be in the treasury department, back to their legacy work combating counterfeiting and they still do do financial work. in treasury, they were kind of

big shots, secret service, within the department of treasury. in the department of homeland security they are one of many, one of many law enforcement units within the department. some former agents i have spoken to said that this is the time that we move secret service back to treasury or out of dhs, put it by itself, put it somewhere else, because they think it is getting lost within the department, there are too many competing missions and needs within the department and the service doesn't get the priorities they think they need. host: do they still do financial crimes even though they are outside of the treasury department? guest: it's a legacy. they have been doing it for over a century and they are good at it. this is where a lot of the agents learn investigative skills, doing financial crimes, investigating people now in

terms of protecting public officials and the president. host: we got less than 20 minutes left in our discussion with ellen gilmer about the assassination attempt on donald trump. we will be heading over to the university of chicago this morning for a discussion on pandemic with administration officials and other experts there. so, we will be joining that discussion when we end this program. if you stick around on c-span, that is where you will go. the house is coming in at noon, the senate is in at 3 p.m., c-span and c-span two, gavel-to-gavel. thomas, houston, independent, good morning. caller: how you doing, america? listen, as far as the secret service, it goes back decades with scandals, even under the

bush administration it was sex parties and cocaine parties and all that, but i'm not here to say all of that. after the incident report on the trump shooting, did he go to the hospital? what was the outcome? i have shot those type of weapons and they do a heck of a lot more damage, believe me. the guy who was killed, how is that family doing? and where did the kid get the weapon? it's kind of hard to stop anyone when you have all of these people out there that are trump supporters. i mean, thousands of them. open carry state, red caps. who do you stop? guest: pretty much every question he raised is something they are looking at in the investigation. as far as the injury to the former president, the fbi has confirmed over and over that he

was hit by a bullet. so, clearly, you know, it wasn't a super direct hit. he turned his head, that was very lucky, but he was hit by a bullet according to the fbi. as far as the other questions, they are looking into a lot of those in the investigation. the open carry question that you raised, that is something that democrats have been raising on the hill. access to guns in america, the proliferation of guns in america , they have tried to corner and press officials to say in a public forum -- is this making it harder for them to do your job. we have seen enforcement officials kind of skirt the question and say they don't want to get into this kind of political debate and that their job is to deal with the threat environment as it exists. host: the caller alluded to past

secret service scandals. did you read the book about the rise and fall of the secret service? guest: absolutely, carol's book is a must read for anyone interested in the secret service, it details a lot of their scandals and failures in the past. even just a couple of years ago there were a lot of text related to january 6 and how they protected people that day, a lot of those messages were deleted and never recovered. that was a big deal a couple of years ago. talking about all of these investigations that are happening, after some fence jumpers during the obama and trump administration's, the scandals in columbia during the advanced trip, all kinds of big issues that put the agency in the public eye and not in a good way, there have been these big reviews done and there was a bloomberg report after a few of the scandals doing the obama

years and a lot of the recommendations of the panel, again, like a panel of experts, former officials with expertise in the area, a lot of it was never carried out. whether it was resources or the agency didn't think it was practical, that's what we face now, how much of this will result in actual change? host: that book came out in 2021 and we covered it with her at the tucson festival of books in 2000 22, march of 2022, and if you want to watch it you can watch it online, there it is for viewers, c-span.org in our video archive, discussing exactly what you were discussing this morning. this is peter, milwaukee, wisconsin, independent. good morning. guest: good morning. i will be honest with you guys, in our open company we took a polling on the trump shooting.

you can be union or nonunion and it is almost 99% even. host: what was the poll question? caller: a lot of people here said that the shooter should have practiced better. host: all right, apologize for that. stepping away from the assassination attempt investigation, what are we looking for in terms of coverage over the next couple of weeks? there's a potential shutdown happening on september 30. we talked about it earlier. what is your read on whether the government shuts down at the end of the month? guest: they probably won't, just a lot of brinksmanship until the end, typical, battles to fight before we get there. house republicans put out their opening offer in a proposed stopgap legislation. they put it out friday night.

notably, related to today's topic, that includes authority for dhs to move money around and make sure secret service doesn't face a shortfall, obviously important given how close the election is in the number of campaign events coming up. host: is it possible that they could get a shortfall if there is a continuing resolution? or will the funding continue regardless of shutdown? host: the white house said they needed this particular authority to be approved to let them move the money around in the right way. i expect to continue in whatever the final product is but this is a back and forth between democrats and republicans before the final bill. host: as usual, is it going to come down to midnight and the final hours of a steel coming together? we have got a couple of weeks, does congress get their work done early? guest: there are a lot of

members who want to get back to campaigning, that's the only reason they would get it done early. sometimes they show their cards a few days before the deadline and everybody can get together and have time to vote. could we see it sooner than last minute? maybe, but only because of the campaign. host: let me try to get one more call in here. eugene is waiting in new york, independent line. go ahead, eugene. caller: they pointed out that shooter right on the roof there, one pop, he ran off. you would think that secret service would have spotted this guy, they train for this. what happened? where's the professionalism, you know? have a great day. guest: what you are describing is the biggest failure that most are honing in on, why wasn't there a law enforcement official on the roof, why were they not able to respond more quickly,

why was the former president allowed to go on stage? the answer to that is that there was a breakdown in communications and why did that happen. host: all topics being explored in these investigations and you can read about what they are finding and telling the public at bloomberg government. ellen gilmer is a senior reporter there. guest: thank you so much. thank you -- thank you so much. guest: thank you. host: that does it for us here on "washington journal," if you stick around we will take you over to the center for global development at the university of chicago for a discussion on pandemic and climate preparedness. that's already underway, we will join it in progress. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] >> two seminal reports came out. the first one was convened by the