tv Washington Journal 05152022 CSPAN May 15, 2022 7:00am-10:02am EDT
street journal will discuss the validity of the steele dossier and the impact it had on the trump presidency. join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook comments, text messages and tweets. washington journal starts now. ♪ host: this is washington journal for may 15. president biden, merrick garland, and several legislators from new york reacted to the shooting that killed 10 people. officials described the shooting as racially motivated violent extremism. the 18-year-old male connected to the event surrendering to authorities after the event. in the first hour you can respond to this event and the related issues. here is how you can call. (202)-748-8000 democrats, (202)-748-8001 republicans,
independents (202)-748-8002. you can also text us your thoughts at (202)-748-8003. post on facebook and twitter and follow the show on instagram. the associated press with a follow-up to this event from yesterday posted at 6:30 this morning out of buffalo. a white 18-year-old wearing military gear and live streaming with a helmet camera opened fire with a rifle at a supermarket in buffalo killing 10 people, wounding three others in a racially motivated violent extremism. he surrendered to authorities. in a rampage he broadcast live on twitch, he later appeared before the judge in a medical gown and said, "it is my sincere hope this white supremacist who perpetuated a hate crime will spend the rest of his days
behind bars. heaven help him in the next world as well," that was governor kathy hochul. she said it strikes in our hearts to know there is such evil out there. these are just some comments from yesterday. it prompted the president to make a statement saying, "tonight, we grieve for the families of 10 people whose lives were senselessly taken and everyone suffering the physical and emotional wounds of this horrific shooting. we are grateful for the bravery of the members of law enforcement and other first responders who took immediate action to protect and save lives. the first lady and i are praying for the victims and families and hearts across the country are with the people of buffalo. we need to know more about the motivation as law-enforcement does its work but we do not know anything -- need anything to stay the moral truth. any act of domestic terrorism,
including an act perpetuated in the name of white nationalist ideology, is not what we stand for. we must do everything in our power to end hate." that coming from the president of the united states yesterday. if you want to make comment on this in the first hour, democrats (202)-748-8000, republicans (202)-748-8001, and independents (202)-748-8002. you can text us at (202)-748-8003. the event yesterday prompting several responses from legislators including ones in new york. brian higgins, who represents buffalo, put out this on his twitter. horrified by the mass shooting. we are in communication with local leaders and to offer any federal support necessary. legislators giving comment as well. kathleen rice saying, praying for the victims and their
families. these types of horrific shootings will not end until we take steps to act with common sense gun laws legislation. another from nancy pelosi, today another community was shattered by the horrors of gun violence. we must never stop fighting to stop bloodshed because enough is enough. a follow-up from the senate majority leader chuck schumer, i for the victims and their families. i-8 for the -- ache for the tightknit community. racism has no place in our country. i have spoken with the mayor and offered any help we can provide. we stand with the people of buffalo. that is chuck schumer. more comments will be throughout the course of the hour. the story from the associated press goes on to say a law enforcement official told ap investigators were looking into whether he posted a manifesto online. they were not permitted to speak publicly.
police declined to comment on the document to outline the attacker's belief. it said a drew inspiration, the man who killed 51 people at two mosques in new zealand in 2019. it quotes the sheriff john garcia saying it was a hate crime, saying it was pure evil from somebody outside the city of good neighbors coming into our community and inflicting evil upon us. that is the comments from yesterday. we will read more as the morning goes on. tyrone in new york starts us off, democrat line. go ahead. caller: this is something that is going to continue to happen because we are not willing to
accept there is a segment of the american population that will never accept black people as people. they will continue to try to hunt us down and kill us with impunity. this government and the state in this country always looked at us as subhuman. they used the terminology black on black crime. there is mostly white on black crime because there are white people who kill black people specifically because they are black. no other reason. we do not kill black people because they are black, we do not even kill white people because they are white. we do not go into churches shooting up white churches indiscriminately because they are white. there is no two sides. this has been white people killing black people just because they are black. could you imagine how scary that is? host: that was tyrone in new
york. let's hear from mike in arkansas. independent line. caller: i was calling with regard to the mass shootings -- which is not always secondary to mental illness but sometimes it is mental illness. this case it might be racially motivated. but these people exhibiting extreme behavior either on social media or signs of mental illness, we need a better system for whenever loved ones and friends see that kind of behavior or people who are concerned on social media. that we have a mechanism for alerting the authorities and catching these things before they happen. rather opposing the guns which seem to be everywhere. something like that i think would be more effective for catching and preventing something like this before it happens. host: when you say mechanism, are you saying legislation or do you mean other things? caller: a mechanism -- it seems like a lot of times,
particularly with mental illness, friends will say, we tried to get help for him but he kind of slipped through the cracks. whether it is involving the authorities or alerting police, maybe legislation for a system of things coming into play if someone exhibits that kind of behavior and maybe there can be an intervention before it happens. host: mike in arkansas. this is ned in florida, republican line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. what this guy did, anything he gets he deserves 100%. but right away they go on with the racial stuff. when the man drove the suv through the parade they did not call it racially motivated.
what the guy did was bad. host: but it was described yesterday as a racially motivated crime. caller: yes. it is racially motivated evidently but so was the guy that drove the suv through the crowd of white people at christmas. but it was not presented racially. it seems like everybody wants to push the racial thing. you still have 7000, 8000 blacks a year. that comes out to 22 a day. that's what needs to be talked about. host: ron in michigan for the democrats. caller: good morning. why does this seem to me many of these mass murder shooters are white and always captured by the police alive, yet the police
shoot so many black people who are unarmed? the last caller was correct. that killer who killed the people in wisconsin, he should have been executed by that cop in my opinion. host: that was ron in michigan. follow-up story on nbc posted by ben collins saying the manifesto claiming to be written by that suspect in the event from les today -- yesterday cited the great replacement theory, trying to replace white americans with nonwhite people through immigration and violence. the manifesto claims to be written by the 18-year-old including the shared birthdate and data with the suspect in custody. the pdf was posted to google docs at 8:55 p.m. two days before the shooting.
the suspect was arraigned saturday of one count and murder of the first degree. he is or arraigned without bail and the hearing is scheduled for thursday. the manifesto, which was not modified since thursday, includes elaborate details of the shooting. the suspect claims he chose buffalo because it had the highest number of black people in the vicinity. let's hear next from james, independent line, brooklyn, new york. caller: good morning. i feel this is just another fbi false flag event trying to separate us and cause more racial divide. you just push the agenda. host: what is the basis of your claim? caller: if you look at the
video, it is an air rifle. there is no bullets. do you remember when you preached about the el paso shooting? host: if it was an airgun, what about the deaths? caller: can i finish my statement? host: you made a claim, i just wanted you to back it up. what do you account for the claims? caller: there were no deaths because it was like the el paso shooting in 2019 you went on about for days and weeks. did you know that guy never went to trial yet? host: john in liverpool, new york. democrats line. caller: this door swings both ways. did we forget about the long island black-eyed with all the -- black guy with all the racist sayings? we all have the same emotions, we love, we hate.
it was definitely racially motivated but so are some of these other things. it is not just black-and-white some of it is against mexicans or whatever. host: how does that relate to yesterday? caller: the door swings both ways. let's not just think about white people attacking black people. it swings both ways with different races attacking -- some of it is gender. this was racially motivated but so are many, many other things across-the-board. host: that is john in liverpool. one of the people commenting, you hurt her comments from earlier, but it was governor kathy hochul talking to reporters about the role social media played.
here is a portion from her statement of yesterday. [video clip] >> it is hard to know what to say. this is my community. i know this community well. i have walked the streets. i know the individuals who live here. it is a wonderful, tightknit neighborhood. and to see that sense of security shattered by an individual, a white supremacist who has engaged in an act of terrorism and will be prosecuted as such, in a coldhearted, cruel, calculating way. a military style execution targeting people who simply want to buy groceries in a neighborhood store. it strikes us in our very hearts to know there is such evil that lurks out there.
yes, i am here to console the family and community that is feeling so much pain right now, but mark my word, we will be aggressive in our pursuit of anyone who subscribes the ideals professed by other white supremacists and how there is a feeding frenzy on social media platforms we are hate festers hate. that has to stop. these outlets must be more vigilant in monitoring social media content and the fact that this execution of innocent human beings could be livestreamed on social media platforms and not taken down within a second says to me there is a responsibility out there and we are going to
work on this and make sure that those who provide these platforms have a moral and ethical -- and i hope a legal responsibility -- to ensure that such hate cannot populate the sites. because this is the result. when you have individuals who use these platforms and talk to others who share these demented views and support each other and talk about the techniques they will engage in and post these ideas and share them with others in the hope they can all someday rise up in their demented view of the world. host: that is new york governor kathy hochul from yesterday. the hollywood reporter reporting this morning livestream service twitch, cited in the story in use by the suspect, has deleted video posted by the 18-year-old who opened fire. a representative told the hollywood reporter that the
company removed the livestream less than two minutes after the shooting began. we are devastated to hear about the shooting that took place in buffalo. our hearts go out to the community impacted by this tragedy. twitch has a zero-tolerance policy against violence of any kind and works swiftly to respond. the user has been suspended from our service and we are taking appropriate action, including monitoring for any accounts rebroadcasting this content. let's hear from pennsylvania, john, republican line. caller: thank you for having me on. stir the pot sunday. cnn trying to get everybody to hate each other on sunday. the first caller things white people are systematically out hunting black people. i guess he does not watch channel six news where blacks kill blacks 3:40 in the afternoon. host: what do you think about
the event from yesterday? caller:caller: i do not think nothing of it because you're trying to start a race war. you had the guy who ran over all those christians that was not race. the guy from philadelphia went to new york and shot people in the subway. host: how does that relate to yesterday? caller: how does it relate? he is racist. he went from philadelphia to new york to kill white people. host: but how does that relate to yesterday? caller: you are racist. host: we are going to cut you off. don in miami, florida, democrat line. caller: i think we are missing the solution. i would like to mention two facts. first, the number one deaths of children in these united states is guns.
the fbi stated the number one terrorist threat in the united states is not foreign bad actors. the number one terrorist threat is white right wing supremacists. host: how does that relate to yesterday? how do you compare that to yesterday? caller: i think the solution is we need safety laws regarding guns. host: that is don in florida. other congressional responses. police tonic -- elise stefanik set our nation is heartbroken about the tragic news of the horrific loss of life in buffalo. we are mourning for the entire community and loved ones. during national police week we must honor law enforcement and first responders who heroically face skyrocketing violent crimes. later on this morning the president is expected to address matters.
look for that on the networks. representative liz eldin of new york, republican, a casual saturday supermarket trip on jefferson avenue in buffalo should never end with anything like this. families and the community and the rest of the state are deeply shocked, heartbroken, and prayerful learning of this devastating news. just some of the legislative reaction from yesterday. you are the president in a statement as well. paul in kansas city, missouri. independent line. caller: good morning. i will wrap this together. governor desantis wants to teach the students of florida about communism but not white supremacy. i venture to say very few
americans accept our guys in the vietnam era met a communist. certainly the people in the middle of america have probably never met a communist. host: how does this relate to yesterday? caller: the fact is white supremacy has been part of america since the institution of america began. like your guy a couple of calls ago that said you were trying to start a race war, this kid, 18 years old, according to his manifesto is saying all the things that we are not supposed to be afraid of as americans. this murder yesterday, this
terrible murder, they are going to compare it to anything other than what it is. until we all get on the same page as far as the fact that you are standing in line, you don't know what that person next to you believes. host: let's hear from holly, new york, democrats line. caller: how are you? host: i am well thanks. caller: i want to speak a little more generally about what is going on in america right now and i am calling from the democratic line. what we are seeing is a right wing, fascist movement spewing hateful terminology, including elise stefanik, creating the
great replacement theory that whites are going to be taken over by hispanics or black people and we are now witnessing that with guns not being regulated, social media out of control, and with the republican party under the spell of donald trump and domestic violence extremists who incited a riot january 6. host:host: how does that relate to yesterday? caller: they are simply acting upon rhetoric from what was once the republican party which has turned into, frankly, a right wing -- host: how do you tie that to the republican party? caller: because of the rhetoric
coming from the republican party. it is ironic when elise stefanik voted to overturn the election results. host: david in richland, south carolina, republican line. caller: david here. i want to give my condolences to the families that were killed yesterday. this was a senseless crime. we had this happen in the church in charleston. i tell you what, the state of south carolina, republican, democrat, black, white, we all came together. the state of new york needs to do the same like south carolina did. we came together whether you were republican, black, whatever color. please come together and love one another. host: that was david in south
carolina. one of the responses yesterday came from the chair of the homeland security committee, bennie thompson, democrat from mississippi, who put out a statement that read, white supremacy tax seem to have -- attacks seemed to have been part of this there are theories that vilify society like the great replacement theory. we also see social media sites being used by extremists to spread their violent plans and manifestoes among like-minded terrorists. as we have done with past attacks carried out on social media platforms the committee has questions about what more could be done to prevent platforms from becoming windows into horrific violence and recruitment centers. he put that out yesterday. that is the chair of the homeland security committee. also people commenting yesterday, one of the people is
the ranking member of that committee. this is john katko, republican of new york saying, it is devastating to hear of the mass shooting at top supermarket in nearby buffalo. my thoughts and prayers are with loved ones of those who lost their lives. i think the brave first responders who put themselves in harm's way to take the suspect into custody and protect their community from further violence. the local and federal level have stated this was racially motivated as the ranking member of the house committee on homeland security, i will monitor this investigation and support federal, state and local law enforcement as they seek justice for the community. you can find those on the twitter feeds and websites as well. democrat line in western virginia, this is jeffrey. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have two things to address.
going back to the wisconsin man who ran over people and parade. he did not wake up and say, i am going to kill white people. i believe it was a police chase and he ran people over. people always try to switch the narrative and say, what about black on black crime? instead of just saying what is really going on. host: what did you think about the event yesterday? caller: it is heartbreaking. i am an african-american and every time i see that, like the gentleman from south carolina said, go to a prayer meeting and shooting them up, it is upsetting. it is like nothing is done until the next time. have a nice day. host: milwaukee this is will, republican line. caller: good morning.
that governor of new york, for her to call the shooting in military style, she needs to get that correct. she could mention the type of weapon but for her to say that -- she thinks the military goes around executing people. look at the look on your face about everybody calling that looks like you disagree with. host: i am trying to clarify people's positions. what you think about the event from yesterday? he hung up. let's hear from blake in mississippi, independent line. caller: black people have got to be the original israelites or something.
someone gave billions of acres to immigrants and not give black people an inch. host: how does that relate to yesterday's event? caller: because white people have become accustomed to having the advantage. even though we pulled ourselves up by our bootstraps, because we got no help in this country -- they are still on our next all the way up until now -- host: tell me how -- caller: white people are still trying to love us by and large. there is bad people on every level but it is that 1% or less than 1%. they are the bad actors. we have not resolved the problem of slavery --
host: we have spent half an hour on the shooting yesterday. some of you commenting on related issues to that as well. you can continue to do so on the lines. (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, and independents (202)-748-8002. you can also text us at (202)-748-8003. the attorney general merrick garland making comments on this event from yesterday. part of his comments read as such saying, tonight the country mourns the victims of a senseless shooting in buffalo, new york. the fbi are working closely with the police department and federal, state and local law enforcement partners. the justice department is investigating this matter as a hate crime and an act of racially motivated violent extremism. we will conduct a thorough investigation into the shooting and seeking justice for these innocent victims. you can read the full statement
at the justice department website. patterson, new jersey, we hear from michael, republican line. caller: good morning. i am calling because i think it is appalling this happened but also i believe the government is pushing for division of this country and pushing for racism. i believe the last caller, the way he talked, i don't want to say he is racist but we are all americans. we are all trying to make a living. we are americans first. host: how does that relate to yesterday? caller: he was an individual talking racism. i consider that racism. my daughter is black. i consider that racism. not everybody is racist. i don't know why he did what he did. all of this with the masks and the shutdowns -- it is perilous
times coming. host: bob, democrat line in racing was -- racine, wisconsin. caller: i am trying to avoid a race war. good people came from europe and bad white people came from europe. and then there was the civil war. all these years later since 1865 you see how people are raised -- host: how does that relate to yesterday? caller: good people came from europe and bad people came from europe. here we are in 2022 based on how
people was raised and how children are and that incident happened yesterday. we want to be less confused and that there are good white people and bad white people. let's not have any kind of war. somehow try to be patient with people. it is a little scary. host: that was bob in wisconsin. the buffalo news editorial this morning after the events of yesterday reads, other questions arise. what drove this person to kill people he did not know? why buffalo? where did he get the body armor and the rifle? were any clues missed that could have prevented this attack? idiom accomplice -- did he
have accomplices? how to prevent these shootings from happening? we shrug and go on about things pretending it will not happen again. we will know more in the days and weeks ahead but for some, the weeks will be difficult, especially those who lost loved ones. counselors may provide support, they will need it. for others, patientience needs to be had but it will not atone for what has been done. in philadelphia this is rick on the independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for picking up. i would like to give prayer, offer my prayer to those families and friends and those caught up in that situation yesterday.
i would also like to salute the first responders for their response in attempting to calm the situation. i am not going to talk about gun laws because this is more than that. we have to actually look at the history. there has always been church bombings, bombing threats on hbcus, people shot down. this has been going on for a long time and nobody has put the dots together. this is a constant history. host: how does that relate to the events of yesterday?
caller: they have been killing blacks for a long time. blowing up churches and sunday schools and all kinds of things. this is not new. it needs to be discussed intelligently and try to find a positive resolution. host: that was rick in philadelphia. tasha in new york. caller: good morning. i want to begin by saying when ever we have discussions about events that happened yesterday in buffalo, which was a massacre, many callers default of the black on black crime. right now, we have the biggest display of white on white crime with ukraine and russia but we don't label it like that. why is everything black on black crime? how does this relate to yesterday? i see a trend in young white men
taking up arms and attacking. kyle rittenhouse, you had dylan, now you have him. this is a trend. i will make this short. black people need to keep their heads on a swivel. start noticing people that do not belong in your neighborhoods, especially young, white men. they do not come to black neighborhoods and if they do, it might be up to something no good. keep your head on a swivel and stop being so open and lackadaisical to the people coming into your neighborhoods. host: let's hear from kat in sarasota, florida. caller: all of this is so saddening to me. the violence has got to stop. i cannot imagine what it takes
for a person to walk into any public place and start killing people. i have lived in this nation my entire life and what causes someone to take a gun out and start killing people -- what gives you the right to end a life? it does not matter what color you are. what gives you that right? you need to solve your problems another way. you do not have the right to end someone's life. host: that was kat in florida. they say that the suspect named dylan roof among other gunmen. his plan for the shooting of
buffalo resembles the 2019 massacre at a walmart in el paso in which more than 20 people died in the gunmen posted a screen filled with white supremacists views. he said he felt a connection to brenton harrison calling him the person who radicalized him the most. harrison had killed 51 people in a mosque in new zealand. buffalo officials said that the suspect traveled outside the neighborhood to unleash gunfire at the regional grocery chain. he lived in new york with his parents and two brothers according to the manifesto. sheila is next in massachusetts, republican line. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i would like to say how heartbroken all of america is over this tragedy.
it is senseless and we will not know the answers but what nobody is mentioning is the fact that mental illness in this country is rampant. it is boasted by the use of drugs and gangs coming into this country, etc. but nobody can tell me that somebody could even plan something like this. this is severe mental illness and we have to stop this white supremacy. white supremacy is not rampant and for our government to put white supremacy at the top of their list for being a danger to this country is absolutely wrong.
it fosters aggravation between both races. host: why do you think it is wrong? caller: because you cannot prove it is white supremacy? where is the proof? i have yet to see a white supremacy march down the streets of washington, d.c. with thousands of people screaming burn them like bacon. host: we are going to stop there. jane in akron, ohio -- james in akron, ohio. caller: that kind of threw me a little bit but let me say this before i get to what i wanted to say. the white supremacy marches are present every day. he saw the stuff in
charlottesville and other areas around this country. it is posted every day. and then we have channels like fox news and the stations like that where it is a daily assertion of what goes on in this country. they are not telling the truth. host: how does that relate to the events of yesterday? caller: let me go to that. merrick garland, our attorney general, is that much as fall as the white supremacists. and the people that teach the young white people they are losing this battle for supremacy. there should not be that conversation. merrick garland has not even made an attempt to get the january 6 situation straightened out and many other things that happened in this country.
our attorney general has to represent all of us, not just one. as long as he continues to find excuses why not to arrest our president -- host: how do you connect that to the events of yesterday on the merrick garland front? caller: there has been too many things going on that all of the white supremacists in this country and organizations have been supporting donald trump. he is indirectly -- maybe they want to give him the leadership role. he is their king. host: how does that relate to yesterday? caller: this young man looks at the rhetoric he has been hearing from people like trump and he don't believe nothing is going to happen to him. he also believes he is 100% right.
if you listen to fox news on any other night besides the weekend, you will hear these people, sean hannity, tucker in particular -- he is rooting for russia to be ukraine. host: tony in fort myers, florida, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am glad you were able to dismiss that last call because that was shameful. we cannot conflate this as a democrat, republican issue. i agree with the previous caller about having their heads on a swivel. we need to keep that energy when antifa claims to speak for us as well. host: how do you relate those things to yesterday? start with that. caller: what your previous caller was saying people do not look like they belong in your community or neighborhood. be aware of that.
there are young white men who come into communities just to incite harm or inflict violence. new york has some of the biggest gun restriction laws. new york is one of the most strict states. host: what was the issue of yesterday do you think? caller: sorry? host: what was the issue of yesterday if it is not a gun issue? caller: just an evil person. in virginia tech they used a nine millimeter gun and killed over 17 people and it was legal. i think people need to stop trying to rationalize or legalize it. in some of the most restricted states where there are gun laws that prohibit these actions, that is where the worst cases happened. host: that was tony in florida. 15 minutes left for your comments from that shooting in
buffalo. we have been showing you pictures and stories. if you want to react in the next 15 minutes, (202)-748-8000 free democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, and independents (202)-748-8002. text us at (202)-748-8003. we told you the president today at noon and the first lady will honor law enforcement officers at an event, specifically those that lost their lives in the line of duty in 2021. this will be at the peace officers memorial service. he may respond an remark on the events of yesterday in buffalo but you can stay on the networks and watch for that event later on today. from bob in pennsylvania, independent line. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. my heart is heavy this morning.
america is in trouble but i would like to say two things. i just want to read two paragraphs. if you keep on fighting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other. and the other is, do your words and deeds speak justly? do you act rightly among men? your hands met out violence on earth. until we start loving one another as human beings this will never stop. that is the only answer to the problems but it will never happen. you can tell by listening to the calls coming in this morning. god bless america. host: let's hear from doug in san jose, republican line.
caller: i am 69 years old and racism has been an issue in this country all my life. unfortunately, nothing has changed. people find reasons to hate because their own lives are not satisfying enough and they want to blame somebody else. it is easy to blame somebody else when it is an issue on the internet or in the media. you can focus on that instead of focusing on your own life and trying to find satisfaction with your own life. this young man found a way to focus on something else instead of dealing with his own problems. he apparently had a run in with law enforcement before. he should not have been allowed
to purchase the firearms he had. the only answer i can think of is that laws ought to be structured so the average citizen can carry concealed firearms and shoot back. that is a horrible, sad solution to a problem that really belongs to all of us in our own hearts and minds. host: that was dug in san jose. the new york times reporting on the story from yesterday highlights saying the 10 people killed in buffalo represent the highest number of fatalities in a mass shooting in the u.s. this year. that according to the gun violence archive which tracks the highest death toll before was six in downtown sacramento april 3. six were also killed in a shooting in texas february 5. the same number were killed in a shooting in milwaukee january 23. gun deaths reached the highest ever recorded in the united states in 2020, surging 35%.
that coming from the centers for disease control and prevention. they reported that on tuesday. phil in orlando, florida, independent line. caller: good morning. i have made it my whole life since i was in a white integrated school in virginia to discuss how we can best come together in regards to race in america. for the most part, most people were out of tune. just a little bit of history but if you missed what i'm trying to say, pick up a copy of "run in my shoes." there was an attempt by white extremists to take over what had
been done during reconstruction after the civil war. the group basically became the kkk but it started to restore white rule. and then these brothers were particularly dangerous. this stuff has been going on -- host: how does that relate to history echo i appreciate the -- how does that relate to yesterday? i appreciate the history though. caller: the young man was killed in brunswick, georgia murdered by an ex police officer. black people it seems like don't have anywhere to go or people in the justice department they can speak to that are going to go to areas and eradicate problems we hear about every day. going down 95 south, going
through georgia, it is frightening. people are unnerved. host: this is jesse in texas, democrat line. caller: i am calling from wynonna, texas but buffalo is my hometown. predominantly black side of town. unfortunately the target was black people. this incident is so appalling. we have too many guns available, unregistered guns, ghost guns all over the land. please pray for buffalo. pray for the healing of our nation. host: carmine in new rochelle, new york. caller: good morning.
pedro, i am offended at the buffalo police and i will tell you why. i just saw on the news this mass murderer stroll into court and go before the judge and he was only manacled in the front. there should have been shackles connected to that to immobilize him to represent the severity of the crime he committed. he might be crazy. he might try to do something. why didn't the buffalo police properly immobilize him and not allow him to have this casual walk walking before the judge? i am so angry i cannot even talk anymore but i appreciate you listening to me. host: let's hear from carolyn in atlanta, georgia, independent line. caller: good morning. host: morning.
caller: i am concerned about what happened yesterday. my heart goes out to the families and i want to know if we could tone the rhetoric down on these different shows and leave off a lot of stuff. people tune into the programs that speak to what they want to hear. calls refuting -- everywhere we go we have people disagreeing and this talk shows in the daytime, these informative shows at night, people hear what they want to hear from each one. if we could tone it down and people going out and about doing their daily activities, are they vigilant? did the have earbuds in their ears? are they talking on the phone? should we be more official and -- should we be more vigilant
because people congregate and when they congregate we need to know something may happen. are we looking around? could someone have gone up on him and pulled his legs out from under him? maybe if people had been more vigilant -- host: that is carolyn in atlanta, georgia. let's hear from kathleen in kansas, democrats line. caller: thank you. i want to say that i think these attacks are going to get worse and worse. i hate to say it but when you hear the disgusting things -- i'm sorry, the radical right is spewing about white replacement theory. they are spewing this hate and divide. they want your votes.
they are coming for your neighborhoods, they are going to take over. they are the cause of this. an trump started -- i know it has been going on for a long time -- but he is the catalyst. he sits there and, oh yeah, black people love me. host: but the shooter said he was inspired by individuals and related crimes on the internet. how do you relate that to the other things you talked about? caller: i think it is related from the hate everybody is spewing. they are making white people so afraid that blacks and hispanics and whoever, muslims, are going to take over. they don't want to. they just want to live. i want to live peacefully with all of them. why do white people hate these people so much? why are they spewing this? why are they so afraid?
i don't understand what is going on. i just don't pay attention to it but other kids are. i don't know if it is getting worse? host: ok. let's take one more call. daniel in tennessee, democrats line. caller: good morning, pedro. you cannot make this stuff up. i believe one man is responsible for a lot of this. one man set the example. one man said people like this are fine, good people. one man came down to mar-a-lago after kyle rittenhouse shoe people up. if you shoe people, you can come
on down to mar-a-lago? host: how do you draw the line? caller: donald trump has fermented the white nationalism to the degree where they are getting violent. host: we had these events before. why do you relate it to him? caller: donald trump has caused people to go over the edge. whether it is speeding down the highway five miles faster than they did years ago or whether it is civil disobedience, whether it is in the courts law in every respect. host: we will. leave it there. daniel finishing off this round of calls.
thank you to all who participated. coming up, a discussion looking at the future of roe v. wade and what might potentially come down from the supreme court in light of reporting over the last few days. nicole brener-schmitz and charmaine yoest, joining us for that discussion. later on in the program, we are joined by alan cullison. he will discuss the validity of what is known as the steele dossier. those conversations coming up on the "washington journal." ♪
>> this week on the c-span networks. the house and senate are in session. the house is working on legislation addressing fuel and energy price gouging and the baby formula shortage. in the senate, lawmakers are expected to work on the house passed ukraine bill. tuesday on c-span3 for the first time in decades, a house intelligence subcommittee will hold a hearing on unidentified aerial phenomena, after a government report released last year citing 144 uavs, but only had an excellent nation for one of them. wednesday at 10:00, the house judiciary committee will look at access to abortion services. this is in response to the leaked supreme court draft opinion suggesting roe v. wade may be overturned.
thursday on c-span3, interior secretary deb haaland will appear before the senate energy and natural resources committee on 2023 budget requests for her department. watch this week, live on the c-span networks or c-span now, our free mobile video app. also click on c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video live or on-demand at any time. >> do all americans have a fundamental right to privacy? tonight on cue monday -- q and a, a look at the public's right to information. -- book, seek and hide, looks at several cases involving this conflict including hulk hogan's
multimillion dollar lawsuit against gawker. >> hulk hogan brought a claim for the right to privacy against gawker. he argued that even though it was truthful, that his level of privacy would trump the right of gawker to publish that truth. ultimately a jury agreed with him. a lot of people in the united states were shocked at that, because we understand so much about freedom of the press and truth and how truth will protect us, and yet this was an instance of someone's privacy becoming more important, in effect, than the public's right to know. >> tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to that and all of our podcasts on the new free c-span now app.
>> "washington journal" continues. host: a discussion on abortion and the future of roe v. wade and related topics with two guests joining us. nicole brener-schmitz was the national political director of naral. charmaine yoest was the former ceo of americans united for life . thank you for giving us your time. we have talked a lot about specifics but when you look to the future, particularly how this topic and what might come down from the court could affect the midterms and voters overall, what do you think the average woman voter is on this? nicole: we saw over one million people marched yesterday in cities across this country because they are refusing to allow their rights to be rolled back. women know they need to have their own decisions about their bodies and they are in force to let politicians and every buddy know they are not just going to sit idly by and let this happen. charmaine: one of the things we
will see over time is the reality is that women are much more pro-life than people have realized. this has been defined and framed as a woman's issue, and get consistently over time the polling data shows that women are more pro-life than men are, in the pro-life movement has been led by women. this is going to be very much a thing over the summer as we head into the midterms. you will see pro-life women speaking up and giving you two sides of the story. host: when you say polling, i think there is polling done on this, and it shifts depending on the question you ask. charmaine: consistently over time, if you look at any polling data, women are more pro-life than men and it depends on how you ask the question. frankly this is because women have been -- have a very personal intimate relationship with abortion. there are a lot of women who have had abortions and have come and swelled the ranks of the pro-life movement because they
reject what happened to them. they reject the advice they were given and they have become very pro-life and speaking up about how abortion harms the baby and the woman. that is a very important message coming from the pro-life movement and frankly it is part of why we are here today. host: how would you respond to that? nicole: we've had polling for years and years and what has remained clear, 50 years ago, 10 years ago and yesterday is that 70% of americans believe roe v. wade should be the law of the land. it is nationwide polls, statewide polls. america a pro-choice country. they believe roe v. wade should be the law of the land. this is what you're going to see, lots of turnout in the midterms because democrats will continue to drive home the fact that if and when this happens in june, states like mess -- states like michigan are where women to come from allies for having an abortion. charmaine: i want to respond to
that because we've heard a lot about what people think about roe v. wade and the problem is people don't really know what hell held -- what roe held. justice alito addresses the fact that roe v. wade was very much out of touch with history and with science and what has changed over time is the science. people have a specific window into the womb. people's first baby pictures have turned into sonograms. you have sonograms on refrigerators across america. it has fundamentally changed how people think about pregnancy and how people think about abortion, and that is part of why we are here today, because people feel very differently about abortion as they have come to know more about the life before birth. host: miss brener-schmitz? nicole: people think roe v. wade should be the law of the land. yes there are women who are excited they are pregnant. when i was pregnant, there was a sonogram on my fridge because i was overjoyed to have this kid
because at one point in my life i was able to access abortion and that is why i have this child now. i can make that choice for myself about when and how and if i become a mother. host: two guests joining us until 8:45. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. s -- independents, (202)-748-8002. you can also text us at (202)-748-8003. one of the discussions from a week -- from a couple weeks ago is what could happen at the state level. miss brener-schmitz, there is a story taking a look at that in the washington post. give us your sense of what could happen. nicole: currently on the books is if roe does become overturned, we will see 26 states become places where women are not able to access this important health care that they need. they will not be able to access abortions because of trigger laws or laws the states have passed and it is a variety of
places like texas with the six-week ban. michigan with its criminalization. it is a variety of different statuses and depending of what state you live in, it is going to be if you get a choice about how and when you create a family for yourself, which should be a decision between a woman and her doctor. we will see the antichoice movement continue to lobby and push for other states to move on different laws. the reality is publicans put out a memo when this was leaked out and they said don't talk about abortion. lean into these -- they know it is not something that is popular amongst voters. they don't want to highlight what is about to happen, which is that women could be criminalized and that this could have a place that expands like we saw and ireland were ultimately they decided they needed to be -- because a miscarriage greeted a death for
a woman because she could not access health care. women under the protections of roe have lived in a country where they could access this kind of care and having that right rolled back is a motivating factor for women in this midterm. host: at the state level, miss yoest, you heard talk about that patchwork of laws and how that might change if the decision comes down that way. charmaine: let me talk about a couple things she mentioned. we could talk about the women who have died under legal abortions in this country. that is an important point as well. no one, absolutely no one is asking for women to become in the last. historically that is inaccurate. that has never been the case and it won't be the case in the future. but is important to be clear about. we've already had a test case in how people are going to react to this ruling. we have the ohio primaries, the day after this potential ruling
was leaked. the turnout on the republican side was through the roof, with unprecedented. it was depressed on the democratic side. granted it is one example but i would argue that is part of what you are going to see moving forward into the midterms. host: as far as that result, can you attribute that to the abortion issue or are there other factors involved? charmaine: i would argue abortion has been on the ballot for decades now. it has been something people have been voting on. it is part of why we have gotten to where we are. the pro-choice side has argued for years that abortion was settled law and yet year after year you saw pro-lifers coming and marching and continuing to make the case that roe needed to be overturned, that our laws were out of step with where the american people are and that is what i would say to you. we've had a very radical abortion regime in this country and this potential decision is just moving us back to a much more common sense approach to abortion. host: do you want to respond?
nicole: the reality is there are states with laws on the books that would criminalize women. that is on the books right now. i would welcome the house republicans in michigan state house to join in a compromise with their governor, who has pledged to protect women's rights, but they are not. they won't. they said they have won't -- they said they won't. this is the reality in certain states. host: when you say criminalize, what do you mean? nicole: women can go to prison because of archaic laws that they still have on the books in michigan. it just is. it exists right now and if the supreme court goes forward with this decision as written by justice alito, that is what will happen to the state of michigan. charmaine: it has always been the doctor or the person who performs the abortion who is at risk any legal perspective. moving forward you will see a patchwork of laws across this
country which is the federalist approach of how we do things that are very controversial. there are huge differences in how people think about this and that is why it is important for people to be able to talk to their legislatures, to have it reflect what they think. i think what you're going to see is that people already have a sense of the laws reflect in their own opinions in red states and blue states. there is obvious they going to be a lot of people agitating about it, but in terms of reflecting the opinions of people closest to home, that is what you're going to have. that is the best approach to an issue that so deeply affects people's fundamental values. host: let's hear from justin in iowa, republican line. you are on with our guests this morning. caller: good morning, thank you. i more have a comment. i am a republican. however, i am not against
abortion on certain terms. i understand rape,es where it is due to health. however, i think it has been more used as a birth control. women think i made a mistake and i need to abort this baby. there are certain understandings and i can understand for people wanting an abortion, they should be able to get it. however i think abortion has made it real easy for women to just say ok, i made a mistake, and i use this. i'm sorry, you knew when you slept with this person, this could be created. host: miss brener-schmitz? nicole: the majority of women seeking abortions are actually already mothers. it is usually a decision where they make the best incision for their family.
they already have children. this is not something that is used as birth control by women, absolutely not. this is not something women are just sleeping with people and -- this is an inaccurate statement. if you look at the majority of women having abortions in this country, it is women who are already mothers, and their 20's and 30's, it is a personal decision they are making about their lives and not a form of birth control. host: to what extent to matters of rape and incest factor in? nicole: that is something a lot of people have said there should be exceptions for. i should -- i believe it is some been that should be accessible, even if it is not a case of rape or incest. at looks like that a leader decision is not going to allow that, and a lot of states are going back to not having these exceptions on the books, so you're going to see certain states that will not even allow for those exceptions to happen. charmaine: it is important to
underscore that there has been a lot of research done on women seeking abortions, and time after time, consistently it shows that abortion is not the best case scenario. women are not looking for this kind of a tragic event in their lives. it is always some kind of external event that is troubling to them, and they report that over and over again. they feel financial duress, sometimes they feel duress in terms of being coerced. these are the kinds of things that i think we can all agree on, if we are looking for common ground moving forward, is to be finding ways to make abortion unthinkable, to be addressing the underlying causes of what women are dealing with in their lives. when they say they don't want an abortion but they feel like they have to have one, that should be troubling across the board to everyone. that is one reason the pro-life community has focused over the last several decades. you have seen an explosion in pregnancy care centers of trying to find ways to provide real concrete assistance to women who
are in situations of -- where they feel trapped or they feel like they have no good options. that is something all of us are going to be talking about, moving forward because i think that is essential to underscore the fact that it is really sad that in our public discussion about abortion, pretty much everyone agrees that abortion is a tragedy and a very sad thing. you hear people who support abortion rights saying that over and over again. we have to stop and ask the question, if it is such a tragedy, then let's look at that and let's find a way to be sure that women don't feel trapped into making that decision. host: let's hear from ruth in california, independent line. caller: good morning. i agree that it is a tragic event, regardless of the woman's choice, for a woman who chooses
to have an abortion or not, i think it is a tragic event. i agree with you. what i'm wondering about is consideration of at one point during the pregnancy, can the abortion be done? there is talk about these live birth abortions which i can't even believe happen, but is there some point at which because the fetus is viable that the state interest in life of the baby that can live outside the mother's body becomes more dominant than the woman's choice? host: that is a call from
california. miss yoest, you go first. charmaine: this is part of the dissonance that americans have held in their heads for decades is we are so fortunate to live in a time when science has progressed as far as it has. viability has been pushed and pushed to the point where you have hospitals across this country where in one wing of the hospital you are able to have an abortion on a baby, and at the same time, the same time in pregnancy, they are in another wing try to save the baby's life and they have made such progress on that. that is one of the reasons people have this shift in understanding of the ability of the baby, to know about the pain that they feel. if you were going to give anesthesia to a baby during surgery before birth, it is this awareness that this is a life, that is worth saving. if we are trying so hard to push
viability back and succeeding dramatically, that is important and that is at the fiber of our understanding of life before birth at this point. host: ms. brener-schmitz? nicole: the reality is 93% of abortions take place in the first 13 weeks. later term is not because a woman just decided farther along that this was the decision to make. that decision is made almost always because of a medical situation, where she is making the choice either for her own health or because there is something horribly wrong with the fetus, and it is not going to have a sustainable life. there is usually a reason. it is very rare that they happen and when they do, there are medical reasons behind it. the reality is that roe v. wade is upholding a woman's right to make your own choice and 92% of abortions are happening in the first 13 weeks. host: we saw the senate try to
federalize abortion laws last week, a vote that did not happen. what did you think about the exercise itself? nicole: we knew the outcome going in. they had taken this vote before in the senate. the reality is we don't have the 60 votes but i think it was important for majority leader schumer to once again show that he was leading this party on this bill, a bill that the house has passed for women's health, and he was signaling and showing that this was not something we were just going to roll over and accept, that there was legislation putting forth, having republicans on the record including the ones proclaimed they are pro-choice but have yet to take a vote that would show that is actually where they are. we see this again and again. every justice that sits on the court said at some point in their confirmation hearings that this was settled law. why did they keep saying it was settled law if they didn't want
to treat it like settled law? he was putting everyone on the record, this is where you stand on this, so there is no question when we go to the voters and say this is what this person is standing for. it is your choice at the ballot. host: one person went on the record, democrat joe manchin from west virginia. i want to play for both of you, his comments. [video clip] >> i was hopeful that the democratic party having control of the agenda would put a piece of legislation forward to codify road v wade -- roe v. wade. 70% of the american public want roe v. wade to be cut if i'd. to me, that would be the reasonable rational thing to do. the bill we have today, the women's health protection act, and i respect people who support it but make no mistake, it is not roe v. wade codification, it is an expansion. it wipes 500 state laws off the books. it expands abortion.
that is not where we are today and we should not be dividing this country further. the politics of congress is dividing the people. they are telling us what they want. host: nicole brener-schmitz, your comments. nicole: this is where senator manchin has been for a long time. i understand it as a cute wink. it is in his playbook. he just wants everyone to get along, can't we compromise. the reality is that the women of this country want to make sure that these laws like that archaic one in michigan are gone, that women have the right to make their own decisions about their own body with their doctors. that is what women's health would do. charmaine: senator manchin did a good job of explaining what that bill would do and why they don't have the votes to pass it,
because it is the abortion law that is out of step with the american people. when people understand we are talking about expanding abortion to all nine months of pregnancy for any reason whatsoever, they balk at that. that is not what they want to see. we talk about people having support for roe, but 80% of american people don't want to see taxpayer dollars going to abortion. they want to see parental consent. they want to see limitations and common sense regulation on abortion. that is the comment -- that is a conversation you will see at the state level, if this decision comes down as we expect it to. host: let's hear from lillian, maryland, democrats line. caller: i wanted to tell misses yoest i'm tired of people trying to take my rights away. the decision to have a baby should be between the woman, her god and her doctor.
nobody else should be involved in this. you never hear them talk about men, men's responsibility. it is always put on the woman. they never talk about maybe men should get vasectomies. maybe men should take some responsibility. i'm so tired of hearing about the woman, the woman's fault, all the time. i don't understand this. men are involved. they should have vasectomies and take responsibility. some of these people who have children, who make children, and then the government or the state is running around trying to recoup money from them for child support. it's bad, it is not followed up. host: we will end it there. miss yoest, you can go first.
charmaine: i appreciate her question and she outlined some issues where i think there is common ground. a lot of people feel very keenly that men need to be involved in the lives they've helped create. lead is definitely something that the pro-life movement does talk about and unfortunately, the law under roe the way it has been interpreted has completely cut men out of the conversation. you saw people over the weekend with signs talking about how if you did not have a uterus you could not be part of the conversation. from a pro-life perspective, we think everyone should care about the innocent human life in the womb and that this is very much a part of -- if your government does not defend innocent human life, what else is it for? that is the fundamental question at hand here, we have a much better understanding of unborn human life. the fact that the heartbeat starts as early as it does. people are concerned about that, they want to see their laws
reflect a much more common sense understanding of protecting innocent human life i let the same time respecting the woman. host: miss brener-schmitz? nicole: wouldn't it be wonderful if we had laws in this country that would support these women after they had the babies, if we could do things like make sure we had childcare that was affordable? everybody would support having things that would because this is an economic issue for women. that is what it comes down to. when we talk about these women over to have children and making this choice to have an abortion, a lot of them lean into the economics of it. let's do things in this country that would provide women with help that we need. so much of the agenda for the democrats is affordable childcare and is popular and would be welcomed in this country and if we could do that, we could really embrace the economic aspects of this and have that conversation. host: is there a bipartisan approach for that?
finding these things to help? charmaine: there is definitely an interest. the pro-life movement has put their money where their mouth is and there has been an explosion of help and assistance. real world, diapers, finding jobs, there are boots on the ground -- where women can get actual real help and you are going to see that continue and even expand in the days ahead. host: same question to you. nicole: we've had multiple bills put forward in congress and state houses and republicans fight them every step of the way. look at so much of what was part of build back better. they fought it tooth and nail. those were real-life solutions that would work for women. that is how we build a strong economy in america and support women and families. host: sarah is next, joining us from north carolina.
you are on with our guests. caller: i just don't get this. do you really have full numbers of how many women are having to have this done because it is a life or death, or maybe the child is going to be born deformed, and it is her choice to have them aborted or not? there can't be that many cases of it being a life or death case. when you've got a heartbeat, that child is human. it's got feelings. you yank it out, it's going to feel it. the thing is,, this thing of government giving money to pay for daycare, that is the only when going to have a child is if the government gives me money, give me, give me, give me. the government has nothing to do with it. you had sex, protected or unprotected, you knew there was a chance you were going to get pregnant, you got pregnant, you need to carry that child to term. host: miss brener-schmitz?
nicole: no one is saying they were handing things out for free. childcare in this country is prohibitively expensive. we are one of the only first world countries that has this. this is something we can do to help to support families. this is something that americans have said again and again. joe biden ran on this. people want to see this happen. as far as her comments about the government giving away diapers, that was -- charmaine: i want to pick up on something the caller said that we have not addressed yet, which is this idea of the life of the mother and health of the mother in the final trimester. there are certainly terrible tragic things that can happen in late term pregnancy. but it is a myth that you cannot go into save the life of the mother and also try to save the
baby at the same time. as long as you are doing that, that is an entirely different scenario than elective abortions. people through these crisis situations into try and muddy the water. saving the life of the mother is morally and ethically a different scenario than elective abortion and it is not the same thing at all. nicole: what the caller was referring to was abortions that are done because of a medical situation with the fetus and that is what the choices are, and they are rare. it is because 92% of abortions in this country are in the first 13 weeks. this later situation in pregnancy is because there is something that was discovered later and it is a medical problem. that is still the choice of a woman to decide if this baby is going to be born that way, and how she wants to deal with this pregnancy. charmaine: you absolutely never have to have an elective abortion to save the life of the mother medically. host: for viewers, this will be
the topic of the hearing before the house judiciary committee next week -- later this week. we will talk of -- they'll talk about access to the -- access to abortion in the united states. you can see that on c-span3, c-span.org and our c-span now app. our next caller from missouri, democrats line. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i just want to say to mrs. yoest, i'm not saying let's get an abortion, they have to answer and they should be able to make the choice that they feel is right for them, right for their life and that is correct. once you have this baby, they don't want to do anything for you. the government don't want to do anything. i have a sister that did childcare. the moment that mother worked two hours over, they wanted to take her childcare away. they want to put everything on
everyone else. it is not your right. people should make the responsible choice for themselves and nobody should make you do that. i'm a woman and i know what is best for me. that is not for some person down the road to tell me that i should have a baby that i feel it is not right for me. thank you. charmaine: thank you for the respectful question, and the challenge here and the reason this debate continues is that increasingly we have a window into the womb and we see there are two lives at stake here and there are some at times that women get misinformation, they feel pressured and coerced into abortions high-end the lawn needs to move in a commonsense direction of protecting both the life of the mother and the life of the baby and that is entirely possible to have a regime that looks like that, that better reflects where the american people are today. host: do you want to respond? nicole: i think they are giving
to the crux of this. this is about each person's choice. nobody is telling you which way to go. that is with the pro-choice movement is about, making your own decision for your own body and what is right for your life at this time and the reality is that is what the majority of women and americans in this country believe. we should have our own choices about our own bodies with our doctor. host: you mentioned president biden. here is what he had to say about that senate vote. he said in part, not one republican congress voted for this bill -- about their own bodies, families and lives to protect the right to choose, voters will need to elect more pro-choice senators this november and return a pro-choice majority to the house. if they do, congress can pass a bill in january and put it on my desk so i can sign into law. it sounds like at that point, the president does not have much more he can do. what else could be done i the white house if anything depending on how the supreme
court decides? nicole: oh what the white house needs to do is help get that majority elected. we need to make sure we are working on things that americans care about in all aspects, making sure we are talking and empathizing about what is going on in this country with inflation and with wages and the middle-class and we need to make sure that he is out there making it clear to the americans of where they have a choice. you can choose this person or this person and this person is going to be there to rollback your rights and this person is going to be there to make sure they are protected and make sure americans understand in these key senate races, the clear choice they have between two candidates. host: do you think abortion is a motivating factor to do that this november? nicole: absolutely. this is something we are seeing, the outrage of the american people as they understand the stakes and what needs to be done about it, that there is a pro-choice senate that needs to be delivered to congress in order to address it. we are seeing that people need
to talk about this issue because they want to be sure that there voters are crystal clear about where they are and that they are pro-choice and loud and proud about it because it is what the american people want. host: miss yoest? charmaine: absolutely not. from day one, the biden administration has been out of step with the american people and very radical on abortion. on the very first day in office, joe biden expanded international funding of abortion in a way that is out of step. 85% of the american people don't want to see their tax dollars going to abortions. that is domestically, not even talking internationally. very unpopular to be that radical on abortion. i don't think that this is going to play out the way people in the abortion lobby think it is going to. they've been reading their own press releases for too long and being out of step in terms of advocating a radical approach to abortion that doesn't reflect where people are, and we are seeing runaway inflation.
a cost close to $100 to fill up my car the other day. inflation is a problem, gas prices, baby formula that has vanished from our stores that reflects supply chain problems. all of these pocketbook fundamental issues for the american people are really going to be driving the debate over the summer, although i will say i do believe that pro-life americans are also going to be very well represent it at the ballot box in the midterms. nicole: on the campaign trail, joe biden was very clear he was going to -- american voters were not surprised by what he did on day one. the american voters handily send him to do that. host: this is from frank, republican line. caller: good morning. i want to say that i appreciate the approach that misses yoest
is taking, it is very sensible unlike what you hear most of the time, people using abortion as a political tool. i've always been a pro-choice republican, but it is difficult. this is such a difficult subject. i think it is going to be good in the long run that roe is going to be sent back to the states because first of all, when women say they have rights, i disagree with that because i don't think anybody has a right to commit murder. we need to have a conversation in this country about when is that murder because when you kill something that is alive, when need to establish if it is six weeks or 15 weeks. people need to be able to vote on it. that is what is the positive will be by roe being sent back to the states. host: miss brener-schmitz?
nicole: this goes back to a complete non-trust of women. this is not murder. it is not killing, that is a false narrative. the late he is referring to, these are difficult decisions that women must make with their doctors when they are in a difficult medical situation. we need to trust women to make the best decision they can for themselves and their families. host: miss yoest? charmaine: i don't understand the language, this is a very antiscience approach. if you have a life one moment and some but he actively takes away that life that if left alone to develop over time, it would be born and have a full life in front of it, that is killing. it is taking an innocent human life and that is fundamentally what is at stake here. the stakes could not be higher. when you're talking about missing human life. -- about innocent human life. this is some of it has been even
euphemisms and called choice and tried to blur the lines. the inability to even talk about what happens inside an abortion clinic. the fact that we are having this program to talk about this issue. for many years it has been this third rail that nobody wanted to talk about. i think it is refreshing and i think it is important for us as a people -- it has been very clear, back in the 1970's, there was all this language about it is just a blob and it wasn't really human. it is hard to advance that argument anymore. our laws need to keep up with the science and where science has taken us. nicole: this is not a fetus, this is not viable right now. this is something that people -- women need to make their own decisions about their own bodies and when they are going to start families. that is your choice, that is your right as a woman in this
country. is not murder. i'm not going to respect words like that. host: let's hear from charlamagne in florida, democrats line. caller: hello. host: go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. my question is this. win is the man going to play a part in the woman's life when they have a child? because they put in all the blame on the woman and they still want to take the rights away from the woman to make a decision about their own body. when is the man going to step up and say ok, we want the child and we're going to raise that child together as a family? a woman being raped is not going to want that child. that is not fair to them. they are putting too much pressure and stress on the woman to do all these things. they are taking our rights away. we can't even get baby food in this country anymore. what gives them the right to do that?
is it supposed to be god, the doctor and the woman. i don't understand why they are try to take our rights away. host: thank you for the call. charmaine: i think it is important and healthy that we are going to have a conversation more about the father's responsibilities to step up and be a part of protecting this life that he was very much a part of. i think it has been disastrous to separate and say that he had absolutely no responsibility in the situation. that was a mistake. the community needs to be a part of this. there is a whole conversation moving forward about how we can -- as would like to say in the pro-life community, how you can welcome that new life and protect them in law. host: do you want to respond? nicole: if a woman wants to involve other people in her decision, that needs to be her choice too.
she can involve the potential father, her family, the whole community. it can be between herself and her doctor or if you want to have other people be a part of it. what the caller mentioned about the baby formula that has been touched on. wouldn't it be great if we were doing what joe biden wanted which is manufacturing in america again? wouldn't it be great if you are making more of this in the usa so we weren't having shortages? it all ties together. host: one of the people commenting on the leaked document that made this all-news was justice clarence thomas speaking at a conference on friday talking about the impact on the court. i want to play what he has to say about the impact and then get your responses to it. [video clip] >> the institution that i'm a part of, if someone said that one line of one opinion would be leaked by anyone and you would say that is impossible, no one would ever do that. it was such a belief in the rule
of law, a belief in the court, in what we were doing, that that was forbidden. it was beyond anyone's understanding or at least anyone's imagination that someone would do that, and look where we are, where now that trust or belief is gone forever. when you lose that tries, especially in -- that trust, especially in the institution i'm in, it changes the institution fundamentally. you begin to look over your shoulder. it is kind of an infidelity. host: as far as the court itself, do you think the institution is at stake? charmaine: what is challenging is the idea that some but he felt so motivated to try and influence the internal deliberations of the court, to do something like this that is so outside the bounds of political norms, and even human
norms of respect for the institution and respect for others that you work with. i hope that we as a country can be a little more serious about moving back to a place of civility and treating others who disagree with us with respect and consideration in and this move to leaked the document does not reflect those norms and i think that is very sad and i think we are going to see the decision come out without the changes that the person who leaked it was perhaps hoping for, and we will go from there. nicole: the leak is concerning. this is not something we want to see happen in the supreme court. we can't keep letting the republicans moving us to a shiny object and talking about the leak. the decision says roe should be overturned and it leaves a huge opening on other decisions down the road. voting rights and then roe, and then we will see what is next.
we need to make sure we are maintaining that america wants roe v. wade to be the law of the land and we need to make sure that is what we are keeping focused on. host: nicole brener-schmitz, the former national political director for naral, pro-choice america and we are also joined by charmaine yoest former president and ceo of americans united for life. thank you both for participating. we will go to open forum. comment on this and other segments. later on in the program we are joined by wall street journal's allen cullison. he will talk about what has been known as the steel dossier -- steele dossier. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. independents, (202)-748-8002. we will take those calls when "washington journal" continues. ♪
>> weekends on book tv feature authors talking about their latest books. professor of history at the university of dayton talks about six presidents, abraham lincoln, grover cleveland, theodore roosevelt, jfk, ronald reagan and donald trump who he says took on the washington swamp after taking office. forbes media chairman steve forbes shares his thoughts on what is causing inflation in the u.s. and how to fix it. he is interviewed by the new york times economic reporter. watch a book tv every weekend and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online at book tv.org. >> c-span has unfiltered
coverage of the u.s. response to russia's invasion of ukraine, bringing you the latest from the president and -- the white house and the state department as well as congress. we also have international perspectives from the united nations and statements from foreign leaders, all on the c-span networks, the c-span now free mobile app and c-span.org/ukraine, our web resource page we can watch the latest videos on demand and follow tweets from journalists on the ground. go to c-span.org/ukraine. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events and campaigns and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips. stay current with elitist episodes of "washington journal
-- with the latest episodes of "washington journal," plus a variety of compelling podcasts. download it for free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington. >> now available at the c-span shop, c-span's 2022 congressional directory. this compact spiral-bound book is your guide to the federal government with contact information for every member of congress including bios and committee assignments. also contact information for state governors in the biden demonstration cabinet. order your cup -- and the biden administration cabinet. order your copy today. every purchase helps support c-span's nonprofit operation. >> "washington journal" continues. host: you can make comments on
this open forum if you want to text us at (202)-748-8003. you can post on any segment you see on the program on our social media sites. that is facebook, twitter. a couple stories relating to pennsylvania's senate race. particularly as the november midterms become more of the story. republicans are increasingly worried that the chances of winning pennsylvania's gubernatorial and senate races are slipping through their fingers as hardline candidates search at the 11th hour. operatives in the state are sounding the alarm that state senator doug must rihanna, front runner in a toil candidate whose bid around unfounded allegations of voter fraud in 2020 is making the top dog in harrisburg out of reach. kathy garnet has part worries about the open seat being vacated by senator pat toomey which is crucial to republicans path to senate control. you can read more on the hill.
and connection to that, political reporting -- politico reporting doug must rihanna getting support from president saturday with an endorsement, adding that the prospect of mr. trump's endorsement to overturn the election in 2020 -- president at the capitol during the january 6 insurrection is a lot of -- has a lot of republicans nervous about his ability to win a general election. but is one of the stories you can pay attention to on this network as we head toward november and the midterm election. you can comment on that on the open forum. numbers on the screen. republican line first, indiana, this is david. caller: how are you doing? host: i'm well, thanks. caller: you got me in on open forum so i will make a couple quick points. the abortion issue, hough we
would focus more on -- if we would focus more on the ability to prevent the pregnancy before it gets started with contraceptives, we could eliminate a large portion of the abortion issue. since we are an open forum, i think you are going to have something come up about the fbi. i think the whole thing in that organization is in hot water, and we need some more clarity as to what they are actually doing about this steele dossier and what and when. host: alan cullison is joining us for that conversation at 9:15 this morning, reporting on national security issues for the washington journal. john in west virginia, democrats line. caller: how are you doing? host: you are on, go ahead.
caller: here is the thing that gets me. the supreme court justices, when they were doing confirmations, they said that roe v. wade is settled law. i'm not a lawyer, but my understanding of that, when you say settled law, that means you accept the law as it is. for them to now go back on that, it's like i have lost all trust in the supreme court justices. then they say that a woman that has been raped or molested by someone has to carry that child? that is so unfair, and that is what i don't get. i don't think no one ever wants a child to be lost.
but my point is this, if it is settled law, it is settled law and now all of a sudden it is being changed and i am totally against that. host: let's hear from anthony in detroit, independent line. caller: good morning, just to change the topic to ukraine. i can't believe congress just brought up a bill at 3:00 p.m. with $40 billion. let's just send $40 billion to ukraine. this is outrageous. i don't support ukraine or anything we've been doing there in eight years. spending taxpayer dollars in ukraine. they can acknowledge the truth about the coup in 2014 that our officials definitely purchase a paid then. there has -- definitely participated in.
let's just send $40 billion over, it sounds great. host: several legislators, including mitch mcconnell, in kyiv, ukraine as part of a story in the washington journal, meeting the ukrainian president. the story saying zelinski greeted the four american lawmakers on a street, calling their visit quote, a powerful signal of bipartisan support from the american people. mr. mcconnell was accompanied by susan collins and john cornyn. zelenskyy noted the special role of the united states in ramping up sanctions on russia and said he looked forward to additional sanctions being imposed on russian banking. he also called for russia to be branded a state sponsor of terrorism. the unannounced trip was the latest in a parade of high-level western officials that included first lady jill biden, house speaker nancy pelosi and leaders in canada and various european nations.
the wall street journal is where you can find that story. also from the associated press, taking a look at finland and the potential of joining nato. you can find it on a lot of different sources but the reporting is that the russian president warned his finnish counterpart saturday that relations between the two neighbors could be quote, negatively affected, if finland does follow through with plans to apply for nato membership. the kremlin press ervin said that mr. putin -- press service said that mr. putin warned finnan -- finland -- such a change in the country's foreign policy could negatively affect russian-finish relations which is built in the spirit of good neighborlyness. that is from the associated press. let's hear from shirley in pennsylvania, republican line. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call.
first of all i'm very upset with the person that was the leaker because this is going against our supreme court and i believe this is terrible. that person needs to be reprimanded and probably put into jail where they need to be. as far as abortion is concerned now they want to send it back to the states and i believe that is a good idea because now the boater has a choice here. when they go to the polls, we can say are we for abortion or against it and you can vote the way you want to vote. i believe that is a wonderful idea and that needs to go into law. and also about abortion, that was god's plan before that child was ever conceived. they need to pray about it and let god handle it. that would be the best way that could be handled and if god wants that child to be birthed
and be a person and be in society, that needs to be apt to god. let's look at it that way. host: let's hear from alice in florida, democrats line. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. if you'll permit me, i have a question and a comment. the question is, i read that the catholic church believes that life begins at conception. however, if that embryo is stillborn, they will not baptize it or give it a christian funeral. that is a question i would like somebody to tell me. secondly, i am concerned that republicans are becoming the communists because they want the president to take over the oil industry and the baby food industry.
that is communism. the government is not running these. why would they want to take it host: independent line, hello. caller: i was caught about the massacre in buffalo. i would like to make a point, people of african-american descent have the same rights and privileges as others, this will continue to be. when we go back and think about out of the south and everything went back to jim crow laws, we think about after the 1968 up people and the rise in america, they did the capture commission report. no one in the black caucus would say a word. like church mice. reelect these people, they do not represent our interests. they are just out there serving the wells of the caucasian. host: that is gilbert in
alabama. we have got about 15 minutes left of this program. if you want to comment on the open forum, the number is (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans and (202) 748-8002 for independents. the white house is looking to prepare itself should either the house or senate go to republican power after the november elections. they write that president biden's legal team is laying the groundwork to defend against an expected onslaught of oversight investigations by congressional republicans should they take one or both chambers in the midterm elections, including preparing for the possibility of impeachment as payback for the two impeachments of president donald trump. as part of preparations, the white house have hired a long time white-collar defense lawyer who is now the top lawyer at the department of veteran affairs to
oversee responses to subpoenas and other oversight efforts according to people who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters. they go on to say the arrangement is set to be aimed at respecting the limit of what taxpayer-funded lawyers should handle and ensuring the lawyers do not mix work in a way that could undermine executive of ledge protecting what lawyers know from any subpoenas were testimony or notes. that is in the new york times if you want to read it. craig in north carolina, republican. caller: good morning, thanks for taking my call. i am a pro-choice republican, i want to talk to all my fellow critical republicans that have walked away from the conservative values of our party and gotten mired down in the oh antiabortion. this is between a woman and her
doctor and her conscience. i can't believe we are getting involved in this. once this baby is born, they are going to cast it aside no matter what that lady said. there are diapers and formula available, maybe that is true. it is true through the witch program antigovernment -- wit program and government. it is an economic issue for those folks. as a true conservative, that is where you should be focusing your attention, making it possible for these folks to do with they need to do in their own economic best interest. i am sick and tired of all of this in my party and i know it will reflect in my vote. host: richard in california, democratic line. caller: thank you for taking my call, can you hear me? host: go ahead. caller: i thought i would call in about the abortion issue. it is such a hot potato, i
appreciate the chance to speak out. i wanted to mention from the perspective of the child, i am one of those children. i was born. you know what i did all my childhood? i lived in a home for unwanted children for three years, i love that grandparents houses, uncles and ought to houses. it was hard. i'm 75 years old, i survived. when you are one of those kids and not wanted, it is hard on you. that is all i've got to say, thank you. host: joe in pittsburgh, pennsylvania. independent. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i wanted to comment, i am a taxpayer, been paying taxes for 50 years. my son and i went on a trip, we had to show our id six times,
show the vaccination cards four times, headed to covid tests to return to our country that we've been paying taxes on. meanwhile, you have undocumented, unregistered aliens walking across the border that do not have tests, have not been vaccinated and are not paying taxes. i do not think it is right. i do not think it is right. real quickly, i do not think it is right we get upset -- i know it is a tragedy, but we are killing millions of babies, black and white. every year. nobody cares. host: joe in pittsburgh, pennsylvania. newsweek comments on a hearing you will see on c-span networks next week, they write that next tuesday, congress will hold a public hearing for the first time in more than half a century, but why is it happening now? the house intelligence subcommittee on counterterrorism, counterintelligence will take place several months after a
highly anticipated government report was published in june last year detailing numerous reports of what officials call unidentified aerial phenomena. the report that was released by the director of national intelligence at the request of the intelligence committee said the u.s. government recorded 144 uap encounters between 2004 and 2021. a report found limited data meant the vast majority of the incidents cannot be explained and there could be multiple types of uaps which required for next the nations. that hearing is set to take place, we will carry it live if you are interested in learning more. these unidentified aerial sightings as they are known in front of the select intelligence committee, c-span3 is where you can watch at 12:30 next tuesday, also follow along at c-span.org and the c-span now app. taylor is next from california, democrats. caller: yes.
the lady earlier talking about a pro-choice stance, she was pointing out this is a big economic issue. i was looking into how much women made at the ages of 20 or 25, 30 and on. they make very little money from 16 to 20, a little more, then at 25, they start earning a decent salary, stuff like that. when you make this abortion illegal, which is already being done in states, it is going to have a cascading economic effect down the road for us that i do not think we are really considering. we are considering people trying to be pro-life, consider the lives of these children, but we
are going to put so many more kids in a bad situation because of this, is what i foresee. host: john in florida, republican. caller: thank you. i am calling about the immigration situation. what i would like to know is, what gives the president the right to go against the laws of this country concerning immigration? it is a sad, sad state when all we have to worry about is taking care of everybody else except ourselves. i was brought up in a household where my father said you take care of the home base first. make sure all the kids have with the need. if there's anything left over, you give it to somebody else. but what is happening in this country is disgraceful.
host: go ahead and finish her comment. caller: what i am saying is, the laws are not being respected. at all. host: that is drawn in florida. politico reporting this morning about election related topics saying the polling industry is on the precipice of its biggest change in decades as they battle back from consecutive presidential election failures. they are increasingly embracing new methods in the run-up to the 2020 midterms after notable misses in recent races. the looming 2024 election cycle whose support among the electorate had posters trying to measure for the past seven years, including missing on the 20 when and underestimating the closeness of the 2020 loss could be on the ballot for the third consecutive presidential election. the internal polling that drives campaign decision and the media
surveys to help shake coverage of the races are changing. pollsters are trying new ways to collect data, like contacting potential respondents by text message instead of phone calls and seeking new ways to adjust data to make it more accurately reflect the home electorate. the story adds the american association for public opinion research, the paper is presented in the sideline conversations the biggest change election: -- in election polling since land lines. about five more minutes left an open forum. ohio, independent. caller: hi, can you hear me? host: go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to talk about the abortion situation. i want 70 to explain, why aren't they talking about contraceptives -- somebody to explain, why aren't they talking about contraceptives?
there are implants. i want to know why, it is ok for a woman to kill her baby, but if i hit her in a car and she is pregnant and she loses the baby, i go to prison for murder. tell me the difference. host: democrat line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i would like to comment that i do not believe abortion should be used for pregnancy -- it should only be used for people that are in a medical situation or somebody that may be is about 16 and made a mistake. we want to give them a chance to keep bettering their lives. take it from somebody that had three children at a very young age. the struggle.
sometimes we need a second chance. we should not use it just to get rid of it as birth control. it should be something you get one chance, or if you get raped or there is a situation where you are medically -- this dictatorship with the republicans on women's bodies is ridiculous. if they do that, women are not going to have anything. we will be like iran. host: oregon, independent line. caller: good morning. i wanted to call in and think the people that went to ukraine -- thank the people that went to ukraine and show support for the united states for another emerging democracy. i wanted to say i voted for trump the first time, in that time, we almost lost our democracy. having said that, the supreme
court is stacked until it can get on stacked. we have to live with these things. regardless of party. thank you for the call. host: from canon, joining us from cincinnati, ohio. republican. -- ken. caller: kudos to the democrat pr, it has been amazing. i'm more concerned about the illicit supreme court leak. this was an attack on the third branch of government, this is just as much of a threat to democracy as january 6. congress wants to politically play january 6 all the way to election day, this is just as important. the need to look at this. now we are basing all of this abortion debate is based on what might happen. but look at what is really happening. my get the gas prices and everything else.
this is a good pr stent. i've got to give them credit. host: amelia and massachusetts, independent. you are the last call for open form. caller: i just wanted to talk about the january 6 committee, how we have house republicans defying subpoenas. it is unbelievable to me. talk about an attack on democracy. house republicans, the gentleman that wants to be the house speaker, mccarthy, will not show up in front of the committee, saying it is false and all of this. it was voted on in the house, excepted. therefore, it is. that is democracy. i think they should all go in and testify. host: amelia there, the story from yesterday. the subpoenas released late last week seeing the outcome of what might happen from the subpoenas certain to reverb be eight immediate investigation of former president trump's
unfounded efforts to overturn joe biden's victory. the same tools weaponizing congressional subpoena powers, november midterm election go after democrats even at the highest levels of congress. the story highlighting the fact kevin mccarthy and for other republican lawmakers were served by the committee investigating, you will see that play out as they announce hearings in june to begin taking a look at the issues. coming up, taking a look at what was known as the steel dossier, origins created and viability. joining us for that discussion is alan cullison with the wall street journal. we will talk about the impact on the trump presidency, accuracy and other related things. that conversation when washington journal continues. ♪ this week on the c-span networks
, the house and senate are in session. on the agenda, the houses working on legislation addressing energy price gouging. and, the infant formula shortage. in the senate, lawmakers are expected to work on the $40 billion ukraine aid bill. tuesday, at 10:00 a.m. eastern, live on c-span three for the first time in decades, a house intelligence subcommittee will hold a hearing on unidentified aerial phenomena on, formally known as ufos. the hearing comes after a government report released last year, citing 144 uaps but only had an explanation for one of them. on wednesday at 10:00 a.m. eastern, the house judiciary committee will look at access to abortion services in response to the leak supreme court draft opinion suggesting roe v. wade may be overturned. thursday at 10:00 a.m. eastern also on c-span three, interior secretary deb haaland will appear before the senate energy and national resources
committee. watch this week live on the c-span networks or on c-span now, the free mobile video app. also click on a c-span.org for scheduling information or stream video live or on-demand any time. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. c-span weekly podcast brings you more than 40 years of recordings from the video library, comparing the events of the past with today. orrin hatch was the longest serving republican in history, his legacy was more than longevity. he was a close friends with massachusetts democratic senator ted kennedy. the odd couple as he called it. on this episode, we explore that side of his the senate legacy. >> i remember when we sat down together, we are from two opposite pools in many respects.
although he does not realize he is a lot more conservative than he thinks. if he thinks i may be a lot more liberal than i think. when kennedy and hatch can get together, people say if they can get together, anybody can. >> you can find it on c-span now, the free mobile app or wherever you get our podcasts. >> c-span brings you an unfiltered view of government. our newsletter word for word recaps the day for you from the halls of congress to daily press briefings to remarks from the president. scan the qr code at the right bottom to sign up for the email and stay up-to-date on everything happening in washington each day. scribe today using the qr code or visit c-span.org/connect to subscribe anytime. >> washington journal continues. host: alan cullison from the
wall street journal joins us, the co-author of the story three friends chatting, how the steele dossier was created. thank you for joining us. guest: great to be here. host: can you remind people, the steele dossier, a lot was said during the trump presidency. what was it? guest: it was a piece of political research that came out in early 2017 after the election that had been circulating in the journalism community for quite some time that basically said there was a well-developed conspiracy cooperation between the russian government and the trump administration in rigging the elections. host: who was responsible for the creation? guest: it was commissioned -- it would -- was financed initially by a republican opponent then later the hillary clinton campaign against trump.
it was done through a private research firm and ultimately coordinated by christopher steele, former ni six. host: what did it contain concerning president trump at the time, the president-elect? guest: it should be did a lot of information to various a lot of the sources -- various anonymous sources that no one had any insight into. it was presented in language, the lexicon of the dossier, it appeared to be a well resourced, well sourced intelligence document. host: you wrote taking a look at the document, you cowrote this saying the dossier proceeded to rivet the u.s. political class
with credibility cast the first two years over the trump presidency and cost millions of dollars for investigations and lawsuits only to eventually be mostly discredited. one reason was much of the dossier information came from, anything but kremlin insiders set a wall street journal review's found many key details originated after they'd been brought together over a minor corporate publicity contract. can you expand? guest: pieces came out over the years, it's only been possible to look at the dossier in a clear eyed way in hindsight partly because of government investigations and lawsuits that reveal the methodology for steele in collecting this information. most of the details came out
with the indictment, of a subcontractor of steel last year. the story we put together, more or less, pulls together a lot of the details that have not been put together until recently. in addition to that, we did quite a bit of research overseas and here in washington. filled in some of the gaps on how all these people came together. host: can you give an example of what was found in the dossier that was discredited or not true? guest: basically, the salient episodes of the dossier were not true. i had always taken interest in the meeting were trump's lawyer was supposedly flew to prague to conspire with kremlin officials and hackers in order to coordinate the hacking and
covering up of the hacking, ultimately that meeting never happened. it was never possible -- proving that something is not true and the absence of these things is very difficult. this is one of the reasons i think we never really had clarity on the dossier back when it was very important during the trump administration. it has been a long road. but i think it is pretty much known it now the tape everyone refers to a were trump supposedly hired a presidential suite in a moscow hotel room, that did not happen. essentially, a lot of the stuff was bartok -- bar talk and ended up in a document. host: our guest with us until
10:00. for democrats --(202) 748-8000 free democrats, (202) 748-8001 four republicans and (202) 748-8002 four independents. let's talk about some people at the center of your story. point them out to her audience and you can explain who they are , you mentioned igor. guest: he is a native russian who spent most of his professional life in the united states. he picked up a couple of higher degrees in the u.s. and worked as a researcher at the brookings institution. later on, that was not permanent work. later on, he found himself working in various capacities, one of them was a researcher for christopher steele. mainly i believe doing due diligence, research on companies and whatnot.
in russia, not really political work. he ended up being the fellow christopher still relied upon for getting all the information for the dossier. host: it was not a job he was a little ambivalent about doing, as far as research. guest: he said that an fbi interview after the appearance of the dossier. they wanted to know where the dossier was from, and early 2017 after it was published by buzzfeed, they had several conversations about it. he said at one point this was new political work for him. guest: the other person involved , charles. guest: charles is a publicist, some have known charles because it was a small circle of people who were kind of a rush experts.
i used to work overseas for the wall street journal, for 20 years i was based on and off in russia. he represented russian companies and working on their image, he also represented or worked some for the russian government and organizing the valve by forum where putin met with various dignitaries and whatnot to explain russia's position on things. he found himself involved apparently unwittingly when he worked with igor on a couple of projects. host: the third person highlighted, olga. guest: olga was an old classmate of igor from the provincial city and the euro mountains. she was a press secretary for a third person, who we will hear about was based in cyber us -- siberus.
her appearance here was not only as a friend, because he was looking for sources and information, he relied upon this old school friend for some information. host: the person you just mentioned in connection to olga, who is that? guest: that was alex, her employer who she eventually had a falling out with and ended up in the dossier as a villain of sorts. host: these people talking, how did end up in the document itself? guest: in early 2017 -- it is a little bit of a contorted tail. a lot of names. but this russian entrepreneur decided he wanted to have a publicity pushing the united states. he hired her to come to the united states, she did not know had to find a publicist.
she contacted igor, who contacted charles. the three of them were talking among themselves. over the course of months, it appears based on the various indictments and things that have come down into several cases, these two people ended up being the main sources for igor in the dossier as he compiled -- when they were all thrown together, because of the publicity project , they also ended up -- that coincided with the work on the dossier. so they became sources. host: as far as the information released into the dossier, did he take this at face value? did he do analysis before submitting it to christopher steele? guest: it is hard for me to have
much insight into that. there are times when he is pretty self-effacing about this when talking to the fbi. he said i think this piece of information i put into the dossier might have been overblown or overstated. other times in public, i have seen him defend all the information. she thought it was defensible in a -- he thought it was defensible and important. host: what was the overall impact not only at the time in washington but the trump administration itself? guest: i am primarily -- my role for the journal is mainly russia expert. i can certainly say this
document had a very big impact on the journalism community. if people were not citing from it directly, it had a very deep influence on their worldview. if very profound one. possibly there would have been plenty of belief. this was something that was believed fervently by some people -- the dossier was something that was believed fervently by some people. they thought of as hard evidence , it got read into the congressional record. the document tended to be a little more resented by people who served a moscow, correspondents who served in moscow. simply because when they first read it, it struck them because of the language, the allegations seemed to pat.
there are only a few names, russian officials who are very well-known known in the united states. they all seem to appear in here and be linked somehow to the conspiracy to rig u.s. elections. it appeared a little cartoonish. i think a lot of journalists certainly did not believe it. but they did not do anything about it, either. host: the first call comes from maryland on the independent line. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. this conversation is very subdued for what you are talking. you are talking about a completely, utterly nonsensical document. you guys are talking back and forth, humoring the idea the
document somehow was created -- it is not an ok document. it is horrible. you have people in the fbi, people in the political parties, both parties implemented. republican and democratic for creating a product that is nonsensical, false. full disclosure, i did not vote for trump. i would never vote for trump. but what happened to him is terrible. a terrible thing for somebody to create something like this because now, you still have people who believe donald trump was influenced by the russians or was an agent of the russians. think of what that means. thank you. guest: i think -- i don't know.
the russians -- we do seem to overestimate the ability of the russians to affect our lives. the competence. the idea they could control a large part of american society is sort of an intriguing one. i think people are susceptible to that. i would not blame entirely on the dossier, a lot of the stuff would have been floating around anywhere. i am not an expert in what happened. there were plenty of skeptics within the cia, within the fbi about the dossier. the reason why they did not publicly express those doubts is another question. i think they are reluctant to crawl into these matters in the same way a lot of journalists
are. you can also criticize a lot of journalists for not going after the dossier earlier. that was a pretty hard task. generally speaking, what journalists do is write about events, write about things that happen rather than attack other journalists about what did not happen. i think it was influential, i am glad eventually we were able to find out what was at the bottom of all of this. i think it is actually very important full of the reasons you think are important. why it took so long, it is not very -- it was not very easy. host: illinois, greg, democrat. caller: hi. i listen to your show every day, it is really good. one thing i do understand, listening every day, only one person the abortions, the
host: we have moved on from the topic from the previous one, moved onto another topic entirely. alan cullison is joining us to talk about the steele dossier, the accuracy in recent days three friends chatting how the steele dossier was created. steve, republican. caller: good morning. first, i would like to know if the guest has a rough estimate of the monetary cost to the american taxpayers for this entire debacle. host: that is the question. guest: the short answer is no. i think the biggest political --
the biggest cost, journalistically, it cost quite a bit. i personally, for a couple of years, had to constantly deal with a lot of dossier related things that did not have much to do with reality. when i got a copy of the dossier , it was december of 2016, i had to cancel my christmas and new year's vacations and run around europe, go to prague and talk to people who said they didn't know anything about any of this. it has been an enormous drag. to put it bluntly. lawsuits, tens of millions of dollars. people fighting each other to recover their reputations, this gentleman in cyprus, the internet entrepreneur who was put in the prague meeting that
did not happen, he certainly spent tens of millions of dollars. host: the fbi using the document for subpoenas, can you elaborate on that considering the content you found as far as the document itself? how did the fbi use it? guest: the fbi -- that is actually not an area of my expertise, i do not cover the justice department. but part of the information here -- surveillance of one of trump's short-term, very short-term advisors. guest: pat -- host: patrick is next in georgia, independent line. caller: good morning. the dossier itself is not the problem, that was opposition research. what i believe is the institutions in the government have been weaponized by the
politicians. it is not the dossier itself, that is opposition research. it is the fact the media and institutions such as the fbi have been weaponized by politicians, that is why there were no deep digs into the dossier and politicians got up there and said whatever they wanted. do you agree that perhaps the institutions and the government have been weaponized by politicians, and that is why -- they never treated a president like they treated donald trump. for good or bad, love him or hate him, president should never be treated like this. guest: i think government institutions work pretty hard very quickly to figure out with the dossier was. they had a pretty well discredited very early. -- it pretty well discredited very early. there is the warrant, i think
the dossier had a much longer life in the journalism and political world. the reasons for that i believe are separate, i do not think they were spurred on by government officials. at least i was not. there may be something that comes out of it in the next report of durham. i think certainly people in the cia had a very quick understanding this was not credible. i think the fbi, it was not directly on the dossier -- i think they were pretty fast to understand it was not anything to rely on. host: one of the things you write, the question of the documents had russian disinformation. guest: yes.
i think we would like -- it would be more interesting for all of us both in the public and journalism world to think maybe this is a result of something rather than a big accident. i believe the metaphor for this whole history, it is not a jason bourne movie. it is more like burn after reading. this is the result of accidents and may be laziness on the part of a few people. i think there was some possibility information was planted, there are bloggers out there who have the and are quite aggressive with it. but the avenues for it into the dossier, i have not seen any specific information that would really get there. i believe there was a meeting in
october of 2016 in which some of the sources of the dossier tended in moscow -- it was a conference -- most of it had been written by them. i think it is pretty identifiable where a lot of the information came from. it did not seem to be coming through russian channels who were directly related to russian intelligence. host: when it comes to research itself, what republicans were interested in compiling the research and when it comes to the dossier, what was the connection to the hillary clinton campaign? guest: it began as research from anti-trump republicans. i'm forgetting the name of the hedge fund manager who did it in the very beginning. he worked closely. later on, after trump became the primary candidate for the
republicans, it was dropped, then hillary took it out. host: did the campaign directly pay for research? explain that. guest: it went through a law firm, then to fusion. host: larry in california, democrats. caller: hi, good morning. i think i just know a lot more than you, sir. you do not seem like you know a lot. trump tower meeting, then the trump tower meeting, they came and brought him the information. right after that, hillary's email showed up. the one guy called up and said nobody ever treated a president like that, donald trump pleaded -- treated obama bad. host: what would you like our guest to address? we are going to stop there. guest: i am not saying there
were not activities by the russian government to help trump. there definitely is. there is plenty of evidence the russians were trying to influence the elections, the allegations of the dossier, however was the trump administration had a direct role in it. and were actually helping with hacking. i think there are real stories out there you can pursue. the reason, documents like this confuse the matter. it muddied the waters, that was one of the most frustrating things about the situation. in 2017, if you wanted to write about real russian influence, it was difficult. because there was a document that said it had all penned down and a prague meeting and with a sex tape that was used as
compromising information against trump. therefore, he was under their control. the methods or attempts were somewhat more subtle in that. for that reason, that was one of the reasons we were interested in possibly the document being a piece of misinformation. it was something that will throw people off of a real trail if there was a real trail. host: if you are of twitter saying the dossier was not the reason for the investigation. talk about the true reasons that the trump printed relationship was investigated. -- putin relationship was investigated. guest: i do not have exact reasons why the fbi does anything. cap there might be more details on that coming out. i think there were plenty of
inquiring minds out there, inquiring for the right reasons about the relationship between trump and russia. those were simply questions, i think they really needed to be answered. i regret this thing came out at the time it did, it made it more difficult to research it all. host: indiana, republican. caller: good morning. do you foresee any indictments? guest: i am not really competent to answer that question. i'm afraid. i do not have any insight into that. host: you mentioned john durham, could you explain to the audience who he is? there is a viewer that adds, how does he play into the steele story? guest: durham has been investigating some of the origins of the dossier for quite a while.
so far, the most significant thing, at least for me, has been the indictment that came out last fall, which explains the source -- how he got a lot of this information. ultimately, one of the main episodes of the dossier being this sex tape, which made it quite famous, was part of a durham research. host: charles dolan said that aspect would give it legs. guest: durham does not make it clear, it was in here as an accident or intentional. it makes it look like an accident. he was simply talking and it ended up. host: if you knew charles, how
did you end up writing the story? guest: this is one of the more difficult things to explain to people. a lot of the world of russia experts and russia talkers, russian journalists, sources, it is small around washington. a lot of these people happen to know each other. i happen to run into dolan because he represented this businessman who ended up in the dossier. when i was writing about him, dolan was representing him, trying to explain that the dossier was not true. that his client didn't have anything to do with it. a lot of the dossier was nonsense. ironically, he shows up in the indictment. host: the cowriter of the story,
let us hear from mike. mike is in florida. independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. i've seen him as a hillary clinton stooge in all of this. with the steele dossier, using that to get the court to agree with everything he said. how are we going to make sure this does not happen again? it is so much bigger than watergate. the media just does not seem to be interested. maybe your guest is interested, the rest of us -- let us put under the rug, not think about it anymore. guest: i think it is going to be -- it is going to be a lot harder for something like the dossier to happen in washington.
after the embarrassment this caused. there are an awful lot of people who would like to sweep it under the rug, who do not want to talk about it. to some extent, i do not want to talk about it. it is unpleasant talking about the errors, what has happened, the journalism industry -- i think there was quite a bit of activism and belief perhaps this was another watergate situation on our hands. people were very interested in what was going on because of it. ask to be part of it. that might explain part of the reason why this was devoured so much. there are an awful lot of people who were horrified by the results and if something similar like this is circulated again soon, i do not think it will achieve nearly as much traction. host: from florida, we will hear from vicki, democrats line.
caller: thank you, c-span, for airing this. i hope you air it again during the week. my question to the guest is -- and a follow-up question for the other person who just called, this is one of the biggest stories and our american government right now. i would like all media and journalists to go out and interview all of the politicians that stood up for all the lies and believed them. we had an impeachment based on this information, it was wrong. one of the callers called in on how much money -- all of our taxpayer dollars wasted time and energy and money towards impeaching a president over this. you may not feel this is your number one story to cover, but i feel the wall street journal -- i get it daily. i just hope it has the truth, go
interview adam schiff to and ask him where the proof is. interview maxine water and ask her proof is. go interview nancy pelosi. i am a democrat. my party is being hijacked by this misinformation. please do your job, journalists. host: that is vicki from florida. guest: i think where the information, where it went wrong , that has not come out yet. i have not heard adam schiff speak on this subject. i think a lot of people cited the document because they were told it was true. one of the most recent indictment from durham against igor was one that said he misrepresented his sources.
i think probably the answer you will get is because it was misrepresented to us as a serious document. the blame will be passed on down. host: it was back in 2019, glenn simpson did an interview with us talking about his book about the steele dossier. he talked about the contents. i want to play a little bit of it for you and get your reaction. [video clip] >> there was one issue, i believe in the first report, the salacious heart you were not sure he wanted to include. >> there is a story of a sexual escapade in a hotel in moscow, we had mixed feelings about it. chris thought it was significant. chris thought it was significant
information because it could suggest there was a black male potential -- lackmail -- blackmail potential. we come at this from a different perspective, which was this was a story that was never going to be proven or disproven and did not -- it was neither here nor there. we were much more concerned with the overall picture of a conspiracy to subvert the election. i will add to this was not the only thing chris found in the early reporting that created concerns about blackmail. there seemed to be a secret relationship between the kremlin and donald trump that involved money, that part of this turned out to be accurate. he was in fact conducting a secret business deal in russia involving the kremlin during the
2016 campaign. so chris was basically right, you could argue back and forth whether it was personal in nature or financial. you cannot argue there was not some kind of secret relationship. guest: i think a lot of the allegations are not proven. i think the secret relationship, if there was one, is overblown. there were attempts by trump underlings to get a real estate project going in moscow, they were trying to do things elsewhere. not just moscow, a lot of cities around the world. generally speaking, this document took on a lot of
importance. in a prior age, in journalism, we saw a role as writing things that were more or less proven. lately, maybe it is partly because of the blog, information is thrown out there and idea that why don't we all kick it around and see if it is true? ultimately, that is partly why the document was published. it was we do not know exactly what this is, but here it is. everyone deserves to read it. i do not think that is an appropriate role for major publications and it should not have them published. host: from texas, republican line. caller: yes. i watched your show almost every day, i've been waiting for you
all to cover this. i am watching this guy, i am thinking, is this the best you all can do? this guy is acting like he's in pain just to talk about this. this is probably the biggest scandal in the history of our country, this was a coup to take down the president of the united states of america. this is just a major disappointment. i do not think i am the only one. host: what would you like to ask him directly? caller: i want to know when someone is going to jail. guest: well, i do not put people in jail. maybe you are disappointed in my capacity, i am a journalist and not a law enforcement official. we did try very hard to get down to the bottom of the dossier, because journalists are not law
enforcement officials, we do not have the power of subpoena. we cannot force people to talk to us. really what has happened over the past several years as i and other people were forced to wait a long time before people were called to testify. civil cases and justice department cases to get a lot of information about the sources. i tried to find out what christopher steele's sources were long before this, it was an uphill battle. it was ultimately impossible. i do not know how much more i could have done, personally, to reveal what was in the dossier. host: one more call from maryland, independent. caller: thank you for taking my call. if you would, i would like for you to maybe take a few journalistic cat and put on your opinion hat, if you have one. if you look at it in terms of
justice, on one side you have the steele dossier and on the other, you have the 30,000 lives that have been documented in the washington post from october 18, 2020. which one do you think is more detrimental to the fabric of american democracy? guest: i'm sorry, the 30,000 lives related to --? i did not understand that. caller: during the trump presidency. guest: listen, i -- i do try to reserve my political opinions for a reason. i do think, as journalists -- i try to think of my job more or less narrowly as lawyers trying
to decide whether certain rules of evidence are to come into play. on the basis of that, decide what to write. i think there have been journalistic errors committed in the past years related to the dossier, i think they have been damaging. this is part of the reason why i have worked on it. i do not think all journalists have to take upon them the responsibilities for the absurdities that have occurred. but i think plenty of people have learned from this, i am pretty adamant i do not think this is going to happen again too soon. host: the story is called three friends chatting, how the steel dossier was created. alan cullison one of the
co-writers on that story, you can find it on the website. thank you for joining us. that is it for our program today, another addition of washington journal comes your way tomorrow at 7:00 a.m.. see you then. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2022] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> c-span's "washington journal ," everyday we take your calls live on the air on the news every day and discussed policy issues that impact you. coming up monday morning, marianna sotomayor and morgan , white house reporter for the hill, preview the week ahead in washington. and a doctor of johns hopkins
university center for health security discusses a recent rise in covid-19 cases. watch "washington journal" live at seven a cocky eastern monday morning on c-span or c-span now, our free mobile app. join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook comments, text, and tweets. >> c-span is your uncensored view of government, funded by these television companies and more, including sparklight. >> the greatest town on earth is the place you call home. as parker, it is our home too. and right now and we are facing a challenge. sparklight is working around the clock to keep you connected so it is a little easier to do yours. >> sparklight supports c-span as a public service among these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. host: this is washington journal for may 15.
president biden, merrick garland, and several legislators from new york reacted to the shooting that killed 10 people. officials described the shooting as racially motivated violent extremism. the 18-year-old male connected to the event surrendering to authorities after the event. in the first hour you can respond to this event and the related issues. here is how you can call. (202)-748-8000 democrats, (202)-748-8001 republicans, independents (202)-748-8002. you can also text us your thoughts at (202)-748-8003. post on facebook and twitter and follow the show on instagram. the associated press with a follow-up to this event from yesterday posted at 6:30 this morning out of buffalo. a white 18-year-old wearing
military gear and live streaming with a helmet camera opened fire with a rifle at a supermarket in buffalo killing 10 people, wounding three others in a racially motivated violent extremism. he surrendered to authorities. in a rampage he broadcast live on twitch, he later appeared before the judge in a medical gown and said, "it is my sincere hope this white supremacist who perpetuated a hate crime will spend the rest of his days behind bars. heaven help him in the next world as well," that was governor kathy hochul. she said it strikes in our hearts to know there is such evil out there. these are just some comments from yesterday. it prompted the president to make a statement saying, "tonight, we grieve for the families of 10 people whose lives were
IN COLLECTIONSCSPAN Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on