♪ host: this is the washington journal for october 8. a busy week for vice president harris, of 60 minutes interview,

a podcast before that and she set to do three interviews in new york today. for his part former president trump canceled his 60 minutes interview but is continuing to appear on networks like fox and newsmax. you can expect more of that from both candidates up to the election for the first 45 minutes today how would you grade media coverage of campaign 2024 so far. you can let us know by phone. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents 202-748-8002. if you want to share your thoughts by text you can do it at 202-748-8003. facebook is available to you at facebook.com/c-span and its at c-span w day -- wj. highlighting the recent interviews this week by the vice president starting with the

interview that aired yesterday. flooding media zone as the final headline, the writers write the 60 minutes appearance is part of a strategy of democratic presence a nominee to hit all corners of a fragmented media landscape in the final weeks before election day. from podcasted tiktok to talk shows. local radio and television. on tuesday she set to appear on abc's the view hitting an older female demographic as well as the howard stern show whose audience is nearly three quarters mail and the late show with stephen colbert which is popular amongst young men. bets on the wall street journal takes a look at kamala harris for his part the former president on media coverage today in the washington post this morning it highlights the fact the trump campaign regularly bans reporters from events to punish them for the roof porting on trump aide the great majority of the former president's interviews are with friendly outlets though he is also held news -- extended use

conference. harris was largely avoided cable news has leaned into broadcast the field of political junkies. since mid-september mr. trump has appeared on at least 12 times on fox news, newsmax and real america's voice. even so the story asks trump campaign sought to make the issue of harris caution of media interviews. you can expect a lot of those interviews from the vice president today new york and also from former president trump when it comes to overall media coverage how would you grade what you've seen so far in campaign 2024. again those numbers. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats paid independents 202-748-8002.

it was at interview on 60 minutes that aired yesterday featuring the vice president, former president trump expected also participate that he dropped out. for the part that vice president had during the time she was asked about her plan for economics and or economic goals. here's part of that portion from yesterday's interview. >> the child tax credit. you want to give tax breaks to first-time homebuyers. people starting small businesses. but it is estimated by the nonpartisan committee for responsible federal budget that your economic plan would add $3 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade. how are you going to pay for that? >> so the other economists that have reviewed my plan versus my opponent and determined that my economic plan would strengthen america's economy his would weaken it. my plan is about saying that

when you invest in small businesses, you invest in the middle class and you strengthen america's economy. small businesses are part of the backbone of america's economy. >> the question was how are you going to pay for it. >> one of the things is i'm going to make sure the richest among us who can afford it pay their fair share in taxes. it is not right that teachers and nurses and firefighters are paying a higher tax rate then billionaires and the biggest corporations. and i plan on making that fair. >> we are dealing with >> the real world here. >>how are you going to get this through congress. >> when you talk quietly with a lot of folks in congress they know exactly what i'm talking about because their constituents know what i'm talking about. their constituents are those firefighters and teachers and nurses. their constituents are

middle-class hard-working folks. >> congress has shown no inclination to move in your direction. >> i disagree with you. there are plenty of leaders in congress who understand and know that the trump tax cut blew up our federal deficit. none of us and certainly i cannot afford to be myopic in terms of how i think about strengthening america's economy. let me tell you something i am a devout public servant. i am also a catholic -- capitalist. and i know the limitations of government. host: from that 60 minutes interview that aired yesterday media coverage of campaign 2024 how would you grade it so far. melissa democrats line starts us off. go ahead. caller: good morning. i would grade media coverage is a very weak c-bordering on a d.

we see the media asking questions and paying attention to things with kamala harris says not with the other side says. they do not ask about donald trump's cognitive decline, they don't ask while they were focusing on joe biden's age and focusing on donald trump's age. the fact that he's only a couple of years younger, that clip from 60 minutes was a good example. how are you going to pay for child tax cuts and they don't test donald trump what he means when taxes have increased prices on things that donald trump -- they are not asking him those questions. local elections, for instance we have marjorie taylor greene's district, everyone keeps talking about her but on local news they

don't talk about the fact that there is a candidate running against her. they don't talk about senator marsha blackburn. the fact that that there is a candidate running against her. they talk about chuck fleischmann but they don't talk about the candidate running against him. we've seen a lot of real one sidedness going on with media coverage where we somehow have forgotten content of equal time which is supposed to be law. >> alyssa in tennessee on this grading of media coverage for campaign 2024, james in south carolina publican line. >> good morning and thanks for taking my call. i want to say hats off to the 60 minutes reporter who conducted that interview with kamala harris. he's the only one that asks the tough questions. all of her other questions, any

other network that talks to her is all softball questions and they never follow-up. you had the debate moderators getting on donald trump and they weren't pushing kamala harris or pushing governor walz for their viewpoints and if you look at the mainstream media coverage it's 90% negative on donald trump read so again we talk about threats to democracy. the media's job is to hold government accountable and they do not do it. they are mouthpieces for the democratic party and i speak as american not as a republican and that's all i have to say. i would grade the media overall the coverage, i would grade it poorly. host: ok. so there's two examples of people taking a look at media coverage and giving grades preyed you can do the same on the lines if you wish. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats.

independents 202-748-8002. you can post on. social media and send us a text at 202-748-8003. former president trump appearing on fox news yesterday in an interview that took place while he was making his second visit to butler pennsylvania and a portion of this interview he spoke about how he dealt with opposition to his campaign and what that means to him. [video clip] >> on a personal level how do you deal with that processing it superseding indictment. another former aide. how do you on a personal level deal with it? >> what's happened is it's been totally discredited. the biggest case was in florida per ed we won the case in its entirety. a couple of them are just really bad judges rate democrat judges, but i had many cases what they

did was they said let's go after this guy and let's cost him a lot of money, but a lot of time and a lot of thought. >> how will you restore faith in our justice system a lot of people will say he's just can it do to them what they did to him. >> a lot of people say that's what should happen. >> well, but -- putatively using government institutions is what got us in this mess in the first place. and the town hall we did in february, one of the lines that resonated someone said my revenge is good be my success. >> i do believe that. they have started a terrible precedent. we do have that in third world countries, a lot in south america going after someone politically. we've never had that almost at all. >> when you get an office you

get a look at your political enemies. >> i want to make this the most successful country in the world. that's what i want to do. >> again that aired on fox news yesterday, some of you responding on faceboo lorraine saying finally we are getting a little fact checking. i would like to see more attentioonhe one candidates health and cognitive and medical but that i doubt will happen. this is from a viewer in maine, c unfairness every mistake or misstep by biden was played, donald trump's obvious mental kleinnls you show it the media is not showing it. is is diane saying it's interesting to listen to the cdc since they are not instantly involved in politics and a different angle that we may not because we are in the thick of it pays to look at other perspectives. that some of the ways to reach out to us on this idea of media coverage of the campaign. napoleon and washington state,

democrats line you are next. >> hello there, good morning. what i would rate the media right now with the presidential campaign right now and everything going on and that's been going on i would like to rate the media probably in the middle. i believe certain networks, certain networks are little bit better at fact checking than others but i mean i get that for certain bases within these that have to, they lean either to the left or the right. and i get all that. i kind of rate them in the middle just like for instance for example 60 minutes last night, the interview with kamala harris, trump canceled and i guess it was because one of the reasons was he wanted an apology in 2020 with 60 minutes because

of some form of fact checking thing that was going on there. and another reason was trump canceled also the second reason was because he did not want any type of 60 minute fact checking on him in 2024. that was one of the reasons paid he did not want any fact checking last night. 60 minute fact checks everything and everybody since its existence. trump canceled for that reason. i believe trump reviews these opportunities because it will be -- it was the most viewed airing and interview before the november election for president of the united states and he would just get his self exposed on the lies and misinformation

that he's been kind of circulating out there. him and his vp candidate. one of the things out there is a do believe it will expose all the manifested lies created for the -- host: there you go. in washington state offering including mr. trump's nonappearance on 60 minutes, the website media highlights the fact it was on the news problem -- program last night there was next commissioner pai the former president backed out it says in part this is from the transcript saying from scott who says unfortunately last week mr. trump canceled and told us the interview would be this past thursday in mar-a-lago they also said they would meet the 70-year-old in butler pennsylvania where he was -- we agreed on september 9 trust mitigation's director sent a

text saying i'm working with our advanced team to see logistically of butler woodwork in addition to the sit-down meeting. days later calling to say president said yes than a week ago the campaign offer shifting explanations. first the complaint we would fact-check the interview. we fact-check the story. later trump said he would need an apology for his interview in 2020 when lesley stahl said -- that is some of the explanation about mr. trump sampson's from that interview. we will take you back in time this is from 2020, the interview mr. trump did with lesley stahl on 60 minutes. here it is from 2020. [video clip] >> do you think that your tweet and your name-calling are turning people off? >> no i think i wouldn't be here if i didn't have social media. and frankly if i didn't have

social media i would have no way of going -- getting out my voice. >> do know what you told me when i asked why you keep saying fake in the media. you said to me i say that because i need to discredit you so that when you say negative things about me no one will believe you. >> i don't need to discredit you. you discredited yourself. >> but that's what you said to me. i did not want to have this kind of edge. >> of course you did. you brought up a lot of subjects -- >> well i set i will ask you tough questions. >> right from the beginning. your first question was this is good to be tough questions. you don't ask joe biden. i see your interview. >> i never did an interview with joe biden. >> the interview 60 minutes i see joe biden giving softball after softball. i've seen all of his interviews. he's never been asked a question that's hard. >> forget him for a minute. you are president. >> you started with me, your

first statement was are you ready for tough questions. >> are you? >> that's no way to talk. >> at this point, one of our producers interrupted to advise about the time remaining in the interview. >> i think we have enough of an interview here. that's enough. let's go. let's go meet for two seconds. thanks, i will see you. >> be careful. >> we were scheduled to take a walk with the president around the white house grounds. i got a lot of questions i didn't ask. while we waited to see if the president was coming back, his press secretary kayleigh mcenany came in with a hand delivery. >> the president wanted me to deliver this health care plan, it's a little heavy. >> this is his health care plan. thank you.

>> the vice president will be with you shortly. >> and the president is not coming back? >> it was heavy. filled with executive orders, congressional initiatives, but no comprehensive health plan. host: that's a portion of the interview that took place in 2020. your grade for media coverage. this is from omaha, independent line. caller: hello, how are you today. i just want to tell you that i will say it now i vote for the character of the person, not their politics. in my opinion donald trump has no real character to be our president and i really -- i judge kamala on what i see on tv and i like her character.

i like how she laughs and all that. host: what about media coverage of both candidates? caller: well it's so slanted. you know, like fox and newsmax and they are all for trump and msnbc and cnn are for kamala and then i watch newsnation a lot. they don't put any spin on the news. and that's, that's who i mostly watch for my news now. host: kevin in omaha they're paid let's hear from carrie in illinois, democrats line. caller: good morning. peter baker did a story the other day about trump's cognitive but did he mention kamala's cognitive.

i think she's a good candidate. i'd like you to play a little bit about that peter baker story. host: you brought up peter baker, what you think of media coverage of all the candidates? caller: i think the media is failing us big time. i turned the channel on and i have to turn away because there's so much bias. to tell you the truth -- host: what you mean by bias? caller: i mean it don't show the point views that it shows, it always leans to the right. let's stay in the middle. you guys talk about compromise but let's show that. let's be fair and balanced. host: that's terry in illinois. a recent poll done by you go and one of the questions was asked

about media coverage saying when asked the question about news media treatment of kamala harris it was 44% registered voters saying the news media was easier on kamala harris. 27% saying it was the same as other camp, 17% saying it was harder. amongst hair supporters only 8% saying it was easier on kamala harris, the 32% saying it was harder on her. amongst trumped supporters, 83% of those who were registered voters of those supporters said the news media treatment was easier on the vice president, only 2% of those polled saying it was harder on the vice president. so that's some of the media as far as poles are concerned when you're looking at the media coverage what you think and if

you wanted to offer a grade. in arkansas, republican line we will hear from bob next. >> hello. i just want to make a comment. harris smiles and she looks good and she lives through her teeth. she won't answer direct questions. most of the media is against trump. fox is probably the only one and maybe newsmax. i watch cnn and all them and the way they do the thing it's like money that fema got and they diverted it to the illegal aliens. illegal aliens the billions -- host: let's stick to the media coverage of both candidates. why do you have the impressions of that that you do? >> because i watch it and i get the impression that the whole

thing is slanted that way. it's just like -- the debate they had, if i had been there i would say ok what about the illegal aliens, i would've asked that to harris and she would've said i'm from a -- style family and she really wasn't, her dad was a professor and her mother was a scientist. i don't call that a mid-american type family. that's elite. her mother got a divorce from uh her husband when she was young. the thing is -- the mother was from india. host: let's get back to media coverage if you had to give it a grade what would you give it? caller: for harris i would say

she's getting 90% and trump is probably getting 10%. host: albuquerque is next. independent line, good morning. caller: good morning pedro. i would give corporate television mediate d-. it is failing terribly. let's remember this election is also about congress. but we don't spend any time hardly at all talking about congressional races. both trump and harris make these statements that really are silly because congress writes the laws. but we don't spend any time focusing on congress. it's the president, the president, the president. ignorant americans think the president is like a king and can do anything he wants because corporate media presents that image. here's another great example. immigration is a hot topic.

but nobody in corporate media asks the question who's hiring all these immigrants? how are all these illegal people present in the united states finding jobs? what companies are breaking the law and hiring them? we also have a housing shortage where are all of the illegal immigrants living? are they taking too much housing, is there too much immigration into the united states? these questions are never asked. they are very simple obvious questions but corporate controlled media will not address them. so i give them a d-. host: giving his thoughts and the grade as well. facebook saying average when it comes to coverage as usu so much horse race, not enough examination of positions and their ramifications. greg from facebook as well saying journalists are doing well.

again, facebook is one way you can post there. some of you sending us texts this morning. jack calling us from maine. democrats line, hello. caller: i think the media is doing exactly what it always does, i think c-span is the most fair. it's the people calling in that make the show. is this me the you have on the air right now. host: you are on the air right now. caller: as far as the ratings i would say the republican leaning networks obviously would get an a by the trump crowd and a d from the democrats print the same with the networks, they would get the flip of that. and c-span is in the middle. i get a kick when people call

and complain about c-span. it's the most fair in my opinion. and the most accurate because they do news is coming straight from the people. that's really all i have to say pray keep up the great work on c-span. host: one of those interviews a vice president will participate in later on is on the view, the hill reporting during that interview the vice president is expected to announce a plan to offer a new bedded -- medicare benefit for home care for seniors in an effort to focus on the challenges of caregivers she will announce that proposal for the first-ever expansion of medicare today where senior campaign official so she can reach the sandwich generation audience. made up of americans who are both raising children and caring for the older. a couple of interviews today out of new york, that's where the vice president will be paid overall when it comes to media coverage, that he is in michigan, republican line.

caller: i think the media is too far to the left then it is for trump. , led doesn't have a brain in her head. she goes to fantasyland and is in a donated to the countries against us and we have -- instead of sending the money overseas and i believe it should be for trump and not as much for kamala harris. host: john on her independent line. caller: good morning pedro. i mean it's a good question. if you want the truth i would give the media an aft. they are great at propaganda at this point. if you want the truth, if you want to be propagandized, if you want to be told lies and things

that aren't true, being gas lit than they are terrific at it. they've learned the lessons very well. when carmella was running in 2020 and joe biden was running also she couldn't even make it out of the primary. she couldn't win her own state. as vice president she was the least popular vice president in the history of the country. once iraq and nancy decided she was going to be running for president of the united states, the media did a 180 and propped her up as great as she can, not telling everybody about her radical ideas. it's incredible. i watch the media and i watch the media and i'm stunned so many people listen to what the media says at this point. you have to do your own research , of the answers are all on there. anybody listens to anything the mainstream media, the propaganda media says is giving misinformation. host: as far as an example when

would you hear something reporting on the media on the vice president what's you find out from your own research that opposes that? caller: i mean we can go down the list. talking about fracking. she was totally against fracking. she wanted fracking to be completely knocked out and now she's saying she's for fracking. the media won't tell you about that. transgender surgeries for prisoners, she was all for that, the media won't talk about it. we can go down the list paid what else do you want to talk about with her. every position she's taken now she was against four years ago. but the media doesn't want to tell anybody about it. they want to prop her up and make her seem like she's a normal candidate when she's probably the most radical candidate who's ever run for the president of the united states. the transition is to bring her into the middle and that's what they are doing. they are not telling the real truth. they need to care about who,

how, why, when and where. those of the five things to become a reporter. now it's about obfuscating the truth for the candidate you want to win. host: what part of florida are you in and what danger do you have or where are you as far as hurricane milton is supposed to hit? caller: well i'm close, i'm a little bit up tampa, 60 miles above tampa so we are definitely worried. we just got through with the one last week. we lost power for a week. we are a little bit worried but we are americans we will pull together and make it through. god bless this country. host: let's hear from shawna new york, democrat line. grading the media coverage. caller: kamala harris is saying exactly what president biden said. stating exactly -- i want to

hear what she has in mind other than what pride that president biden had. host: did you watch last night's 60 minutes interview? >> she's going right through president biden's repertoire. i want hear what she has to say. >> but as far as media coverage what you think of it and what grade would you give it? caller: they had their talks back and forth. they both killed each other. they said exactly the right words and we don't want to hear that. we want here truth. the truth is what will prevail. host: republican line this is from scott, hello. caller: hello. what i want to cover is i have two comments real quick. is first that -- i can, you need

to do something about your hours because people in seattle on the west side have to get up at 4:00 in the morning. if we could have a little later time frame so some of us could on the west coast not have to get up beyond belief. host: to the media coverage of the campaign what would you say about that? caller: ok. right now i have turned all my media campaigns over to c-span or actually washington journal. most of my information now comes from you and of course the american people that call into you. every morning i get up and you know listen to you at 4:00 in the morning on the seattle side.

. but anyway, we -- media coverage and then most of my opinion i do like ben shapiro and stuff like daily wire stuff. i'll get opinions from that her you have dave rubin, i will listen to him in the morning and that will give me pretty much a clear idea of what's going on in the news for the day. oh, and -- host: before we let you goa let you know to save you from getting up at the hour you mentioned there's a couple ways you can still watch the program even aside from doing it live in real time you can always go to our website. the program is kept there and you can always go to our free video app at c-span now if you

want to download that and see the show there and other things that take place during the day. a lot of different avenues this world we live in today as far as how you can catch the program, that you can find out more information at c-span.org. the vice president engaging in earlier this week is an interview on a podcast reported by newsweek called call her daddy in which the vice president and democratic presidential nominee engaged in a candid conversation with the host alex cooper. during that interview harris discussed the state of abortion access in america and adding one out of three women in this country, she described the challenges faced by women in those states particular mothers you can find more at the call daddy site with alex cooper and here's a portion of that interview that took place earlier. [video clip] >> i was raised catholic and

abortion is a sin. and when i put out that episode i had a lot of women reach out saying i live in the south and i never thought about it that way. maybe i am pro-choice because i won't get an abortion because of my religion, why should we control what someone else wants. >> al -- exactly. what i'm finding is i travel, people who before two years ago, before roe v. wade was overturned people who felt very strong about this they are antiabortion. our now seeing what's happening and saying i did not intend for all of this to happen. and i think that's also why in state after state, so-called red states and blue states when the issue has been on the ballot, the american people are voting for freedom. host: that was sunday, some of the reaction being reported by forbes sing cooper's choice to

interview harris on sunday was met with thousands of comments from her followers on tiktok and instagram, some of whom slammed her decision and announced they would no longer listen while others praised her for securing an interview with the vice president. one comment states -- and not his comment on tiktok video explains inviting both to her podcast, she wanted them to be a comfortable space for a people of all political affiliations. some of the reaction from that interview you can see more of that on the podcast. you can use that and come up with a general grade of coverage for media coverage when it comes to this year's campaign. caller: good morning. the media coverage i would give them a d. if you look at it side-by-side with a normal campaign, kamala harris is really not getting good policies for the working

class. i don't know what trump stands for. all i know he's worrying about things happening. so this does not look normal campaign to me. i've been around 55 years and this is not it. so the media coverage tries to make it look normal like this is normal. this is not normal. i've never seen a man screaming in the microphone about this issue. he has a problem. it doesn't sound right. thank you. host: houston, democrats line. caller: i feel the media has totally let us down. c-span is the exception of course but i think their whole purpose is to sell pharmaceuticals, cars and what have you.

they are not interested in truly informing the people. it's tied to their economic -- economics. it is awful to hear all about that eating the pets in ohio over and over again as if that were something that should be talked about more than 10 seconds. there is so much that needs to be covered that's going on in the rest of the world that is utterly ignored. once again every talking head talks about that pet thing in ohio. i think it's just abysmal. we may as well be russia far as and real news. except for c-span. the others tried but they are after the money in the commercials and that's what we've got in the united states of america. thank you. host: robert in connecticut you

are up next. this idea of creating the media coverage of the campaign so far. caller: i'm calling in regard specifically to the clip you played at the very beginning of the show regarding the 60 minute interview and the kamala harris talking about income taxes and how shall pay for everything. i would rate the reporters questioning a c. he did have some good questions but he didn't ask a follow up questions and there was a gentleman who called earlier saying that 60 minutes checks everything, they fact-check everything. when kamala harris says the firefighters and the teachers are paying more taxes at a higher rate than the billionaires, that's blatantly false. and i could just tell you quickly three months ago i called in with the facts behind that and there was someone from barrens on on your show and he

said that guy is right. meaning me. and about a month and a half ago you had someone from a tax institute i think it was a fairness in taxation and he said the billionaires actually pay 8%. that's not true and it's so misleading to the listeners of the show. it was based upon a study that included unrealized capital gains on stocks and business valuations. host: back to coverage overall then as far as follow-up questions preyed what follow-up question should the reporter go with that? caller: well -- you can start by saying --, if she saying that the billionaires pay less taxes at a less rate what rate do they pay and where do you get the information from. he should have that information at hand. it's readily available. secondly. host: let me move on to florida,

this is scott in florida pray to independent line, go ahead. >> good morning. eight years ago we finally found out that the press was colluding with the democratic party. the fbi, the cia, the doj, the dhs. all the media, of the teachers union, taking money from russia and china and they don't report on it. you are all perpetrating a fraud and you are an accessory to the crime which is sabotage and treason. that includes you to pedro. i've been watching the show since i was 14 years old. 1979. never in my life i've seen you talk about trump as joe was destroying this nation and ignoring it. remember all the people that work for hitler's said we were

just doing our job before they were tied up and shot. host: lisa in georgia, democrats line. lisa in georgia, hello? lisa one more time. we will take one more call and this will be from john in pennsylvania, republican line go ahead. caller: good morning pedro. i would like to end this abortion controversy once and for all. host: let's stick to media coverage first of the campaign and what you think about it. caller: trump 100%. host: what grade would you give coverage overall of the campaign that's what we are looking for. caller: um, donald trump unfortunately is not making as many visits to the public as he did in 16. i would like to talk about this controversy please. host: no, you called in on the

question of the day so the former president -- what do you mean by that? caller: well he's not going out there and having his many rallies as he did in 16 because he's been shot at. but they just had a clip about kamala harris talking about abortion on let's go daddy website or whatever podcast and i want to comment please. host: quickly. caller: i'll be very quick. to end abortion controversy once and for all. when it comes to rape and incest, bring castration into the equation. host: we will leave it at that eerie for those of you participating thanks for doing so. we are doing a shorter version of our first hour today because of our guest lineup. two guests are joining us. coming up next we will talk with author ken block, author the book disproven. it looks at his hiring by the trump campaign to dress to get the election of 2020 voter fraud

claims and the claims that ultimately came up empty. later on america first policy institute on former president trump policies on immigration and border security. both of those conversations coming up on washington journal. >> as the 2024 present a campaign continues. american history tv presents a series historic presidential election. learn about the pivotal issues of different eras preyed what made these elections historic and explore their lasting impact on the nation. this saturday the election of 1948. >> we must entrust our destiny to those who will safeguard our rights, our freedoms and our national order. >> a new era. there will begin in washington the biggest unraveling,

untangling operation in our nations history. >> in a major upset, harry truman defeated republican governor thomas dewey keeping the white house for four more years. watch historic president elections saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern. amican history tv on c-span2. >> do you solemnly swear that the testimony are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god. >> weeknights watch are on court presentation of american history tv congress investigates as we explore major investigations by the u.s. house and senate in our country's history. authors and historians will tell the stories and we will examine the impact and legacy of key congressional hearings. tonight special senate committee

investigates the sinking of the titanic in 1912. the inadequate number of lifeboats and treatment of different classes of passengers. watch congress investigates tonight at 10:00 eastern on c-span. >> washington journal continues. host: our first guest is ken block, the author of disproven. the data that shows why he lost and how we can improve our elections. also the president of simpatico software systems, ken block joins us, welcome to the program. guest: thanks for having me. host: talk about your book a little bit but it was in november of 2020 you received a call from the trump campaign tell us about that call. guest: the call came from out of the blue. i was not pitching my services to anybody or any organization

to look for voter fraud attached to the election in 2020. cannon was the top attorney for the trump campaign asking me to help them look for voter fraud in swing states we all know by heart. i decided to help them look with the understanding that if i found it it would stand up in court and if i did not find it was not there. alex agreed that that was a good approach. he wanted an honest assessment of what things would look like from a voter fraud perspective and in the month of november we pretty much worked nonstop assessing whether or not there were a lot of dead voters in the swing states, whether there were people who voted twice in the swing state and on top of all that, the trump campaign also asked my company to do their legal due diligence for them for

claims of voter fraud that other people were making and that the trump campaign was trying to assess. we looked at about 20 different claims in the swing states and every one of them we were able to show why it was false. host: you said the call came out of the blue but did you ever learn why the call ultimately came to you? guest: i actually don't know specifically why. we do have a recognized expertise in looking at voter data. i am an expert in the legal system when it comes to election data and helped defend estates against lawsuits and have helped people bring lawsuits against states that are centered on election data. i imagine that was a big component of it at i don't know specifically why the trump campaign reached out. host: when you heard the request from the trump campaign why did you agree to take the job? guest: a couple of reasons.

it was a unique opportunity to essentially audit a national election is something that i don't believe has ever been done before, it's all most impossible to do. we had a lot of resources made available and i knew that i could do a straight up assessment and i thought in this particular circumstance it was crucial to be able to if there was voter fraud document it sufficiently so that the claims would survive legal scrutiny and if there wasn't voter fraud i thought it was important to document that all the way through so people could understand why voter fraud wasn't a factor. host: to what degree did you believe that widespread voter fraud had taken place? guest: i told alex before we signed the contract that i knew what the campaign was hoping i would find and i told him it was very unlikely that we would find the kind of fraud that could

overturn any of the election results in any of the swing states because in a decade of looking at voter data and specifically for voter fraud in that data i had never seen anything come close to what the campaign needed and alex appreciated my candor on that and said this is really what he wants, if it is there, documented. if it wasn't, tell them it wasn't there. host: did that attitude ever changed during the course of your conversations between you and the campaign as the data was coming in? guest: so, not so much on the voter fraud that i was looking for but for the claims of voter fraud that other people were bringing to the attention of the campaign, alex's conversations with me daily conversations about can you look at this one or this one, the way he framed the questions was can you tell me whether or not this claim is true or not and by the end of the month he was saying just

tell me why this one is false. host: if you want to ask our guest questions, you can ask them about election voter security and issues regarding that. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents 202-748-8002. if you want to text you can do that at 202-748-8003. you are identified as a data specialist pray for those who may not know what that means and the work you do how would you describe it? guest: my profession is working with large databases over the years, my company has been the prime contractor to the state of texas for their electronic food stamp program, oftentimes called snap now. we've done large systems like that in multiple states.

we specialize in working with data, analyzing data, understanding what the data is trying to tell us and over the last decade we have spent a lot of time looking at election data. the former candidate for governor in rhode island, i wanted to apply what i knew about data to the results of my election just to better understand how election data could be applied and what it could possibly tell us. it can tell us if there's fraud if the fraud was there and what it told us in 2020 as there were small amounts of fraud nowhere near the amounts that could change the result of the election. host: you will probably hear calls from people that said widespread voter fraud did take place paid what would you provide is evidence? caller: -- guest: so really the burden of proof is on the people making the claim. in our legal system the people bringing the charge have to prove that the charges true. so for every claim that was brought forward i was able to

show why the claims were wrong and quite often the claims were wrong because people were misinterpreting the data and they did not understand what they were looking at. they did not understand the complexities of trying to identify a specific person. for example my name is ken blo ck, it's kind of a unique name but there is deceased driver -- there are 70 to 10 blocks in the country for their 14,000 john smith in the country. people with the same name can easily share the same data birth and people who are doing the analysis trying to determine if someone voted twice for example say here's john smith born on this state and here's another john smith born on the same data, that is the same guy, that has to be voter fraud. and over 90% of the time it's not the case. host: can i ask about your methodology and the forensic so

to speak. looking at these claims for people at home to understand, what is that process involving? guest: so would relieve areas based on the claim. -- it would vary based on the claim. we had a group of dead people voting in pennsylvania from a claim of a group of undertakers paid what i had to show is the group on the list wasn't dead. the undertakers had made the mistake that i just described to you. or they had misunderstood that in pennsylvania at the time you could vote early, pass away before the election and still have your vote count and there were a bunch of votes that fell under that particular issue as they were legal votes that were valid even though the person who cast the vote had died before the election as opposed to in wisconsin in 2020 there was a

claim of three quarters of a million voters who voted fraudulently twice in that state. and it was a colossal misunderstanding on behalf of the group of people who did the analysis, they did not understand how wisconsin election data was put together and i was able to easily show why that misunderstanding led to that particular claim read -- claim. they were all different from 2500 illegals in arizona to 16,000 people voting twice in nevada. claim after claim after claim we were asked to show why the claims were wrong and we were able to do so. host: in every election cycle does a degree of voter fraud take place? guest: yes there are small amounts of voter fraud. what i mean by that is you have some people who resurrect a dead relative and vote fraudulently under that relatives identity. he found a couple of instances of that in pennsylvania in 2020.

i found one of those instances before the election. interestingly for those two cases in pennsylvania, dead voters the people who perpetrated those frauds identified themselves to authorities as republicans. so part of the narrative that we are all being -- we are all hearing in terms of voter fraud is that it is a crime that is partisan in nature and that democrats with regularity. the reality of the voter fraud i have identified and over a decade i have probably found 10,000 different individual cases of voter fraud scattered across 24 different states just to give you an idea. 10,000 votes is smaller than any of the margins of victory in the swing states in 2020. so it is a small number and it is evenly divided amongst those

10,000 fraudulent votes as many republicans cast of those votes as people who were registered, kratz. host: -- who were registered democrats. host: ken bloch joining us. our first call is from mike in ohio. republican line you are on with our guest. caller: good morning and thanks for taking my call. there was claims that in a certain district of michigan they had more votes than the actual population in that county. that would exceed the national average voting of roughly three quarters of the people that voted in that county from what i recall from the reports they had more votes counted then people who lived there. what did your investigation find out about that and why was that not brought to courts at any

point and challenged because i see almost in every case every court in those democratic districts denied any of the claims or processes to take it through court. how would you answer that? guest: so the reason you never saw that find its way to court is the claim turned out to be false. i did not investigate that personally, but the county election officials explained it again. it was a misinterpretation. the people who brought the claim forward did not fully understand the data they were looking at. i believe we are talking about the same thing. sure, because there were an awful lot of claims. there were republican judges appointed by president trump who bounced cases out of the courtrooms as well as democrat.

it wasn't a partisan legal activity. more than 60 cases heard by both republican and democrat-appointed judges, all of those cases were thrown out for different problems. a lot of the problems with the data and the claims themselves were wrong. in other cases, the person who filed the lawsuit didn't have legal standing to bring it, which if they had clear that hurdle would have had a different hurdle in that the claim itself wasn't true. i'm going to take exception to your statement that it was because of democrat judges or democrat-leaning counties or whatever that these cases didn't go. if there was a legally valid claim of voter fraud, i believe strongly that it would have been investigated and prosecuted because we did see prosecutions for the small amounts of voter fraud that i had identified in november of 2020.

so the first thing you have to ask yourself is are there overriding reasons why the claim didn't find its way into court? in my opinion and in my experience looking at the claims, most of the claims were horribly deficient. host: bruce is on the line for independents out of new york state. caller: yeah, good morning, everyone. this is an absolutely critical portion that you're are considering right now, have to give a good heads up on that one. i do have a simple question. in referring back to the previous session where we were raiding mainstream market media on its political coverage, how would you rate how mainstream media itself has either clarified or confused the talking points and actually

getting the people to understand what is really going on between the propaganda, the rat race talking points and all the market stuff that goes on in the economy? and i'd appreciate more than a yes or no, if you could expand on that. i'm just going to hang out and hope that question was clear, i'm a little nervous. guest: it's a great question and i have direct experience because i have a lot of exposure to media over the last year. before i wrote the book, i was subpoenaed by jack smith's investigation in d.c. and fani willis' in georgia and a lot of media attention came my way because of those subpoenas. there is very much a divide in our media. to a large extent, most media.

they typically lean either left or right, depending. and my experience in talking about my work for the trump campaign, i've had very little success talking about my issues with almost anybody in conservative media. in fact, the federalist is a conservative website that published a hit piece that somebody wrote against me and i wanted to rebut that peace with my own peace and they wouldn't publish my peace. so the bias in the media is real. i don't know how we ever find our way out of the problem we are in right now, but by and large if you have a set of media organizations unwilling to talk about contrarian viewpoints, which has been my experience in

trying to tell my story on conservative media, it's a real challenge and a problem because the tens if not hundreds of millions of american citizens who take their news from either left or right leaning media organizations, there are almost certainly not hearing both sides of the argument, and i think that is a very precarious situation that we are left in because of that. host: jack smith filed a case against president trump. is your data part of that case, do you know? guest: all 165 pages of it that came out last week references my company and my work several times, yes. host: bob, -- before we go to bob, what degree did they comment on? guest: the company names are redacted but i know that one of the two companies that they

mention was mind, having been hired by the trump campaign to look for fraud. i can't remember his exact language, the basic gist of it was overwhelmingly unable to document any substantial amounts of fraud, both companies failed to identify substantial amounts of fraud. and the other mention deals with a claim of fraud in nevada that was supposed to be filed that i had been asked by the campaign, and i was able to show that the claims, fix team thousand duplicate votes was more like 16 duplicate votes. and all of that was documented in emails, all those emails are in the hands of prosecutors in both georgia and in d.c. and they are just of the truth about those particular issues. host: republican line from tennessee, bob.

caller: ok. in atlanta, they shut down the polls because the water main break. now that is suspicious in itself. so what they did, they ran some poll workers out. they ran them out, a couple people went in there, they put the tablecloth up and started putting boxes out underneath the table. legislators. and then you had two hours in arizona where they shut the thing down when kari lake was running. so if these people are lying, then something ain't right. the reason that you and everyone else, you just want trump to go away. that's just like with the dishonest judges you were talking about, the republican ones.

they are liz cheney type people, and they want it to go away. you know what, the news reporter pointed up in atlanta, cameras are still rolling. host: we will let the guest respond to that. guest: yeah, so there's been credible explanations for every one of the different water main type things that you've grabbed a hold of. i'm not going to rehash what the explanations were from republican election officials explaining the different situations that you brought up but i do think it is important to talk about the reality of what caused the trump loss in

2020 and what i believe firmly is a real danger to him in this election, and that is the loss of moderate republican support. in georgia in 2020, 30,000 republican primary voters did not cast a vote in the general election. those voters were unhappy with trump. cast votes for every down ticket republican but declined to cast a vote for trump for president. you can call them rinos or moderate republicans felt when you consider that trump lost by less than 12,000 votes in georgia, the loss of 60,000 republican votes is a gigantic problem. moving ahead to this election, there are 70,000 nikki haley primary voters in georgia.

a quarter million nikki haley voters, primary voters in north carolina. 300,000 in michigan, and more than 150,000 in pennsylvania. trump really hasn't done much to try to bring these middle-of-the-road republicans back to his side. he was abandoned by them or actually kind of told them to get lost in 2020, and he hasn't fixed that problem. trump won north carolina by 130,000 votes but a quarter million republicans cast their votes for nikki haley. 150,000 nikki haley voters in pennsylvania who cast those nikki haley votes after she dropped out of the race, and trump lost pennsylvania by 80,000 votes. when you talk about real issues that can impact and explain what is happening with the elections, it doesn't get real or than that. trying to hang your hat on

conspiracy theories, while it might make you feel better about things, it's nowhere close to the reality of what really happening. to win in election you need to have more votes than everybody else, and trump's problem is he's never brought the republican middle back over to his side and in these really close races where the margin of victory can be measured in tens of thousands of votes, it doesn't take many moderate republican to swing the election the other way. host: there's a profile of some rule changes in pennsylvania saying that this year's ballot includes return envelopes preprinted with the year in large bowl numbers and under state law every county has some discretion to handle mail-in ballots and errors as it sees fit. do you think those issues have been resolved to some degree this time around? guest: no. i mean -- no.

i don't believe that election authorities have spent the last four years dealing with what i believe are the really important issues that should be changed with how we conduct our elections. we do have many states whose voter rolls are dirty, there is a lot of slop in those voter rolls. by the way, most of what i'm talking about has nothing to do with any swing states. swing states have been under such a microscope. most of the swing states have very clean data now. but i'm talking about states like new jersey where there are 25,000 registered voters with no date of birth on record for those voters. an 8000 of those voters cast votes in 2020. so there's a lot of things like that that have been left unaddressed.

the ability of states to keep their data clean is almost impossible without the federal government providing some help for them to do it in the form of computer systems to help them figure out if they have voters who are registered to vote in their state and then also some other states. the mail ballots are handled wildly different from state to state and often times county to county, and those variations in how mail ballots are handled mean that different voters can experience really different rules. i don't think that's really fair. we should really have standardized results for the same situation when you vote across the country. gerrymandering is a terrible problem that alters the outcome of elections and by any reasonable look, it is not they are and it is not becoming of our democracy. these are things that i believe everybody can look at and agree we need to address, but these things weren't addressed.

the whole back part of my book talks about these sorts of issues and the things that we really need to do. to make people feel better about our elections they have to be more similar to each other across the country than they are right now. we have to get there and no matter who wins this upcoming election, hopefully we can move beyond the voter fraud narrative let's take the focus on our elections and do some positive things to make it better. host: beretta, north carolina, democrat flood. caller: it seems to me there is one democrat that is on the line stating their view to every three republicans this morning, seems like to me. i've started writing them down. but anyway, what i would like to say is i just don't understand how these republicans -- i mean,

they are the ones that are committing the voter fraud. just came across a publication, for people voted twice. they voted absentee ballot and then they went to the precinct and voted on the day of. there were three poll workers that helped them with this. i mean, generally whenever i hear about voter fraud and then you hear something about who it was, it is generally republicans. whatever it is they do, they turn around and scream that their opponent is doing. that is the standard way that they operate. take the fact of elon musk's mother out there telling people

to vote 10 times. i might -- i think, if this was aoc's mother, what do you think would be said about that? host: we will let the guest respond, thank you. guest: voter fraud when it happens is a bipartisan activity. i've seen just as many democrats commit it as republicans, but a much more important point, president trump's focus on voter fraud to legally contest the outcome of a state election is really problematic for this reason. when you vote, your vote is cast anonymously. when the machine tallies your vote, they cannot tie that vote back to a specific person. now this did not happen, but let's imagine that i found 15 thousand fraudulent votes in

georgia in 2020. the margin of victory with less than 12,000. i didn't, but if i had found 15,000 fraudulent votes i would have no way to show that the results of those votes were votes for biden as opposed to votes for trump. so the campaign could never prove that the fraudulent votes because their candidate harm, and in our legal system it is not enough to show that fraud occurred. if you want to overturn the election result, you have to prove that the fraud harmed president trump, and it's impossible to do. and so the whole narrative of talking about voter fraud as if it could be a legally valid reason to overturn an election result is a really big ask of the judicial system, and i can't imagine that we ever get to the point where if we did find enough fraud, that a decision

would be made to overturn an election result or to take the stated winner, remove the title of winner and hand it over to the opponent. you can't do it without proof that those votes went one way or the other end that proof doesn't exist. host: mr. block is reporting that the texas attorney general is asking to verify the citizenship status of more than for the 50,000 names on the state border role saying the vast majority are likely eligible to vote and he wants to weed out those that aren't. how difficult is that type of request? guest: it's incredibly difficult. the only database that potential he could be used to help identify someone who is not here legally is owned by the department of homeland security. but you still have the problem with names and dates of birth and how do you know for sure that it is the same person?

it's very challenging to identify a unique individual in a database of names and dates of earth. -- date of birth. i have yet to see any hard evidence that there are a lot of votes being cast by people not here legally. i think the attorney general is engaging in some political theater. there's nothing illegal about engaging in political theater, however when that theater causes people to seriously doubt the outcome of elections, that's where we have to sort of take a step backwards and soberly look at what the claims are. that's really what i meant you're talking about right now. there's fraud, but not enough fraud. there are some people who are going to vote illegally the same way there are some other people to cast votes for their dead relatives, but it doesn't happen in large amounts. so we are scapegoating elections under the guise of questioning the intention -- integrity of

elections when the outcomes of our elections have not ever been proven to have been swung by fraud. and it is a weird place we are in, it's only recently we are seeing these claims. the last decade that we are seeing this come. with executive talking about it we have yet to see legally acceptable proof documenting enough fraud to matter anywhere. host: michigan this is brian, independent line. caller: mr. block, how many envelopes did you get to look at? the mail-in ballots that have to be signed by the person who submitted them, how many did you look at? guest: i was looking at envelopes, i was looking at data. caller: so we don't know whether one person sent all of them in or not. guest: if you assume that election workers did their jobs verifying signatures, i think you could have some level of confidence that one person

didn't send them all in. caller: laughing[] except i don't. guest: this is the challenge. you say that, but you don't have any proof to back up that statement, do you? host: collar is gone, apologies. so a similar sentiment. what would be your expanded response to the one he just made? guest: right. it's easy to make a claim. it's really hard to back at that claim in fact. in this particular space where we are talking about election outcomes in the legal system and asking the courts to take action as a result of an election result, you can't come with a squishy claim that you can't back up because it goes nowhere in our legal system, and that is

the right outcome. we can't prosecute and convict people on hearsay evidence. that's one of the key underpinnings of our legal system. you have to have proof that stands up and the court of law. and with a color for michigan just brought up was a completely undocumented, a complete lack of proof. it is his feeling that those votes had to have happened that way, but the caller is also refusing to acknowledge that 150,000, the margin of victory for biden in michigan was 150,000 votes. that's a lot of votes to have been cast fraudulently regardless of the state. it's very hard to commit voter fraud that is that big and not get caught added. and he's also ignoring that almost 300,000 voters in michigan are nikki haley voters. it's much more likely that trump had lost in 2020 and will lose

in 2024 in michigan do to those voters and not any nonspecific case of voter fraud. host: you did a profile for time magazine and one of the things that came out of that leading up to the election about the vulnerability, you said the threat comes from within, but what i'm most worried about in this election cycle is the role that partisan election officials might play in altering the outcome of an election. could you expand on that? guest: there's been multiple news stories on how in 70 counties in the swing states, conservative counties, that there are conservative election workers, election officials, some of whom have done some pretty sketchy things in the lead up to the selection, including refusing to certify the results of the 2022 election without any specific reason.

which is lawless behavior in the court system of those states. what i worry about our overzealous partisan election officials who decide to try to tip the balance of the election on their own. might they toss out every other mail ballot cast by voters who don't share their political ideologies? to me, that's one of the most likely forms of voter fraud that we may see in the selection. because as long as we have election officials who are willing to do anything to see the election coming up the way they want, that is not good. our election officials should not be hyper partisan. we should have election officials dedicated to doing the job correctly, doing the job in a way that survives every audit, and we don't have that right now. we are seeing high levels of

partisanship that we see throughout the country now being applied to the conduct of our elections, and that is a terrible thing to see. host: james is in florida, democrats line. caller: good morning, gentlemen. there's two parts to this. the first one, my question is about arizona. i know the numbers for how many times they did the recount. nathan doing this for about 18 years now. i'm grateful for that. in florida, that's extremely difficult. however, in 2020, there were a couple of people that were dead

people that voted and turned out to be the children of the spouse who forged their signature and got caught. the system does work. i will let you take it from there. guest: he safed down there, i know you've got a big hurricane headed right at you. yes, the system is clunky and honestly, validating signatures, i can't sign my name the same way twice. it's a 100-year-old way to prove your identity. i don't like it. i am a fan of a national voter registration with biometrics that i feel uniquely identify you or something like that. there are ways we can be absolutely certain that the president cast their vote is who they say they are. ironically, and a lot of republicans were most concerned about this piece of election

integrity hates the idea of a national voter registration, but as a technologist i can tell you that if we were going to put together an election system from scratch today for this country, we would never, ever designed something that looks like what we have right now. our system just kind of became what it is over the course of 200 years. it doesn't hang together and technologically there are far better ways to do it. it's the best that we can do with what we have but i'm going to come back to what i said earlier. we should get serious about bringing our entire election infrastructure up to the modern standards of what we do. many other countries do their elections on far better technology than we do. they have far better processes than we do. and what stands in our way is bipartisanship and a lack of

will to make the change. we should make the change because it will make our systems far stronger in the long run. host: you mentioned it briefly just after the caller, to let the greedy you think that the hurricane in north carolina and florida, will that impact the selection? guest: yeah. when you don't have electricity, you don't have the freely, you have people much more worried about eating and drinking than casting their votes, yeah, it just has to have an impact on the elections in those places. i guess the only good news from an election standpoint is we are still basically one month out. in that month hopefully amongst the things that emergency relief workers are working on is making sure that people have the ability to cast votes in those areas, and if they had to get out of dodge and maybe be away from their homes for much longer periods of time, making sure

that they can get the mail ballot and cast their votes. it's going to have an impact that is impossible to predict which way that impact will be in terms of partisan outcome, but from a democracy standpoint we need to make sure that everybody has the ability to cast their vote. host: when you put out your book, what was the response from the trump campaign? guest: there was no official response or acknowledgment. although i did take a text message from alex camden who wanted me to send him a copy of the book, and i did. host: this is ken bloch, the author of "disproven: my unbiased search for voter fraud in the trump campaign." it is a much longer title but if you want to pick it up, there it is. guest: thanks for having me this morning. host: we are going to speak with chad wolf, former president

trump's immigration policy approvals, both policies could look like under harris administration. we will have that conversation when washington journal continues. announcer: attention middle and high so students across america. it's time to make your voice heard. 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 or your community? whether you are 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 grand prize of $5,000, this is your opportunity not only to make an impact, but

also be rewarded for your creativity and hard work enter your submissions today. scan the code or v studentcam.org for all the details on how to answer. the deadline is january 20, 2025. c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse our latest collection of products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring unfiltered view of what was happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with live streams and floor proceedings and hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events, the courts,

campaigns and more from the world politics all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. scan the qr code to download for free today or visit our website. your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. washington journal continues. host: the america first policy institute, he serves of the executive director for the center of homeland security and immigration with the former acting homeland security secretary in the trump administration from 2019 the 2021. welcome back to the program. guest: thanks for having me. host: a little bit about the institute itself, what is it and how is it funded? guest: the america first policy

institute is a 501-c3 institution, we are a think tank and we started in 2021 shortly after the end of the trump administration. we've been going on for 3.5 years with about 16 different policy centers. we talk about all of the public policy facing the country today from national security to homeland security to health care, education, tax policy, and everything in between. we talked about the america first approach that was practiced under president trump's first term, and so we do events, speaker series, white papers. talk to members of congress and their staff about legislation and things of that nature. it's been going well. we continue to grow year after year and i think we are having a pretty sizable impact for just being organization that is about 3.5 years old. host: to what degree is that an extension of the current trump campaign or a transition team if that takes place? guest: well, we've got folks

that have been working on different policies over the last 3.5 years, that i'm sure the campaign has taken a look at to see how you would govern, what policies you would do in grabs a second trump administration as well. there are certainly folks down there working hard on president trump's transition. host: how does that inform your current position on immigration and what is best practices to you when it comes to immigration and border policy? guest: all of my positions and all of my views on border security and immigration enforcement and then on the legal immigration side are obviously influenced by my time at dhs. i served at the department all four years of the trump administration and in the

interim served as acting secretary for the past 14 or 15 months. so my views are impacted by the discussions, the interactions and my experiences with border patrol agents, and all of those in the department and the outside of the department, interacting with those at the department of justice, state department and others on what we did during four years. so my view and how i talk about these issues come from my experience, on the ground experience in helping to run the department and trying to execute its primary mission or one of its primary missions, and that is border security. host: what were the drivers of illegal immigration specifically during the trump administration and how do you see those today? guest: a lot of the drivers are what be called incentive factors. a lot of loopholes in immigration law that we saw with the cartels and the smugglers

taking advantage of time and time again. so we were to close those loopholes. we tried to work with congress to pass laws that the close those loopholes and when that didn't materialize we used executive authority and executive action to take action and to put new policies in place that would try to close those loopholes, hold people accountable, try to render asylum protections in many cases to those that needed it quicker in the process. so just trying to execute the law as it was written by congress. we worked pretty steadily to make some process at of the chaos we saw on that border. host: if you want to call and talk to our guest, the numbers are (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 four democrats. independent, (202) 748-8002. if you want to ask questions,

you should know that at 9:00 the house of representatives is expected to come in for a pro forma session. there's usually just take a few minutes. we will go to that when it does take place but when we are done with that session, we will continue our interview with chad wolf. go ahead and start calling in, we will take those calls as soon as we can. as you look at the almost four years of the biden administration, how would you judge its practices when it comes to immigration, what they've done and what they should have done? guest: unfairly critical of the biden harris administration with their actions along that border. you see the worst border crisis we've ever experienced over the last four years and it's primarily because of policy decisions made by this administration, really from day one. in the first hundred days, they took 94 executive actions on immigration that really tore down a a lot of to be successful policies of the trump administration and really didn't

put anything in its place. so what you saw, use of the traffickers, cartel members and others taken van into that. they reinstituted a catch and release policy which is detrimental to americans and american communities, and so it goes down the board. the data, much of which is on the dhs website just proves this point. you seen encounters reach astronomically high numbers, using national security threats, noon suspected terrorist encounters reach astronomically high numbers. if you go down the board and look at all of these different measures into different factors, they are all trending in the wrong direction under this administration because of policy decisions. it's not because of a lack of resources or a lack of money, it's not because congress didn't pass a bill. those policy decisions have consequences that unfortunately the american people are having to deal with. host: the vice president

appeared on 60 minutes last night and part of it she did talk about immigration efforts by the biden administration and their approach. i want to play you a little bit and then get your response to it. >> there was an historic flood of undocumented immigrants the first three years of your administration. as a matter of fact, it quadrupled from the last year of president trump. was it a mistake to loosen the immigration policies as much as you did? >> it's a long-standing problem and solutions are at hand and from day one literally we have been offering solutions. >> what i was asking was was it a mistake to kind of allow that flood to happen in the first place? >> the policies that we have been proposing are about fixing the problem, not promoting the problem. >> but numbers did quadrupled.

>> and the numbers today because of what we have done, we have cut the flow of illegal immigration by half. we have cut the flow of fentanyl by half, but we need congress to be able to act to actually fix a problem. host: mr. wolf, what is your response? guest: i've got a lot of thoughts there. i don't know that the vice president will be answer the question. the question was over the last three years before 2024, why did you institute the policies that you did that caused the border crisis to ask load in the way in which it has? she didn't answer that. she did mention proposing different policies. again, this administration has been in power. the american people to want proposals, they want action. the president has an immense amount of authority here. the dhs secretary has an immense

amount of authority to take action so it's unclear to me why she keeps saying proposing. she's been the vice president for three and a half years, it's time to start doing. and that her last comment talking about how they've cut border crossings and half is simply not the case. there's a lot of data on the america first policy website. the border patrol encounters are going down at the number of encounters at ports of entry are skyrocketing and the numbers of parole that they created from the program skyrocketing. and if you take all three of those numbers, the number of illegal aliens coming into the country today has remained steady over these last three and a half to four years. the numbers are not going down. host: we saw the biden administration make some changes to asylum policy. in september, around 54,000 arrests took place. when you see those numbers out of that relate to what you just said?

guest: they talk about that number going down and they are able to say well, our border numbers are cut in half. but what they don't tell you are at ports of entry, but they created in this administration, fly here into the united states, if you look at all three of those together, the numbers remain around 150 to 200 thousand encounters or it admissible aliens into the united states, and so that gives you the full picture of what is going on. if he didn't have that program, these individuals would still be trying to cross the border because of the policies, because of catch and release and other things the biden administration is doing. it a little bit of sleight-of-hand they are using and in my mind they are not being honest with the american public to say border patrol

encounters may have gone down, but here is what is continuing to happen along that border. host: there was an expansion the asylum policy saying the u.s. could restrict asylum access between official border crossings saying that the daily numbers at an average of 1500 per day, the daily numbers now have to be below 1600 for nearly a month before restrictions can be listed. what does that suggest to you as far as a policy that was previously put in place? guest: so many different procedures or restrictions on it, so many different loopholes if you actually read the policy. so many different ways they are able to exempt individuals out of that that it makes it almost meaningless. the actual impact of that is

having very little impact because of the way in which they have structured that. if you traveled through third country where you could have sought asylum, you are ineligible to see it here in the united states. we didn't have a threshold number that you had to reach. it makes it very complex directly administer on a day by day, week by week and month by month basis were border patrol agent along that border. host: this is chad wolf. kansas, democrats line. you are on with our guest. caller: yes, i was calling about the phrase america first and exactly what it means for your group today. i know that it was first coined by charles lindbergh back in the

30's, 40's. but the meaning of that term and what your group intends to do, are they similar or can you explain the difference between the america first movement today and the america first movement that was in lindbergh's time? guest: that's a good question. to be honest, i haven't looked at what lindbergh and how he used that term. the manner in which we use it today, the same way that ronald reagan used the term. when they institute public policy, whether it is national security, border security, education, making sure we are looking after americans first. one is in the best interest of americans, then we look at the best interest of our overseas

partners and elsewhere, and i think that is what our view is, and how we look at a variety of different perspectives. you saw that championed during four years of president trump's tenure, and you talk about policies that were very prosperous, whether it is an economic policy, the national security, the border security. i will give you one example. only talk about border security, i talk about what can we do alone that border to make sure we are protecting americans and american communities? i think for the most part when you hear the biden harrison mr. risch and talk about water security, almost always it is what is best for the illegal alien. that is how you approach the issue and what you keep in mind is your endgame. host: glen, pennsylvania, republican line. you are on, go ahead.

caller: yeah, i'd like to congratulate mr. wolf for being in the best administration. in 10 years you going to learn how great trump was and how much of a joke the biden administration was. but the border is open. they are flying people in. they think they've got 15 million people that registered democrat, and the last thing is i see kamala's husband worked at mcdonald's for two years. that's where they got their mcdonald's story. host: what did you think of some of those claims when it comes to what is happening with immigration? guest: again, what we've been experiencing over these last three and a half, four years has been dramatic for the country. not only the fact that you have

all these folks breaking u.s. law, it's also the downstream effects that american communities are suffering today. we can talk about the fentanyl and the games in the public safety threat and the national security threats, hope you can also talk about the children. over 500,000 children trafficked into this country. they go into our public education system and that has not been planned for. english is usually not their first language. what does that do to teach your resources in these public education systems and our public health systems, public safety systems? when you have this influx of individuals largely being released, it's going to have downstream effects on the u.s. economy and some of our social safety net systems. i think that it's really not being understood and0 i'm also concerned about that. host: former president trump

would suggest that mass deportation to be an option. what would that look like? guest: absolutely. removing individuals, whether you call it removal, repatriation, deportation, the ability to remove people from the country is an integral part of any sane country immigration system. countries around the world or do this each and every day, they remove people who don't have a legal right to be here. so i think president trump should get a lot of credit for talking about this. this ministration hunter biden and harris, the two don't mix well together. you can't have those two and have a functioning immigration system. i think we need to allow our ice removal officers. we need to allow them to do this. 600,008 hundred thousand illegal alien criminals.

you need to get at it because it is hard doesn't mean you shouldn't try. individuals know that if they break the law, they come here. if they do certain things in the fall out of status, they will be removed from the country. that's going to have a deterrent effect and you will see more and more folks start to follow the law. host: you said ice officers, to what extent that extend to using local police force or other means if a mass deportation is going to take place? guest: dhss partner with local law enforcement officers in the past, a very specific program that has been utilized at ice under previous administrations. and so you have sheriffs, law enforcement officers around the country that want to help, that want to remove criminal aliens

from their community and they are looking for a little help from their federal government to do that. there is a partnership there that can be accomplished but again, you are going to have to target these individuals and i think all of that is important. it's not going to happen overnight but you can start to build and you can start to remove criminal aliens, other national and public safety threats that are in american communities and i think that is what americans want to start seeing. they want to see the folks in the community that are a public threat removed if they are here illegally. host: virginia, democrats line. caller: i just have a quick question. i degree, i think the biden administration probably could have done some things a little bit faster. but i guess the question is that the house has been controlled by the gop for the last two years. they actually get a pass for not passing anything.

how is that fair that they get off by not passing laws? they make the laws. we let the house not pass anything. nothing was passed, they asked the senate if they were going to do anything. then they went back to the drawing board. i've never understood government where you have a situation where it was a crisis, you have lawmakers, i hope you feel it is worth it that you are running on this. i don't understand why you are on here, i agree with some of the things you're saying as far as with the biden administration should have done, but you are not saying anything about the gop as far as what they have not done. host: on the senate side, there was a bipartisan bill that came forward.

guest: i think it's important, but if you go back even before the senate bill, you can go back to a hanceville that was passed at this point over 14 months ago. the house did pass a border security bill that talks about some of what i'm talking about but it obviously goes further as well. they sent it over to the senate for the senate to either pass it or obviously to debate it, make changes to it. that bill sat on senator schumer's death for the last 14 or 15 months, they've not acted on it. instead they decided to go a different approach in the senate with a different bill. there's also bipartisan opposition as well. i took a look at it, it was not operationally effective. it did not implement anything that would curb the crisis. one that the house passed and

one that the senate did. let's go back to the root of the crisis itself. congress didn't pass a law that created this crisis in 2021. it was the administration that took certain actions. it's always been baffling to me a little bit that the administration turns to congress and says you guys fix it. when instead, there are certain executive actions that can be taken, certain policies that can be taken and put into place that can start to curb this crisis pretty extensively. they've just chosen not to do that. i understand the need and desire to talk about legislation, that is what congress does, and i think there is an legislation they be passed. at the end of the day, congress didn't cause this. it is up to you guys to fix. we washed our hands of this matter, we can't do anything more, and so we need you to pass more laws that we probably won't

enforce because we are not enforcing the ones today. i think it's more of a good talking point that an actual solution to the problem. host: republican live in virginia, this is for john. good morning. caller: chad, thank you, great response to that last caller. there is such a need for education on both sides of the aisle and the way you just capture that is great because i think there's a lot of confusion where folks just don't understand the fact that we have two chambers in congress and have to go through both chambers to get voted into law. but my question really is just hitting on what you just brought up, the bill that the senate tried to pass the senator lankford and sinema. it just seems like president biden and kamala harris and tim walz just use that as a speaking point to say that that bill got passed, that would solve molar problems.

president biden has said it time and time again and it seems like there is a lot from the media as well as on the debates when president trump was debating president biden and kamala harris, when jd vance was debating tim walz. seems like a huge opportunity just to share that. all you guys say is pass the bill, pass the bill. but it's not going to do anything because you have 5000 border crossings a day. so at the end the day i guess my question is why are the republican party politicians, your argument has no merit. it's not holding any water. just pressing them on that. that would dissipate any type of argument they would have. guest: i do agree with you. the more you dig into that bill and explain that bill, the more it starts to fall apart. he stopped -- you start talking about how it doesn't end cajun release, it doesn't address

asylum fraud and as you indicated, and allows up to 1.8 million a year before that trigger is instituted, and then that trigger sunsets after three years. everything else in the bill states indefinitely. that makes no sense to me. i'm not sure how congress knows there will be a crisis for years from now and if it is, that provision is no longer available to the department. so there's a lot of things wrong with that bill. in my mind there are a lot of new procedures and that bill, things that have never been tried on the border that members of the senate decided to put in there. and i love that this bipartisanship, i love it when you can have a bill passed by a republican and democrat but just because a republican senator and a democratic senator write a bill doesn't mean it is a good bill. neither one of those individuals has served for extended periods of time along that border, and so they don't know what it is really like.

they don't know the procedures and have asked, he certainly would have offered up opinions. just because you can say it is bipartisan doesn't make it a good bill. it makes it a bipartisan bill but that does not mean it is an effective bill. when i had other folks that i worked with, operators look at it, they all said the same thing, that this bill is actually not going to solve the crisis. instead if you wanted to pass legislation, you go back to either the trump administration, the obama or the bush administration and let's look at things that work and then codify that instead of coming up with entirely new system that are untested, unproven and you have no idea if they are going to work or not. host: about two minutes until the house comes in for its pro forma session. barbara, you're joining us from pennsylvania, independent line. go ahead. caller: yes, we've talked about what the democrats have not done. quickly, would you please tell me why trump didn't do this when

he was in his administration? the wall didn't get completed. explain why he did not get rid of this problem of immigration. host: barbara in pennsylvania. guest: yeah, i don't know that is a problem you can ever get rid of, but you can always try to tackle it and try to address it in any form that it takes. we talk about the border wall system that you indicated, we built over 450 miles, i think it was 453 miles of that water wall system mainly in california, arizona, parts of texas and others. another 250 we were looking at the biden administration obviously stopped and hasn't built any more physical infrastructure. if you speak with border patrol agents, they need those priority locations to stop that. the remaining mexico program, our asylum cooperative agreements. there's other enforcement programs that we have put in

place in 2019 and 2020, and that's why you saw those illegal apprehensions or encounters start to follow some of the lowest numbers that we've ever seen. had the biden administration just kept those programs in place and operating today, you would still see those numbers low. but in the first 100 days, they repealed almost all of what we had put in place in 2019 and 2020. in my mind it's unfair to say president trump didn't solve this problem. we had certain policies and procedures and tactics in place to address the issue, but if you remove those and you don't put anything in its place, you are going to see the problem started just explode and that is what we've seen over these last three and a half to four years. host: chad wolf of the america first policy institute joining us for this conversation.

retribution. come down from your heavens and grant us the mercy of your reconciliation. too easily we speak of escalation and ignore starvation. lord, let your condemnation of our hateful or apathetic attitudes call us to account for our own contributions to this vortex of strife. we say we love you. may we show that love by striving for the right and not rightness. for lives lived in peace forever and not living forever fearful of the imminent possibility of death. in these times of grief, of sadness, of anger, and of frustration, may your mercy extend from the heavens to those

who love you and yearn for your deliverance. in your sovereign name we pray. amen. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to section 3-z of house resolution 5, the journal of the last day's proceedings is approved. the chair will lead the house in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. pursuant to section 3-z of house resolution 5, the house stands adjourned until 1 p.m. on friday, october 11.

caller: in 2013, they shutdown down another bill. i think the republican party is pandering to its racist base, but maintaining a steady flow of cheap immigrant labor. they anti-immigrant propaganda is absolutely despicable. it sounds exactly like the anti-jewish propaganda during the third reich. now, i live 90 miles from the

border. we just don't see the kinds of problems here in new mexico that people claim elsewhere. in fact, we need that immigrant labor. if you look at, if you go to the cato institute of the u.s. chamber of commerce, they say we need more immigration, not less, and these immigrants are being mischaracterized as criminals and carrying disease, you know? the object is to frighten people. we lost 4 million workers to covid. we need to make up that workforce. in agriculture and construction and in the hospitality industry. host: ok, that was cliff in new mexico. guest: obviously i disagree with the caller. i think that the objective is not to demonize or scare, but to

enforce the law. the united states is a welcoming nation, i talk about this a lot. we give one billion green cards per year. we have a number of visas you can come in and work on. there are legal ways to come into the country where you can contribute to work, leave, and do other things, but that is not what we are talking about here. we need to be clear and concise, we are talking about the illegal activity on that border and if you live in new mexico, i have no idea how you don't understand and see the effects of the illegal activity coming across the border in new mexico, arizona, texas and the like. we are talking about the illegal activity. what we are asking is that if these individuals want to come into the united states and avail themselves of the protections of the united states, that they do

that legally and don't continue to cross illegally, enriching cartels, putting border patrol agent's in harm's way. there is a better way to do this. that is what we talk about" we demonstrated during the trump administration. host: when you hear comments about migrants eating pets, coming in with diseases, what do you think of that type of rhetoric? caller: i think that this is an issue that the legacy media is not paying attention to. why are they are not stories about 30,000 individuals every month being flown into the united states from cuba, haiti, nicaragua, venezuela. why are we talking more about the fact that the dhs inspector general said they are not being properly vetted? they are not having proper sponsors, into the united states. instead we just kind of ignore

all of that. when jd vance and president trump talk about a haitian population in the middle of ohio that is almost double or, you know, the size of that population, let's start talking about what this administration is doing in flying in and allowing these folks to come into american communities, some that have been overwhelmed. that's not just senator vance and president trump. the mayor of new york city has been on record for two years saying that it's unsustainable. that new york city may not be able to recover from the number of migrants coming in. i think that that is what they are trying to illustrate. we have an ongoing crisis and problem in the united states because of the policies and no one is paying attention to it. again, i give credit for trying to shine a light on this, saying that this is a problem. the policies we are seeing are not helping.

host: you say give credit, but is that the rhetoric used to highlight the problem as you see it? caller: look -- guest: look, everyone is going to talk about the border and the crisis there in their unique way. i heard senator vance talk about his constituents and the concerns with what he's hearing. i haven't been on the ground but i can tell you the policies from this administration, whether it is 20,000 haitians in the middle of ohio or nicaraguans in the middle of kansas or elsewhere, that is a problem largely being ignored. the more light that we shine on that, americans, the vast majority are shaking their head saying what are we doing, why do we have this influx of folks coming in? then you hear the biden administration saying that all the venezuelans that have come here on parole in the last two years, we are not extending that

parole, so what do you do with them? they will fall out of status in less than two years. what do you do with them? we know they won't be removed. senator vance and others are trying to bring the issue to like to talk about solutions and talk about how this is a major problem the u.s. is going to face. again, that legacy media and vice president harris doesn't want to talk about that. host: baltimore, maryland, independent line, courtney, good morning. guest: i'm a registered democrat and that's because i live in the state of maryland, to participate in the primary -- host: i'm going to have to stop you and call you -- ask you to call back on the democrats line, please. we tried to keep people in the lanes that we have to have that representation when they call in. we invite you to call us back in the next few minutes. greg, indiana, republican line,

hello. caller: yes, i would like to ask why nobody has gone farther in this country to start making sure that our interior is cleaned out first by fingerprinting. there has to be a system. a system that will positively identify all u.s. citizens. in fact, it should be a party, fingerprinted and already identified as american citizens. so, you have to dig deeper. you have to do more as far as fingerprinting anybody that comes in here illegally. and they are put on a schedule to be fingerprinted all the time.

host: that was greg in indiana. employers, when they hire, what is it that can make sure they are hiring legal immigrants? guest: if i understood the two parts of that question, one is the vetting of individuals coming into the country to make sure they are being fingerprinted and the like, i think that that is important, but some of these folks that come from countries that don't share information, where we don't have any background or anything to vet them from, we are relying on the host country information that they share with us. sometimes it is good, sometimes it is not good, you can see the problems with the vetting there. in the united states it is obviously against the law to hire illegal aliens and they certainly have a duty to make sure that the individuals they are hiring have work authorization and there are a variety of ways they can do that. e-verify is run by dhhs and it allows them to run the

biographical information on that individual in they will get a hit back saying whether or not that person is authorized to work in the united states. employers do have some responsibility here to make sure that the workers they are hiring are in fact legal and authorized to work in the united states. obviously, on the employee, they obviously have a responsibility as well, that they are only applying to jobs if they have the work authorization. if they don't have the work authorization, you shouldn't be working in the united states. host: democratic line, mississippi, ava, hello. caller: how are you? host: good, thank you. caller: i would like to ask, mr. wolf, people like him, with a send their own people? he is speaking up for a race of people. these are human beings and they

should treat them like that. they are carrying children, not drugs. what would you think if that happened to you and me? i'm from here. are your family from here? i just wanted to ask that question. these are humans. please treat them that way. guest: sure, absolutely, good to hear from mississippi. i was born there. again, what we are talking about is making sure that we treat everyone with respect, but also making sure you are not putting them in harm's way. the policies of this administration are doing just that. this idea that i continue to hear that if you don't let everyone into the united states and don't remove everyone, only if you do those things are you compassionate, do you have a heart for the folks coming into the country, and i disagree with that. that is not how our immigration law is written. the secular branches here to execute on that law. you need to be able to hold

people accountable, need to be able to remove people and enforce the law. going back to my earlier point, we are one of the, we are the most welcoming country in the world when it comes to allowing individuals to come to the united states. we ask that you come legally, don't come illegally and break our laws. those that do and don't have a legal right to remain in the united states, that is to say don't have asylum protections, they need to be removed from the united states. simply saying that you don't care for individuals or treat them as humans if you want to remove them, i disagree with that. that is not how our immigration law was written, not how congress envisioned it, shouldn't be the way it's executed. host: chad wolf is the executive director for homeland security and immigration in the trump administration. mr. wolf, thank you for your time. guest: thank you. host: we will finish the program

with open forum. if you want to participate, here are the numbers to call. (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 for democrats and for independents, (202) 748-8002 . we will take those calls when "washington journal" continues. ♪ >> since 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress, from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings and committee hearings . c-span gives you a front row seat to have issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions, and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government.

>> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio is easy, tell your speaker to play c-span radio with important public affairs events throughout the day. weekdays, catch "washington today," tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable. >> friday nights, watch campaign trail, looking at the issues of the week driving political news and to take a look at the week ahead. watch the c-span 2024 campaign trail, friday nights at 7:00 eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org, or download it as a podcast on c-span now, our free mobile app, or wherever you get your podcasts. c-span, your unfiltered view of

politics. >> if you ever miss any of c-span's coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates, and other events with markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights. the points of interest markers are on the right hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos. this makes it easy to get a quick idea of what was debated in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on points of interest. >> "washington journal" continues. host: again, if you want to participate and text us, (202) 748-8003 is how you do that. you can always post on our social media sites, facebook and on x. right after this program and on this network, the supreme court will hold its argument on

an issue ks ghost gn garland versus vander stock ghost guns are firearms that can be assembled and if the government can require age limits. you can find that starting at 10:0-span. follow along on c-span nowour free mobile video app, and online at c-span.org. whent comes to theampaign today, jd vance will be in detroit, michigan, speaking to supporrs about the auto industry and the economy. c-span, c-span now, and.org is how yo do that. tim walz will be hding a rally in reno, nevada today, later on. u can see that at 9:30 this evening and again on our platform there, the main channel , c-span.org. you can always see that information on our website, c-span.org. president biden has to travel to

philadelphia later today to participate in a rally. the vice president is in new york today to take several interviews as part of several interviews that are planned for this week. all of it is up for grabs on this open forum. patricia, you are starting us off. go ahead. caller: i meant to call the democrat line. it's open forum, right? host: ok, but we are asking you to pick the best line that represents you. go ahead, call back, we will try to get you in. let's hear from rosemary and virginia, democrats line. caller: i had a question for mr. wolf. i want to know why is it that every four years, whenever there is time for an election, you all make immigrants your bogeyman. this has been a problem during republican time in the white

house. it's been a problem when democrats and republicans are in the white house. my question to you is -- what did trump do when he was in the white house, trying to build a wall that mexico didn't pay for? host: mr. wolf is no longer with us, rosemary, but you can always watch that interview, by the way, on our various platforms if you want to see the things he said. texas, independent line, we will hear from david. david in texas, hello? you are on, go ahead, please. caller: yes. uh. i wanted to actually try to catch your speaker, but i guess he's probably gone by now. i live in texas, ok? for people that don't know, for people that haven't been truly affected by this, by the

immigration thing, come to texas . look at what these folks have done to the black community. they have totally taken over our communities, ok? it's really sad, for people to come and talk about it, it's one of the things from the past, but it's another to be totally stupid. mr. wolf, he didn't mention one time about how this has just totally destroyed our black communities. come to any city you want to come to. texas to california. you are going to see it for yourself. host: what do you mean by destroyed the black community? caller: i grew up here in fort worth texas. there are no more black communities because of the millions of illegals that have been let into this country. where do you think they come to? you think they are going out to

one of those million dollar homes? they are not. they are right here. we tried that welcoming stuff, being nice. those folks don't like us. they come up here and totally take over and dominate. what trump is saying is mostly right about them folks. i'm not racist. i married a hispanic woman. but the truth is the truth. for those who want to not know the truth, come to texas. host: ok. manual, republican line, texas. caller: i wanted to piggyback on your last caller. i'm a black trump voter, but a lot of the black people that are so compassionate about open borders are the ones who get hurt at the end. not as far as physically, but my own community is hispanic. this is not a knock against the hispanics. the black community doesn't have the skill set to buy houses, fix

houses up, put their money in a pool to refurbish a community. nothing against hispanics. there's no black grocery stores in madison, wisconsin, there are probably 20 hispanic grocery stores. no black restaurants in madison, wisconsin. probably thousands of mexican restaurants. this is not a knock against hispanics. all the black people calling in on those lines, as far as crime and purchasing houses? new york and chicago, those sanctuary cities, they are, they have buyers remorse and you don't have the right to cry when your community is gone. host: randy, north carolina, democratic line, hello. caller: i agree with the last caller, but here's what i want to say with -- say to those

slick brained trump voters. check out ronald reagan, he made a speech. the immigrants keep the country young and free. without immigrants, it's not america. everybody's an immigrant. i'm sick of these republican close the border people, coming across the street, coming across the border, everything else, that's a lie. the border is secured. we need immigrants in this country to keep it young and prosperous. host: that was randy in north carolina. kamala harris taking aim at ron desantis on monday for reportedly not taking her calls regarding federal storm relief efforts as a second powerful hurricane bears down on florida, milton. the vice president's comments came a couple of hours after abc

news reported that he was not taking calls from the vice president, citing unnamed aides who said that the calls seemed political in nature. to give you a sense of the back and forth on this issue yesterday, speaking with reporters to give an update on what was going on with fema and a discussion on governor desantis coming up, here's the vice president. [video clip] >> i cannot stress enough to all the folks in florida and in the tampa area, please listen to evacuation orders. please listen to your local officials. i know a lot of folks out there have survived these hurricanes before. this one is going to be very, very serious. i urge you to please just grab whatever you need, listen to the orders you are getting from local officials. they know what they are telling

you and they know what milton is about to be. so, please do that. the other point i would make is that there is a lot of misinformation being pushed out there by the former president about what is available, particularly to the survivors of helene. first of all, it's extraordinarily irresponsible. it's about him, it's not about you. the reality is that fema has so many resources that are available to the folks who desperately need them. and resources that are about helping people get back on their feet and rebuild and have places to go. you are entitled to these. people are entitled to these resources. it is critically important that people apply for the help that is there. all of those resources were created for just these kinds of moments in an emergency situat k entitled to have the bs

and resources they rightly need to. listen to your sheriff around the places that have been impacted by helene. listen to your local sheriff, he will tell you straight about what's available to you and how for so many reasons and ways, they are available to you. >> nbc is reporting that governor desantis is ignoring your calls on hurricane resources and help. how does that hurt the situation here? >> you know, moments of crisis, if nothing else, should really be the moment that anybody who calls themselves a leader says they will put politics aside. people are in desperate need of support right now. playing political games at this moment, it's a frightening situation, utterly irresponsible, selfish, and

about political gamesmanship. the job you came to do was to put the people first. host: that was the exchange from yesterday. for his part, governor desantis responded to the comments from the vice president and here is a portion of that interview. >> we have been laser focused on leveraging all resources available, including from the federal government. i've been in touch with fema, marshaling agencies, supporting local communities. for harris to say that my sole focus on the people of florida is somehow selfish is delusional. she has no role in this. in fact, she has been vice president for 3.5 years. i have dealt with a number of storms under this administration and she has never contributed anything to any of these efforts. i think it selfish for her to blunder us to this. has she cooked -- >> as she

called before? >> no. she has no role in this process. i'm in contact with the president of the united states, managing state agencies, supporting local government. i will say this, i have had storms under trump and biden and i worked well with both of them. she is the first one who is trying to politicize the storm and she's doing that just because of her campaign. she is trying to get some type of edge. she knows she is doing poorly and playing political games. i don't have time for political games. i have people who have their lives on the line. people whose homes and possessions are on the line. we are focused 100% on that mission. host: political reporting this morning about funding for disaster relief, government to be nearing a collapse in terms

of helping with major disasters as the second catastrophic hurricane in less than two weeks bears down on florida. hurricane milton, weakening to a category four early yesterday, swirling towards a possible landfall in tampa bay as the main federal disaster programs are facing financial instability amid a series of recent calamities, including flooding of communities to the southeast, including the federal emergency agency disaster fund, which pays for loans for stricken businesses and homeowners, and the fema flood insurance program , all could be within weeks of running dry on cash based on recent remarks from the biden community and insurance analysts, even as they sought to ensure the public that they had enough money to meet their lifesaving responsibilities. we have half an hour of open forum left. let's hear from new york, tim,

independent line. caller: hello, pedro. i wanted to ask you if you knew about the psychiatrist's, c-span did a recording where they had a symposium at one of the local washington -- i don't know what you call it -- like where they all sit and meet. anyway, they wrote a couple of books about how unstable donald trump is. they never showed it on "washington journal." she has been blackballed by the main media. it's only right, giving his mental state -- given his mental state, that this information be brought out. all of these other issues don't mean anything if you put someone like that in office who is basically a psychopath. also, she refers to, you know, white people joining cults and

all that stuff. she's a serious person and she has a lot of serious people working with her. so, you know, i just, i would love to see her get on "washington journal." it's the one show on tv where you have republicans and democrats, fox, msnbc, they all listen, nobody else does that. that's all. host: that was tim in new york. the guests that he spoke of, annie lee had an appearance on her own tv shall, but there is the information if you want to check out what she has to say about the issues of donald trump. you can find it on our website. c-span.org. washington state, democratic line, george, hello. caller: the republicans continually talk about irregularities in the 2020 election. it's almost four years and not

one of them has any proof, proof . i'm tired of it. host: ok. gloria, texas, independent line. caller: yes, hello. first of all, i would like to say that i grew up as a democrat. i grew up during the clinton era. i never thought that i would be anything other than a democrat, just because, you know, middle-class, someone who, who, you know, born to immigrant parents, you know, but really devastate -- impacted by the policies put in place back then. you know? then you had the president and, you know, trump.

like i said, i never thought i would be anything other than a democrat. but recently i've just been so astonished at, you know, i'm trying to know a little bit more about, you know, kamala harris, but you know, you know, it, it, it's not just until recently that she has started to come out more and more. so, i found myself having to really look into, you know, what the policies have been these past four years that have been proposed. host: what about her policies are interested in learning about? caller: like where she stands on

immigration and when she comes out in terms of saying, like recently the fema money and how that was not used for immigrants , how, you know, is that something that is really true? or is that something that is being said for political reasons? host: go ahead, finish, clara. caller: ok, you know, yesterday, this was going on all day. i think it, i really do think that people really do need the help, whether it comes from fema or whatever. i think that i would have more respect and would really want, you know, for the truth. yes, part of it was used for immigration, but now we are trying to do our best to come up

with, you know, the money for, for, for the victims and possible future disasters that come our way host:. ok, ok. let's hear from maggie in orlando, florida. republican line. caller: i'm calling with concern for my family in the mountains of north carolina between asheville and north carolina. collegeville needs help. we have seen nothing away. nothing. coffins and the bodies were floating down the river, johns river. i think it is a disaster. i think it's horrible that we send $8 billion to ukraine to help those people when our people here in america are hurting so badly.

pray, pray, pray for us with this horrible hurricane coming towards florida. but don't forget those mountain people in the carolinas, who actually founded this country. host: are you planning on staying in light of -- caller: yes, i'm staying in praying. host: how did you fare last time from helene? how much damage did the orlando area see? caller: none. we got some flooding but were in the center of the state and have been blessed so far. host: that was maggie in florida, a lot of attention being paid there because of hurricane milton, helene, and the after of that. oklahoma, democratic line, randy, hello. caller: good morning, this is the first time i ever got to call in and talk to you. it's a kind of privilege.

i appreciate it. so, i can't figure out, and i hope that somebody can call to tell me, why are they not using the dossier against trump? seems like the whole campaign was built on the trunk collusion with russia and the dossier. you know? 2020. and it's all still as relevant and true today as it was back then. host: in your opinion, why is it as relevant and true today? caller: well, nobody ever debunked it. the, james comey, they all said it was russia. and they are, they are government officials. my god, if we cannot trust our own government to tell us the

truth about something so important as an election? i just, i don't understand. host: that was randy, there, from broken arrow, oklahoma, participating in what we call open for them. if you are interested, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 free democrats, and (202) 748-8002 for independents. this headline, "we gave the fbi more than people know," published by christopher steele. the memo had been published on donald trump and russia, the night of january 10, 2017, the publication of the news story was the first that any of us knew about it regarding the consultancy i cofounded with my colleague, chris burroughs,

after indications earlier in the day that they were onto a story involving paul bernstein and that there had clearly been some kind of leak out of the u.s. intelligence community with memos attached regarding russian interference ahead head of the presidential election in 2016. we were not named at first, my wife, catherine, thought it was only a matter of time, but that with the potential damage that could cause the sources, it was a shocking moment for me as an experienced intelligence professional in our household where we move between stress and strain. that was published this morning. newsweek is where you can find it. here now, a lot of analysis on the steel dossier over the years. you can find some of that work by congress and others ifou go to our website, c-span.org, you can find all of that information there. sean, north carolina.

caller: thank you. i think it is interesting that some of the previous callers work villain icing immigrants. feels a bit odd. i think they are misguided and misinformed. this has increased under republican leadership. when i say republican led, i mean the majority senate and house. also, the rates decreased under democratic leadership. basically, they are used as a physical labor to provide volume the country doesn't have and they shouldn't be blamed if your community is having problems. you need to look within to fix them. thank you. host: another north carolinian, david, republican line, concord. caller: i was sitting here watching this when you showed harris a minute ago talking about fema, they are nonexistent here. i've got friends and family who

live in the mountains. it's been 11 days. they have no help. the ones getting help from fema are getting $750 and they are not even giving them that. nobody understands what is happening. our government has left. kamala is out campaigning. biden is out campaigning. the house, they adjourned until friday. they need to be on the roads now . there are over 20 million people , from georgia to florida, tennessee, north carolina. florida, florida it is fixing to be compounded. you can predict a hurricane. you cannot predict that earthquake or tornado. they know they have time. but there is nobody home in washington. nobody doing this for three years and they don't care. a few of these people have not

even seen anybody. they finally got something and someone found them. it's been 11 days. these people are dying and they don't care. the people that are trying to help them are being turned away. it makes no sense. all of the agencies are doing it. they are even turning on the agencies, now. the people in these mountains are fixing to get violent and i don't blame them. host: we will hear from courtney in baltimore, maryland, democratic line. caller: hello, i'm the one that called earlier on the wrong line, sorry about that. a couple of things i wanted to respond to regarding the fema situation in north carolina and harris. it just seemed a very on brand for her to come out and make it a politicized thing, saying i'm calling everybody, listen to me. we don't hear from her very

much. of course this is the time we hear from her, when she criticizes the governor in florida. that said, that last guest you had, it was refreshing to hear him speak on the executive orders. there is this misconception that there's only one possible way to fix the issue and that it is what happened in congress but that's not true. literally, every good decision that trump had made, which doesn't get a lot of press, obviously, but when biden reversed them on day one, there's not enough conversation around of the impact of these immigrants. they are not here legally. the ones and haitians are legal because they were subscribed to at the border. but they are now coming into these swing states and they have these one-stop shops where we are helping them get temporary ids through, i think, the bureau

of motor vehicles in ohio. i guess my biggest concern is like how do we know that the people working at the immigration center in the bureau , if you are applying for a male voter ballot, they don't actually ask you, the application doesn't ask if you are registered to vote, it asks where the address is that you are registered to vote at. all you need to do is show an id and they could be temporary. what would be helpful in every state is if we could get a list of all the mailing voter's. like who are the people? if i'm applying and i'm an immigrant and i don't know what's going on and someone filled out an application for me, can i vote without realizing of doing anything wrong? i don't trust that judges are going to cross-reference that database. are we just going to process the application? because that's the address they filled out where they are

registered to vote? host: ok. that was courtney. let's hear from cap in phoenix. caller: good morning. i want to respond to a couple of things. the gentleman who called in earlier and asked why they are not using the dossier, that was debunked so long ago. everybody in the world unless they live under a rock knows that that thing was put together by hillary clinton. i mean, how can you not know that? everybody in the world knows that. second off, they are voting, these illegals, illegal immigrants. if you listen to marie bartle romo, i have it on tape, i keep it, from four months ago, nicole malliotakis was on their. through foia she went and got the information on the soft sites that they built originally , biden built them, to put

illegals in their. on their it says that they must register them to vote. how do you like that, people? it's and what about this crazy, harris is trying to brainwash people. she is a liar. she's a marxist. i don't say that lightly. she lived in canada and from six grade she graduated in canada and says she's middle-class. no, she lived in montreat all. host: new analysis of economic plans from former president trump and vice president harris in "the washington post," this is analysis done by the committee for a responsible federal budget, showing that former president trump has called for extending his 2017 tax cuts, adding $5 trillion over 10 years to the $35

trillion national debt. his plan to end taxes on social security benefits and tips would raise the debt by an additional 3.6 trillion in his call for a nationwide campaign to deport undocumented immigrants would recall 350 billion and harris by extension would add $3 trillion to the debt by extending the 2017 tax cuts with 1.3 5 trillion for a major expansion of the child tax credit and earned income tax credit, according to a study. the campaign says that those programs would costs less, adding that harris called for an end to income taxes on tips but that her campaign discussed adding guard rails. more on that, if you want to read that for yourself, it's in "the washington post" today. part of that campaign coverage. armando is in hawaii, republican line, hello.

hello, thank you for -- caller: hello, thank you for taking my call. regarding adding to the national debt, if you go back to the obama administration, he, obama added 80 trillion to the national debt. i think every president, is that right, including trump and biden , and harris, have added to the national debt. anyway, i wanted to say, especially to the people in north carolina and florida, god bless them, i hope they are safe . to play politics at this point and at this time, you know, i'm from hawaii. we went through this, the maui fires. you know, just to clarify something, fema gave the victims of the maui fires $750 each, i

think, initially. it's no different from what they are doing now as opposed to back then. so, you know -- host: and if any other money comes it has to be determined by fema? caller: that was done a year ago, when they gave it to the maui fire victims, that's exactly what they did. you know, i was angry at that time. all of that money, billions of dollars going to ukraine and all of that? i was so angry. why are they giving billions of dollars for this war when we only get $750 for the people of maui? host: that's just upfront money for short-term needs. for other money that could come from fema as a part of their overall disaster relief.

washington state, democratic line, stephen, hello. caller: good morning. my whole life, i was a democrat. i didn't have a choice. when you are a kid, you do what your parents say and that's how it is. then i started watching. i went to my mom and my dad and i said you guys have a gun, right? yeah. why? to protect us. they have locks on their doors. i go do you just let everybody in your house? heavens, no. that's the same way for the border. i mean, our country was founded on christian principles. god rocks, jesus is the answer, the devil is a punk. i'm a republican. host: i'm going to stop you there, you are calling on the line for democrats. callers, they stick with the

line that best represents you. we will show them on the screen. (202) 748-8001 is for republicans. (202) 748-8000 is for democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002, if you want to participate in our open forum. we asked just a couple of rules. if you have called within the last 30 days, please hold off and pick the line that best represents you. let's hear from julie in wisconsin. independent line. caller: good morning. as far as the national debt, if the government would wise up and legalize marijuana, the debt would be gone in about five seconds. who would have a surplus. it's outrageous. host: ok. caller: that's all they have to do. it's so simple. legalize pot. host: let's hear from becky in

massachusetts, republican line. caller: i would just like to know if there was any newspaper coverage of the trump return to butler. c-span usually gives the headlines of the newspaper articles. i've noticed you didn't do much today. you certainly, the lady that was on on sunday did absolutely no coverage of that. was just wondering if the newspapers had actually covered -- because it was a very short return to butler, where he was shot at. it was a significant. the discussion the next day was not anything. so, thank you. host: we did cover the second

butler riley, if you want to see that on our website. had to our website, its c-span.org, for the second rally . the return of former president trump to where the assassination took place. let's hear from larry in georgia , democratic line. caller: i want to make three comments, right quick. north carolina, they are in very good shape. i was in a flood in north carolina in the 90's. the president had made a speech that fema was going to be there in that they was going to help us. they was there, but it takes a little bit of time. to the people of north carolina, fema is there, but it takes a couple of weeks for them to get to you. i was in a flood. my home was flooded. what they did was they came in, but they had it sped up across

the city. it took a little while but from there it was a young city where they communicated with them. the president of the united states and vice president harris, they gave the ok for fema to work. fema is already there. you don't have to worry about anything. just wait a little while. in georgia, i came to georgia, moved there in 94. they had a flood here. fema paid out millions of dollars. the millions of dollars went to the people, but the people here in georgia tried to take the money. it's a process that you have to go through. when fema comes to your town, make sure you go through the set up for you. you will have to answer questions. you will have to give statements. once that is done, you will get your money. that $750 that kamala harris

sent to each one of you, it is on the way. but it is just to help you pull over to buy food and gas until fema is able to set up their sights on you. you are ok. host: ok. washington, d.c., anthony, independent line. caller: my first point is that republicans should cut the budget. they are always cutting the budget. as soon as there is a crisis or a hurricane somewhere, the same republicans say -- my god, fema hasn't been here, the government hasn't been here. republicans always cut budgets. the point is, the ships that came from europe in the 20's, from england, from germany, from italy, those italians didn't know how to speak english or have college degrees. they were begging for soup in new york city.

the white republicans always forget their history. ignorance is what's going to destroy this country. it's not russia or china, it's ignorance. most republicans don't understand, you know, that their families came from europe with nothing. they were begging for soup in new york city. that's my point. host: just a few minutes from now, the supreme court said to hear arguments on a topic known as ghost guns and the legal issue behind the manufacturing and what is covered by them under the second amendment. you can see that as the audio comes to us from the supreme court, set to start just under 10:00. calls until then, rick in indiana, republican line caller: . hello, pedro, how you doing today? host: fine, go ahead. caller: this storm coming in,

people haven't seen nothing yet, sir. it's going to get worse than wh you think. and i tell you why, after florida there's going to be another one and we are going to have more storms. more other things until people start believing in jesus christ. if they don't start believing in jesus christ, sir, that chaos is going to happen. the earth is going to shake. we will have floods and lizards until people go to the lord jesus christ for healing the land. what i've got to say for you guys is god bless america. host: richard, arkansas, good morning. caller: the people calling in saying that noncitizens are voting, i want to say, noncitizens including permanent

legal residents cannot vote in federal, state, and most local elections. some people cannot vote after being convicted of a felony if they are currently serving time. some people who have a mental ability may not be able to vote. u.s. citizens residing in u.s. territories cannot vote for president in the general election. people need to start doing research and stop calling and spreading misinformation about voting. host: independent line, jeanette, vermont. caller: good to be with you today. i am independent. i i just want to say let's stop the hate. let's stop the hate against immigrants. let's stop their lies about funding and fema has been here this summer and a couple of summers ago.

they've done a great job. in project 2025, they will be cutting fema. so we will have no funding at all when it comes to disasters. please read this. we have to inform ourself as u.s. citizens. we can't get all our news on the internet because after of it is lies. please just be informed. and we've got to. we've got to come together as a country. let's stop the hate. the imgrants, we have enough in this beautiful, wonderful country to go around. leave those people, they're hard workers. leave them alone. don't demonize them. let's stop the hate. thank you. host: ok. jeanette's there. let's hear from gloria from virginia, republican line.

caller: hi thank you for taking my call as a christian, i'm disappointed in my brothers and sisters in christ who can vote but they choose not to vote. two issues come to mind. one is abortion and the other is israel. when you think about abortion, you think about that as being in the hands with god. every life is in the hands of god. i believe if you read after this one, you will find out what it means to have a -- roe v. wade and that comes from the king james version of the bible. god did not intend any of us to decide when someone should die or where -- when life begins. i would ask every christian to turn to the king james version

of the bible. i would also ask them to read psalm 1:39 how david god, particularly pay attention to the verse where he is in the womb, where david is in the womb. host: ok. let's hear from alex in illinois, democrats line. caller: yeah, hi, thanks for taking my call just listening to the folks who are concerned about fema and what harrison-biden are doing, just want to remind people, all of us that fema is taxpayer money. and it has to be funded more and more every year because the hurricanes are getting more frequent and they're getting more intense. and we're getting more

disasters. that's caused my climate change. we have an ex-president who ran that -- part of what he was wanting on was that climate change is a hoax. he still says it. even though we have more disasters every year. every 10th grade student knows that climate change is leaves partially and it is naturally caused by humans. then if we don't acknowledge that, then fema will run out of funds. we have governors who are not taking calls for political reasons like zeshan is who is -- desantis is a climate denier.

so, when it comes to fema, fema is funded by taxpayers. we're going to go broke as a country if we don't acknowledge that climate change is caused by humans and we have do something about it and the -- host: i apologize. we're going to have to leave it there. this show typically ends at 10:00. we're running a little past our time because we are set to take you to the supreme court again. there are oral arguments on a case called garland v. vanderstok is where the court us taking up on the issue of so-called "ghost guns." that's it for our program today we now take you over the supreme court.