tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN August 14, 2014 10:56am-1:01pm EDT
that numbered maybe as big as 15 at a time. all the time trying to sort into the blue. that's the human condition it seems to be. c-span: david mccullough, author of "the greater journey: american in paris." thank you again for your time. we are out of time. >> guest: oh, brian, thank you so much. what a joy. ♪ ♪ >> for a dvd copy of this program call 1-877-622-7726. for free transcripts or to give us your comments about this program visit us at q-and-a.org.
>> if you missed any of our q&a conversation with the david mccullough or you would like to watch it again, we will re-air the interview today at 6 p.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> here's a great read to add to some retailers, c-span's latest book "sundays at eight," collection of stories from some of the most influential people over the past 25 years. >> i always knew that there's a risk in the bohemian -- i decided to take it because whether it's an illusion or not, i don't think it is, it helped my concentration. it stop me being bored, stop of the people being bored to some extent. it would keep me awake, make the evening to go on longer, to prolong the conversation, to enhance the moment. if i was asked would i do it again, the answer is probably yes.
i would've quit earlier possible in order to get away with the whole thing. easy for me to say. not very nice for my children to hear, sounds irresponsible if i sasaid i would do all that began to you. the truth is it would be hypocritical of me to say no, i would never touch the stuff if i don't because i did know. everyone knows. >> soviet union and the soviet system in eastern europe contained the seeds of its own destruction. many of the problems that we saw at the end begin at the very beginning. i spoke already about the attempt to control all institutions and control all parts of the economy and political life and social life. one of the problem is that when you do that, when you try to control everything, then you create opposition at potential dissidents everywhere. if you tell all artists they have to paint the same way and one artist says i don't want to thinpay that way, i want to pait another way, you have just made him into a political dissident. >> if you want to subsidize housing in this country and we want to talk about it and the
populace agrees that is something we should subsidize, then put it on the balance sheet and make it clear and make it evident and make everybody aware of how much it is costing. but when you deliver it through these third party enterprises, fannie mae and freddie mac, when you deliver the subsidies through a public company with private shareholders and executives who can extract a lot of subsidies for themselves, that is not a very good way of subsidizing homeownership. >> christopher hitchens, anne applebaum and gretchen morgenson are a few of the 41 engaging stories in c-span "sundays at eight." ..
you have issues in the city is the headline. the kansas city star protests of shooting continued. police won't name the officer is the front page of usa today this morning. it has a photo into the lead story police fire tear gas and a night of furor in ferguson and the police in the streets wednesday as they clash with protesters and ferguson missouri and you can see the picture. also a picture in the "washington post" on the topic. racial cross between missouri town and police go back years. a picture of a protester taking shelter from smoke billowing around him in ferguson missouri. we'll be talking about this morning. but i want to read some from the dispatch story this morning the latest from them. law enforcement officials on wednesday asked for patience to allow the investigation to the shooting of michael brown to take its course as tension over the teenager's death continues for its fifth straight day and
the st. louis county prosecuting attorney said his office will take as much time as necessary to review circumstances that led to ferguson police officer to fatally shoot the 18-year-old brown on the street in a saturday afternoon resisting public officials for answers that show why the unnamed officer confronted brown and the companion shortly after news and he said the details may not emerge until the process of collecting evidence and presenting it to a grand jury is complete. time frames for giving perhaps two weeks or more. if you want to read more of that in the st. louis post-dispatch home page. for more on this and specifically the justice department involvement want to turn out to eric tucke now to ee associated press the justice department reporter. good morning. let's start with the justice department investigation. how is the justice department involved and does the justice departmenjusticedepartment has r
when they expect to have answers? >> guest: >> caller: >> guest: they have a civil rights division to review the cases like this and many other civil rights matters. they became involved in monday. they are running what they described as a parallel investigation with the st. louis county prosecutor in the scheme and just like you were saying about the time they planned to take the justice department intends to speak to >> host: what is a parallel investigation? >> guest: the local authority is going to be looking at whether the shooting violated any local, state use of force law which is a very specific category of offense and prescribed by local missouri law whereas the justice department is going to look at whether the civil rights and there are a
couple in the statute. one is that the shooting was a hate crime per se in a common law offense and that means law enforcement, police officer, it doesn't bother using the power of the office, covered his authority, power of his badge to knowingly deprive someone of their civil rights, their constitutional rights and in this particular instance, that right is simply the right to live. so that's what they are going to be looking at and that is the different category than the state. >> host: and to read the viewers the statement from the attorney general eric holder in his statement this week he said the shooting incident in ferguson missouri this weekend deserves a full summary view.
he said at every step we work with local investigators who should be prepared to complete a thorough and fair investigation in their own right. i will continue to receive regular updates on this matter in the coming days. eric tucker, what specific resources is the justice department providing to the local police as they tried to conduct this investigation? >> guest: they involve the [inaudible] aside from that is the community relations service which is a department that goes out to areas that are experienced in the racial turmoil and problems and they are sort of the mediators in the sense of the go in and try to figure out what is the root cause of the turmoil and the tension and they work to try to resolve that in a peaceful manner.
and those specialists are also being deployed. >> host: eric tucker last question. what options does the justice department have after this investigation is complete and what's the role of the civil rights division? >> guest: in theory there could be a criminal prosecution. it's not uncommon for the justice department to prosecute the municipal police officers for violating a civil rights issue, and there is within the civil rights division criminal section that can bring terminals to criminal prosecution. no one has said that is the likely outcome that can be predicted but that is a possibility at the end of the tunnel. >> host: eric tucker is a justice department reporter with the associated press. thank you for joining us on the washington journal this morning. some other news coming out of what's happening in ferguson. here from the huffington post.
huffington post reporter was arrested in ferguson. the story notes the huffingtonpost along with the "washington post" were arrested wednesday evening while covering the protest in ferguson missouri after the death of michael brown. the journalists were released unharmed but their detention ramped up the police presence which left numerous residents injured by rubber bullets, pepper spray and tear gas by protests every night after brown's death. huffingtonpost also released a statement early this morning from washington, d.c. bureau chief ryan graham. that statement is compared to some of the others who have come into contact with the police department, the reporters who were arrested came out relatively unscathed but that in no way excuses the arrest or the militarization against the journalists. ryan has reported from guantánamo and said they resembled the soldiers more than officers and treated those inside the mcdonald's where they
were arrested as combatants. police militarization has been among the most consequential and unnoticed development in our time and it's now beginning to affect the press freedom. statement from ryan, the bureau huffingtonpost. we are asking our viewers to weigh in on the situation and we want to know about police relations in your neighborhood. our phone lines are divided regionally and a special line for the st. louis area. let's start west virginia. danny, good morning. >> caller: good morning. i would like to reiterate what the huffingtonpost reporters said. this is a symptom all over the country of the police love being mandated to protect and serve as being wanted the soldiers in the county next to ours they gave them, the pentagon gave them a million dollar mrap vehicle from
iraq. why they would need a bomb explosion proof vehicle for made for military combat if changes the mindset of the police from being there to serve the public from being there to press the public and they shoot people over the most ridiculous things. they put eight bullets into somebody. >> host: you might be interested in the peace usa today editorial piece on the pentagon hopes to fuel the confrontation. the story noting that the pentagon might not have those on the ground in ferguson does have wheels on the street. the media relations chief at the defense logistics agency confirmed that the ferguson police department is part of a federal program called 1033 that distributes hundreds of millions of dollars of surplus militar my equal to the police forces across the united states. the materials range from small items and automatic rifles to the heavy armored vehicles.
the piece notes that such militarization is just one element of the often toxic relationship between minority communities and local police. would you agree with that assessment in the usa today piece? >> absolutely. and i'm going to be calling my congressman and senators today saying that material is paid for with our tax dollars and they are just feeding off the public trough buying military equipment that they don't need and then they don't know what to do with it so they are giving it any way they can give it and sending it out to the local police. i am really angry about this and that is going to be hell to pay. >> host: th rich waiting in pittsburgh. >> caller: good morning. i would like to agree with the first call. and i would also like to add this to get you mentioned about federal dollars in federal equipment. where is the right wing and the militia helping to defend these
people? i understood i heard some information about the police force overwhelmingly white and in the overwhelmingly african-american community. i would think these people in my opinion are definitely being deprived of their freedoms. where is the right-wing to come to their defense? i'm suggesting possibly the color of their skin may be the difference. thank you. >> host: some statistics on the community over the "washington post" story we showed earlier. st. louis is among the most segregated metropolitan area in the nation. ferguson one of the 91 municipalities in the county has seen its population shift in recent years about two thirds of the city's residents are black, that's a significant increase from 2000 in the made up just over half the population. white residents accounted for 44% now make up just under 30% if the police force note patrolling ferguson hasn't changed along with the population. they have 53 members and three
of them are black. the mayor and the chief are white as are the members of the city council. the "washington post" story about the racial golf between the missouri town and the police going back years. let's go to michelle waiting and churched in maryland. good morning. >> caller: morning. i am so, so tired of hearing that -- you just talked about how there are 53 white police officers and three black. does that mean, not you, but does that statement mean that 53 white police officers are racist if they are trying to defend themselves or something happens where they have had to kill a black person clicks this stems to me from the president of the country is now so divided based on color it's so much more divided than it used to be. just because this police officer told him, nobody knows what the
story is. we don't know what the particulars are of the situation. but al sharpton running very and all of a sudden because of that come in white person telling a black person know it's something racially involved and it's the color of their skin. it is just so unnerving to me -- >> host: on the police department question, do you think it would help the situation of the police departments were more reflective of the community as they patrol or do you think that is an issue at all? >> guest: of course they need to be reflective of the community but it's not the police department's fault or the white police officer that is 53 white police officers and three black men, black police officers in fact community is majority of black residents. >> host: the chief of the department should have done more to recruit people for where do you think that situation can't --
>> caller: what does that matter? i don't feel like it matters. maybe they are trying to recruit black police officers. the point i'm making is that it shouldn't matter. the police officers are upholding their job and the law and it's not supposed to be based on color. maybe there are racists out there. don't get me wrong there are racists against every nationality, but just because there are 53 white and three black and because this black youngster was killed it automatically goes to the fact that it's the color of the skin. >> host: lets go to jamaal waiting in indianapolis indiana. good morning and thanks for calling the washington journal. >> caller: good morning. that's a tough act to follow. as a 53-year-old black man come and also on talk radio that's why i'm here in california because of my duties as a radio
producer and personality, but it might be held different people in the community can dismiss racism when if we change the colors around if there was a town with 53 black policemen and three of them were white and a white kid got killed, there would be the cause for concern. listening to the attitude of the lady how she quickly dismissed the racial component of this and wanted to blame al sharpton and the typical thing that happens whenever people try to circle around and dismiss the racially motivated situations and try to blame al sharpton and the black community that is tired of being depressed. the call before her made a great point why do the police departments need all of this military stuff if they are out here to protect? they are out here because they
are going against al qaeda or there could be israelis going against palestinians. all you have to do is simply reversed the roles of the race involved in these incidences, and america wouldn't be dealing with this epidemic. if they were white kids unarmed -- >> host: that's jamaal in indianapolis bringing up the point of the police militarization subject was brought up in the editorial by the kansas city star this week as they've been reporting on the situation the editorial board noted that in ferguson police compound the slaying with excessive force noting that this has come to resemble a military zone as heavily armed face-off many of whom stand their ground with their hands in the air and rage on their faces. the editorial board notes the
police must not make a bad situation worse. let's go to frederick calling in from atlanta texas. good morning. >> caller: a lot of the colors have made good points but one of the problems i have with this whole situation as an african-american you have 70% of the city's african americans and a police force that doesn't represent them they need to change the situation from the council because you can get rid of the police chief if you have the representation if you don't feel that you are doing the job he needs to be doing and if you feel there are not enough on the force then go out and vote. that's your right you have the right to vote. you can plug yourself be put in the face of the apartheid situation because you will not turn out to vote. i don't understand how a city with 50% black complaining how they are not being represented when the only thing you have to
do is go out and vote and then the people in the council and in the office but they need to get the things done. >> host: you talk about the leaders in the office. you think president obama has done enough to address the situation where do you think that he needs to come up before the cameras and say something about this and about the ongoing violence in ferguson? >> caller: do hav to have a democratic governor, claire caskill. i don't know if there are other centers but they represent the state of missouri. when i hear them complain they won't get out the vote -- a press conference by white house deputy press secretary erik scholz to the situation in
ferguson here's what he had to say. >> yesterday they sent their condolences to the family of michael brown and over the past few days officials and the department odepartment of justin monitoring the situation and working with local investigators on a full and thorough investigation. as the president said yesterday the best way to honor the memory is through calm reflection throughout the community. the president and first lady sent their condolences during this difficult time. >> i would add that the department of justice has dedicated resources to this and we've been in touch with civil rights leaders both in the area and nationally. >> host: that was secretary schultz yesterday. it jane nixon headed to ferguson today here's a story he breaks
his silence in the michael brown case breaking his silence on a twitter page several comments last night on this subject among those that the governor said i was closely monitoring the situation and we will be in st. louis county tomorrow. we must keep the peace with the press and is the governor i'm committed to ensuring the pain of the weekends tragedy does not continue to be compounded by this ongoing crisis. we are getting your thoughts this morning. (202)585-388(202)585-3881 and ad thithe specialwind this morninge st. louis area residents fight 853882. let's go to mickey index in
illinois. >> caller: the reason i'm calling is because i had an idea. i am not sure if this would work but we have all kinds of industrial things that we can use and i think it might be a good idea that maybe the police officers have some kind of a camera thing that they would have something to back themselves up. and i think that it's really taking away from the main problem that they are having. it's easy to get on tv and so they have these fires and stuff and it's just going to make the situation worse. other than that i'm sorry that the officer did try using a
teaser first if the situation was different i probably would think that they may want to use force but i believe the situation probably should have been the use of a teaser. >> host: sarah is waiting. good morning. go ahead. they should see if they care about the quality and justice. if they saw my 21-year-old son who is half black and they would treat him differently than somebody else and i think that this story will go to the value of human life and that was his child or family member would he have shot a kid and it isn't even a threat. i think if you read all of the different stories and his friend that was playing next to him what he said it's the lobbyists
the cops didn't do what he should have done. if they thought that they should have placed them in handcuffs. she didn't follow the protocols that you follow. that's not how you treat people that you're supposed to protect and serve. what the woman said about the cameras, they actually have shown that the states that implement that with the police brutality have decreased significantly since they have and it protects the cost and these mostly black children that are being downed for no reason. >> what is the relationship between the local police and the community in tucson arizona? >> caller: i have four children that are biracial for the most part they haven't dealt with that. in arizona you don't have a lot of that happening.
i'm grateful for that. i would just like peace and people to take the time to pray for that mother who was getting ready to send her son to college on monday. >> host: the members in congress also weighing in on this on their twitter pages and releasing statements. here is eleanor holmes norton. i'm saddened by the death of michael brown but encouraged that there is support for an independent investigation. images and reports out of ferguson are frightening. is this a war zone or u.s. city government escalate tension with military equipment and tactics and then there's suzanne democrat from oregon hoping for a peaceful resolution.
one of the senators in memory, claire mccaskill releasing statements over the past several days from yesterday writing to you in to work the phones that the escalate the eye except the situation in ferguson today and tonight dozens of calls including the head of the civil rights division of the department of justice and the call tomorrow with the attorney general eric walker. out of missouri a republican his statement i join all misery and women bring the family of michael brown and the ferguson community as they grieve the tragic loss of this young man and his high school graduation should have been the beginning of better things. everyone deserves a transparent understanding of what happened here and fully supportive of the investigations and an open review of the events that went on he says in that statement. >> thanks for calling the washington journal.
>> the top 1% to control all of the world is divided and conquered in this country the media, fox news promotes racism wicked is promoting a sale at wal-mart. the disney corporation put rush limbaugh and dennis miller in the booth on monday night football to promote racism. >> host: what do you think about the members of the media yesterday since you bring up the media to the members, one of them huffingtonpost and one from the "washington post" according to the reports arrested and then released tracks what do you think about the media coverage happening in ferguson? >> caller: you just mentioned to people got arrested. i just mentioned to you that fox
news promotes racism like they are selling bread. i just told you the disney corporation, time warner cable tv has 25 shows with rednecks from guns. the media which is the top 1% needs racism to exist. the market it like they are marketing the state fair. >> host: jacksonville florida. good morning. >> caller: this is getting blown out of proportion and i think it is done by the news media. everybody wants to rush the justice. there are plenty of white people killed in this country. it doesn't make national news. there's also plenty of white people killed in the country by black youth.
there've been a number of shootings right here in jacksonville by black youth that they got everything they wanted and turned around and shot the lady. >> host: can you talk about the relations between the police and the community in jacksonville since you bring up the situation? >> caller: you don't have the problems they have thereby wedded to blame it all on the police. like the one person said about those people go and vote. i'm not sayin saying that police were innocent. i'm saying this country is too quick to get onto bandwagon of black youth being shot by a white person when there is 20 of plaque youth being shot by blacks and plenty of white -- just look at the fbi statistics.
>> host: still waiting for information about the officer who did this shooting. there hasn't been information released about the officer. the officer hasn't been named yet. the police dispatch had a story about the naming officers that fired the shots far from routine in the st. louis area. the story noting that many departments in the country released the officer's names into the details of the investigations. there is no consensus and it has been far from routine in the st. louis area where the subject has sparked controversy for years. the ferguson police teeth -- chief said they would release a statement but later in the week declared he would provide it under the court order or the officer eventually charged with the crime. the business manager of the police officers association is opposed to releasing the names of as a state legislatur legisle tried to pass the legislation to protect them. he said that they face threats during the shift and they
shouldn't have to face them at home. another story in the st. louis post-dispatch this morning. >> caller: good morning. i want to send my condolences out to the young man. i'm a father and i have a son of the same age and its tragic to see a young man shot down and left in the middle of such an environment governed by so much hatred. you can see the broken into political law enforcement and it's been police and governed like that for so long almost like a detachment.
add some point we don't know the details of the issues going on in for the media reports and what you're seeing now you can almost see what the environment entails. for a cop to back up a car regardless of what the issue was you could see that provoking the young man. >> host: we are still waiting for details of the investigation. a lot of people calling for the details to be released.
we had a piece in yesterday's usa today. there is a ferguson near you among his many comment commentsn that piece he writes many are absorbing ferguson and witnessing the demonstrations and al-isam and calling for quiet. the quiet isn't enough. the absence of noise isn't the presence of justice we must demand justice and the others. too many have adjusted to be any quality but injustice and inequality anywhere is a threat to justice and e. quality everywhere. i try my best not to do nothing wrong because i'm scared of the police. i shouldn't be that th but the e are too aggressive nowadays. your thoughts on the situation in ferguson. also want to know what the police relations are like in your neighborhood and we split up the lines regionally and
when a cop kills a person, a civilian, they never go to jail, not even a day, not even a minute so that's the factor right there. >> host: we are talking about this morning after a night of unrest according to the story this morning from the st. louis dispatch the st. louis post dispatch the animosity for the most part was until a throne bottle forced them to fire at the crowd before last night. released a short time later after dispersing the third straight night with tear gas, grenades the story says that about 2:15 this morning the governor of missouri headed to ferguson today. let's go to linda in michigan. >> caller: i would like to say a couple things real quick. first of all we don't know the
entire story. at least i've not been able to find the entire story. anytime a life is lost it's horrible. it doesn't matter the color. the behavior of the people they are destroying their own city where they have to live. that happened in the riots in detroit. the city has never recouped. people just wanted to get out. we all know what detroit looks like. but we saw what the behavior of the people did. you can't behave in that manner and use that as an excuse the death of a child. on the street there is a little beauty shop. when my daughter had prom night event in and i was inquiring as
to the cost to get her hair done. the owner of the shop looked at me and said i don't do white girls hair. i said okay. thank you. i wasn't offended. i know that she had to be licensed to do everybody's hair but i didn't take that as a personal crime. that's fine. it's her shop, it's her business and i'm not hurt. so i don't see why everything has to be made black or white. we need to figure out what happened so that it doesn't happen again. >> host: the editorial board decided to write about the michael brown case yesterday the death of michael brown is the headline on the lead editorial. they write but is not in dispute is a permanent grievance held by many residents and shared in the
segregated urban areas around the country. though nothing excuses violence it is clear that local governments haven't dispensed justice equally. it's also a reminder of the toxic racial legacy that still affect cities and suburban areas across america. that is yesterday's editorial in "the new york times." we will go to jesse in washington, d.c.. good morning. >> caller: yes. i watched the news last night and the only thing that i saw missing from the news was what her hoses and dogs. the teargas and the stuff they show the children was ridiculo ridiculous. what they decided to do is walk out of school until it stopped. if they decide to close the schools tomorrow i think the black kids in missouri need to
walk out of school until the adults investigate this matter and bring it to the public. >> the school district in the ferguson area has postponed the start of school it was supposed to start today postponed until monday. we also want to hear about how the police and the community interact in your neighborhood and in your part of the country. michelle is next and spencer oklahoma. good morning. >> caller: a couple months ago we watched mr. bundy and he had a whole group of armed and ready to shoot federal agents. president obama asked him to step back. doesn't he see all of the people
coming into the neighborhood is only going to escalate the violence he should come in and tell these people to step back and let them protest and get the tanker out of their system. they talking about the lady doesn't do white hair on it is totally different than a child being shot. it's a big difference. and america you need to wake up because the racism that continues today is just a continuation of the jim crow l law. the only thing we didn't see last night was dogs and water hoses. >> host: judy is waiting. good morning. yes, i don't remember obama reaching out to the families of the white man in detroit who was nearly beaten to death by black teenagers were the young white couple beaten up somewhere in the northeast i think it was maryland because they were
walked in their car. and to me having the black panther party the protesters that come into missouri and having al sharpton there is like pouring fire on the field and it's very disappointing that i think everybody needs to stop rushing to judgment. i don't see this as a racist issue. i'm sorry. i just don't see that today. it's very disappointing that the president didn't come out and get this stopped but chooses not to do so. >> host: i think we lost judy. one of the issues that judy brings up is echoed on the bitter. if they are still riding they are being agitated by outside forces. he said i wonder who is behind
it. let'what's good henry calling in from what was south carolina. good morning. >> caller: yes, i think that america needs to be real. we keep denying that these are racial and in sensitive issues. two examples. bundy in montana that was grazing his cattle on the government planned you had white racist supremacists pointing guns and automatic rifles at the federal agents and police and nothing was done. as a matter of fact the policemen stood down and i have never seen anything like that in america. i'm talking about american citizens pointing rifles at government law enforcers and here in ferguson you have people holding their hands up saying don't shoot unarmed and you have guys coming in from tiananmen
square in china and it was no different. >> host: you bring up national stories about this there was a discussion about race relations in the country in the wake of the trayvon martin shooting into the trial last year. do you think anything has changed since those conversations that happened today? >> guest: >> caller: it's obvious that it happened. i've never seen that in america and pointing guns at federal agents and the agents standdown now they are walking around with their hands in the air saying don't shoot and it's like they are so militarized now it looks like something from a third worlthirdworld country. >> host: we will go to mike in des moines iowa. good morning. >> caller: yes, sir. i would like to say right here in des moines iowa we just have
a 19-year-old black kid beat to death by a 97-year-old white man, beat his wife, left her for dead. you didn't see anything in the paper or anybody writing about that. i think a lot of times they just use an excuse to riot and pillage this is a terrible thing that happened to this young man but they've already convicted the policemen. let's have a trial and see what happens. thank you. >> host: midway florida. >> caller: i'm a retired police officer and that happened
because some people have no business being police officers. that's one thing i will bring up we have a proof of how they just aren't going to do anything to deal with certain things. i'm trying to make a point about how i'm a vietnam veteran. the reason i'm bringing that up is you've got to be able to recognize -- and i knew everybody they are keeping all of that but you don't have a life to live. you have to sort of recognize people are going to do the right thing but -- as good as ray.
we compiled links mac here is a preview. the greater journey. they are on the greater journey which will be their experience. the spiritual battle professional journey in the city of paris where they are trying to rise to the occasion to exile in a particular field whether it is writing or music or painting or sculpture or medicine because
many of them went to as medical students because paris was the equal capital of the world. so they are ambitious to excel and they are going against the trend because to go up to europe wasn't fashionable yet and it wasn't part of one's broad education. many of them had no money, many of them had no friends in europe or paris and spoke not a word of the language and yet they were brave enough to go to embark on the greater journey. >> host: here's a quick look at our prime time coming up tonight across the c-span networks.
a roundtable discussion on u.s. foreign policy and what's being called the obama doctrine. from today's washington journal this is just under an hour. >> host: we turn now to u.s. foreign policy and principles embodied in the obama doctrine and joining us now to discuss the subject is brian katulis and robert zarate of the foreign-policy initiatives. mr. zarate the obama doctrine has been described as don't do stupid stuff. how would you describe the doctrine when it comes to u.s. intervention abroad?
>> guest: that's a great question. i would use the foreign-policy contrast to american exceptionalism. what i mean by that is president obama came into office really wanting to put at the very forefront of the diplomacy and the particular grand bargaining south of the diplomacy. and this sort of engagement with rivals and that sort of thing. and he really wanted to in general deemphasize the military instrument. but the problem is focusing so much on the means, i think sometimes the actual outcomes were not always the focus. the most clear example is the russia reset that despite the intentions is yielded among other things. the plea out right now with iran and the negotiations by the leader talked about how they are, quote, useless.
it is a sharp contrast the bush doctrine. now i will close by saying the doctrine of the recent days in particular has been experiencing a lot of president obama's most senior advisers. secretary clinton in particular who has criticized some of president obama's decisions in iraq and in some ways is providing a stark contrast to the policies on iran. cynic would you agree with that description of the doctrine? there are three main components. one is getting others to pull their weight around the world. in the decade after 9/11 when president bush we have this guber fight about the shock and power but what we have right now is a pragmatic administration that says look when it comes to ukraine into the situation
inside of iraq we have the iraq cheerleaders that have given billions of dollars of weapons. that's one component. the second component is pragmatism and what works practically and this is the shorthand of don't do stupid stuff but this is a very deliberative president. he thinks through what might be the consequences of the actions that we take and i think that does have some downsides to it. i agree that when you compare it to all of the mistakes in the previous decade i think on balance that is a good thing and the last thing i would say the third component in the summer is a great example of this where secretary kerry is right now. you look at the india engagement and the rising powers. the meticulous focus on how do
you expand the zones of stability and prosperity without getting distracted by these incessant trench warfare is into the street fight is in chile which are important and i think we will talk about this and we won't disagree on much. it's how you strike the right balance between having a proactive agenda and one that we are building a broad zone of prosperity like the trade agreements with russia and europe without diverting so many of th the resources like we did under the previous decade of getting an escort of trenches to solve other people's civil war and i think that is fundamentally the challenge and the leader will have. >> host: secretary shultz yesterday in the press conference was asked about the obama doctrine and again here's how he explained it. >> we have sound fundamental principles that dictate how the president views the role of the united states in the world. number one, that is confronting
any threat to the national security interest of the united states. the president has said he will not hesitate on that front. and i would also urge you to read further into the speech when he talks about how their military action cannot be the only component of the leadership and if the instance just because we have the best hammer doesn't mean that we have to get every nail. so i think the president has taken a deliberate approach to these issues and he laid out his guidelines over there but the bottom line is the united states will use military force unilaterally if necessary and when the interests demand it and of course most recently you heard the president talk about the willingness to act on behalf of the dignity and the support for democracy and human rights goes beyond idealism and it is a part of our charge. >> host: has the president done a good enough job explaining how the action in iraq fits into that
foreign-policy principal? >> guest: i think he is trying to explain it but to be frank i think that he could do better and any president that is mobilizing the u.s. forces for the semantic area moderation you really need to lead from the front and ideally every day that he is explaining it to the american people why we are doing what we are doing a couple of comments on what the deputy press secretary said i think it is indeed dichotomy to say my worry is the administration uses false dichotomies either we go to th war or retake the present course. and i would say that the report in june of 2014 that laid out the options of things to do on iraq that went further i thought that was a constructive thing to do beyond the sort of .-full-stop often these o raisee do so the first thing is the discourse of the dichotomies in the foreign-policy. but i think the second thing is in terms of explaining why we
are getting involved in the horrible thing that happened i think that yesterday the parliamentarian in iraq was injured in a crash after earlier this month that called for the iraq he intervention to stop this. at the end of the day, how are we explaining who have nearly 200,000 people die at the end of the asad regime and the islamic state how do we explain to this area and into the other is why we are trying to save them, but yet doing frankly very little. and the last thing i will point out i in these idea of the sound principles coming of you seen this in the recent days with secretary clinton, the ambassador off, today josh rubin writes about how the state department has been talking to modern rebels in 2011, 2012.
>> host: you mentioned the center for american progress. do these actions fit into the obama doctrine and have they been explained well enough? >> guest: i do think they fit into the obama doctrine. i don't think that they've been explained as clearly enough to the american people and i agree on that. i think that's more work could be done on a regular basis to do that. what they say one thing about the doctrine before we get into iraq. when people look at the doctrine and it's important to explain to the american people it is a sensual when you look at what made america great after world war ii we had leaders in the bipartisan consensus of what made america great but if you look at the bush doctrine isn't clear what it actually was whether it was a strong strand of the freedom agenda and supporting freedom and i think that's great. but when you look at the implementation of that coming either in egypt were other places were the trends towards human rights and freedom in the previous decade it wasn't great.
if it was a doctrine of preemption and preemptive war we really only applied it under bush and iraq not north korea or iran or things like this. the doctrines are important but more important is what do you do when you implemented your question on iraq is i think what things have moved forward you've got politics in iraq still helping and hopefully the new prime minister coming in and very limited u.s. engagement in iraq. if you look at the paper that we did in 2014 we were signaling that you can't deal with this problem of the state simply in the borders of iraq because there are no borders in iraq and serious right now so the thing for all of us americans is we need to think about this threat, and i think it's a very serious threat posed by the islamic state of serious. the do it ibut do it in a way ts measured and clear. if i were to suggest to the president how he talks about this and what we are doing worse in terms of the limits and
things like this and more in terms of what are the threads and also the opportunities to defeat this threat and i think that he has the right architecture inside of iraq was worth with people who should be fighting for their own country. but what's also clarify that the nature of the new threat that has emerged inside of iraq and see via is a big problem in the medium to longer term. right now you're safe. you are safe. our homeland security officials. we know very well they are working very hard to keep america safe and thank heavens i don't think that we are on the verge of another 9/11 but the trends in the region are disappointing and i think that it's largely out of the problems of the region unless the actions or inaction that w but we need y vigilant on those issues. >> host: we will get into those trends in 45 minutes or so on the washington journal joined by brian katulis and robert zarate of the foreign-policy initiatives are you here to take your questions and comments.
republicans can call (202)585-3881, democrats (202)585-3880, independent (202)585-3882 and if you are out of the u.s. today 25853883. 25853883. let's go to anna who is waiting in texas on the line for democrats. good morning. >> caller: good morning to you. the obama doctrine i don't think there is one and i'm a staunch democrat. there are conservative democrats out here. first of all, wrong decision to put secretary kerry. he didn't make a great candidate for the president and i don't think that he's doing a great job now. you have to pull together the nations and i really don't think that president obama has died a great job -- has done a great job of doing that. and you have the candidates
mccain and mitt romney who is speaking ill of the president. president obama needs to bring people in. i know he probably doesn't want to come up with condoleezza rice, madeleine albright, people really work with all the countries and people need to get rid of valerie jarrett. she does nothing. i'm sorry. but there is no good doctrine. .. , the caller bringing up who the president has surrounded himself with these issues. your thoughts. i am biased as a congressional staffer, but from the first thing i would like to see is the president and gauge on capitol hill. he canceled a it back with lawmakers.
-- picnic with lawmakers. these little things are good to build buy-in. talk to don't feel consulted. wendy sherman came before the foreign relations committee, one of the biggest complaints is they were informed but not consulted on syria's foreign policy issues. the president is doing more on the congressional relations side. a fair criticism of this administration is he's not strong and congressional relations. he would find a lot of partners to are willing to try to find a constructive way forward and if you look at ronald reagan and bill clinton does the both presidents who dealt with antagonistic and partisan congresses and we may see one in january but they passed serious pieces of education, the
balanced budget act anti-iraq liberation act, reagan had goldwater nichols act. something of a president and domestic policy figure out how to work with congress going forward in a productive way. >> a story in the wall street journal some lawmakers pressed for a war of the talking about what is happening in iraq with a handful of lawmakers a president obama must get authorization from congress for military action in iraq which could exacerbate tension between the branches and present members with the difficult votes before midterm elections. brian katulis, is that something the president should be doing? >> i think he should consider it. it conjures up the debate over syriac exactly a year ago. many lawmakers, republican and democrat did not have that vote. i will be interested to see how many people clamor for this. it is important anytime force is used by the united states that there should be congressional
oversight and engagement and this administration could do a much better job building the fabric and the first caller mentioned these names like condoleezza rice and madeleine albright. is an important point that president obama is at a pivotal point of his administration. most americans don't care about what is going on in foreign policy. the world seems chaotic. most public opinion polls, i do think we need to engage and to have that we need a stronger architecture, bipartisan consensus on what engagement looks like and on the republican side, we talked a little about secretary clinton criticisms of president obama but when you look at rick perry versus rand paul versus john mccain you have multiple world views on the right and it is great to work with congress when you look at the disability tree put before congress and you can blame the
obama administration for the failure and they share a lot of the blame the law is this trend of internationalism in the republican party, it is not isolationism but turn inward which i think is understandable given all our problems but we can't afford to stick our head in the sand. >> among members of congress, according to the wall street journal, tim kane, republican from virginia and rand paul and john geramindy. bill, good morning. >> caller: good morning. there was a clear policy on anything at all. let me tell you two points why i believe that. this gentleman spent his entire political career in the
university. the leasing he ever did was teach students in a classroom. elected to them and had to report what he said. the oval office is not a place for university academic, a guy with charisma. you need somebody with leadership ability and real-world experience. that is the first point. the second point is look at the west wing and ask this question. where is george shultz, and mr. kissinger, they don't exist in this man's white house. >> louisville, kentucky, among the criticism that has come up on the president's foreign-policy, some statements with former secretary of state hillary clinton saying don't do stupid stuff is not an organizing principle. robert zarate, would you agree as we show that had lied about clinton and obama making nice
actors those statements having a hud in a private party last night apparently. >> i won't read the tea leaves as to secretary clinton's positioning, i take at face value she had differences and is trying to push forward a constructive foreign policy. to the question on the president's style of leadership, every president lives in a bubble. this is every president but presidents and their staffs to lot to help reach out the bubble and see the information. viewers, looked up lieutenant-general michael flynn's interview, the defense intelligence agency director. it is a sobering interview he had with defense news, he talks about how he had an argument that al qaeda isn't dead. there is so much focus on
leadership of al qaeda. he himself -- it is ideology of jihad is some and he and others in the intelligence community have been warned, they talked in february calling isis, the islamic state of iraq and syria a threat to the united states. j johnson of homeland security calling isis a threat to the united states. the fbi director calling crisis a threat to the united states and it really took this metastasizing cancer of basis. you see the intelligence committee using that phrase, the metastasizing threat of isis. a lot of foreign policy problems are like that. if you spot them early on, strong, firm things to contain them you can prevent them from metastasizing. if you are reluctant and don't even do the small things to hopefully contain it you get what you had today. metastasizing in syria and iraq
that could spill to saudi or the united states. >> a few tweets from viewers, kate miles says obama's policy is consistent with that of the founding fathers who invested in foreign military adventures. the policy of helping but not leading in situations where native government should be helping. isaac is waiting from bronx, new york on the line for democrats. good morning. >> to the american people have you ever seen any president being disrespected like this before? >> this respected in foreign policy decisions? is that what you are talking about? i think we lost isaac. on the foreign policy, this criticism does it border and disrespect of the president? >> we're in a democracy. if there is disrespect this is a
president that can take it. there was this respect for george w. bush in the dark eras of 2005-2006. i would hope we could rise above bad rhetoric and take the criticisms good with the bad. one real phenomenon that has developed over the last few decades was lowering of cost of making foreign policy of partisan wedge issue. i go back to the 1950s and 1960s, the era when my parents were growing up when you did have a sense of coherent thread and bipartisan consensus. there were always fight between republicans and democrats but that consensus about internationalism broken-down in the vietnam war and accelerated after the end of the cold war, and got real bad and the war on terror with people campaigning in different directions about our leadership in the world. we are in a hyperpartisan
moment. >> you talk about this on your program, on policy issues. now politics doesn't stop at the water's edge. overseas george w. bush was disrespected in many ways and that is unfortunate. president obama had a vision of engagements, we are going to restore american leadership and power. that is incomplete at best. part of it is when you hear different lawmakers, when our military takes action against isis as it did last week and they minimized the actions of our military to deal with the threat and to deal with this threat i think it cheapens the value of our engage and. criticism is good but when it becomes so hyperpartisan it does actually e rode the notion of america being a leader. >> the center for american progress, if you want to follow along in this segment, check out their work on line,
americanprogress.com. robert zarate, you can find their work at foreignpolicyi.org. we're taking your questions and comments for the next half-hour on washington journal as we talk about the obama doctrine and what it has meant for foreign policy. bob is in petersburg, virginia. >> good morning. i was trying to understand why this country -- to give every country in the world to do something, hitler -- because of what he was doing with these people, can never change their mind using reinforced on them and if they are doing what they are doing which is unbelievable to me but other than that, by the way when the gentleman was talking about george bush and disrespect, george bush turned
his disrespect. >> host: bob in petersburg, va.. his question, getting foreign partners for allies to participate in this effort in iraq. can you talk about the obama efforts so far? have they been enough? >> there was a threat in the conversation that president bush was unilateralist. he had multilateral coalition that he was respected internationally. was respected too especially by our antagonists. part of the reason we didn't see the provocations we see today. in terms of the allies and partners helping, look at iraq. britain has provided special operators and humanitarian aid quite a bit. germany and france, germany is on the cusp of reversing a longstanding policy of not providing arms and moving terms
-- arms to the kurds. france similarly. the french foreign minister demanding for ministers come and meet and that has happened. a bright note in this is we are seeing the europeans, in particular, take a more forward leaning posture not just in iraq but with regards to the ukraine and russia. it took the death of 300 people in the malaysia airlines 17 attack. >> host: you are nodding your head. >> where we agree is the game we were talking about in building partnerships on iraq it is good with the european nations, britain is a close ally on things like this. what i hoped we would see more of which president obama is trying to do with his counterterrorism partnership fund is action from the region itself and you see it with the kurds, the kurdish fighters that
are on the ground as our air operations are conducted. their gritty, they are determined to go after this threat. quite a contrast to what we saw in june when the iraqi national security forces literally stripped off their uniforms and dropped the weapons the taxpayers provided to them. that is the challenge and having capable reliable partners we were there for more -- almost a decade and you can't make people want to fight for their own country, you want to fight for them. not that there is any serious discussion, it is a serious challenge when you look at libya and syria what are people willing to fight for? in our country we saw civil war, revolutionary war, we have a national identity that is clear. this is a problem in these places where there is a vacuum. groups like isis have exploited this >> you bring up the counterterrorism part of fund. >> it is a proposed idea which instead of u.s. troops going and
as invading and operating these countries like we did for a decade in afghanistan and other places, you build partnerships in multiple countries from all away from pakistan in through a northern africa to get people to stand for themselves against the threat. i worked and lived in these places and parts of the middle east and what we see in our media are the fringes, extremists. they don't represent your ordinary iraqi for syrian. what this party should intends to do signal a sense of support that we will use our unique capability, we have the strongest military world, the best intelligence community in the world. how can we help others develop those capacities and do it in such a way that it saves the iraq and afghanistan war. will let work? we don't know but the concept, and the best case not only iraq and syria but places like libya which look bad right now but these efforts have not yet been
funded. >> any idea how much and might cost to start something like that? >> if you want it to indoor it should only be u.s. taxpayers funding it. countries like saudi arabia which have a mixed record on counterterrorism given their support, they proposed giving money to a u.n. fund so these multilateral initiatives -- >> $100 million. >> the amount of money they make as we fill the gas pump should be more as far as i am concerned. to the central theme of obama's foreign policy, what can and do is do to help themselves as opposed to what we do for them. >> host: ohio, our line for democrats. >> caller: this project, u.s. foreign policy and the obama doctrine. what is the u.s. foreign policy and why is it every 48 years we
are waiting for a president to come in with a different policy that doesn't reflect the u.s. policy chief u.s. congress doing? is congress's policy? that is what i would like to know. >> host: changing u.s. policy from administration to administration. >> you will see with administrations different points of emphasis. there are certain -- certain constants in u.s. foreign policy. with that is eroding we will see. one of the constants is the united states is frankly an indispensable pillar in the national order. we learned after world war i and world war ii two wars that consumed the world that the united states whether we like it or not is the last bastion of freedom, that which prevents all heck from breaking loose so that is the first thing. the second thing is the united
states not only -- promoting, working advanced security, prosperity and human dignity throughout the world. we stumble, president clinton said sometimes we stumbled but we keep moving in the right direction. every president, republican or democrat keeps trying to move in the right direction and there is a tendency to focus on the partisan differences but if you look at the grand sweep, people like robert kagan, have written about america's larger grand strategy in foreign policy. >> host: edison, new jersey calling in on our line for independents. good morning. >> a few quick points. as far as obama's doctor and his concern, is cleaning up the mess left by the previous administration whether it is economical foreign policy especially iraq. we never should have gone there in the first place. number 2, i think obama is aware of the threats out there. he is not beating his chest and talking like john wayne and
using the military as a police force of the world like previous administrations of gun does not mean he doesn't understand the threats that are out there. the guy from foreign policy magazines that something good job something in my mind as far as ronald reagan and clinton working with congress. ronald reagan had democrats in congress. it was an easy thing for reagan to do. clinton worked with the republican congress passing republican priorities like welfare reform and things like that. this president had a congress that doesn't -- extreme tea party nut cases. it can't compare to congresses previous presidents worked with. >> i will let brian katulis fields that. >> cleaning up the mess, the caller has a point. i also think there's a statute of limitations on how long we can blame george bush. >> the george which administration made mistakes. when some of my colleagues used to work with me in the center
and other positions they were shocked at not only the economic disarray if you remember the period, the crisis we were in, worse than the great depression but revealing threats in pakistan and other places. we didn't have osama bin laden yet. we took some steps. the caller is also right that any president understand the threat. the real debate is how you respond to them. a strategic debate, much of our debate tends to be tactical when we get into the weeds in syria and other places. the general thrust of it where we agree is u.s. leadership is essentials. we provide a backbone. look at the kurds and what they are doing. when we send a signal that we are going to be engaged with the debate is how much you calibrate that, how much you try to get others to pull their weight and how much we leave ourselves and one lesson when you take a step back from both the jewish bush
and obama administration eras is getting that calibration right because we don't want to bear excessive costs as we did. our military was worn down by deployments. our budget was destroyed in essence in the previous decade so my hope is in the next phase as obama tries to rebound as they talk about it, bring greater clarity to that and what it means when keeping a vigilant eye on these threats bubbling up in syria and iraq. >> several points, between the it -- the two you agree, where are the areas of disagreement on the topic of the obama doctrine? >> where he and i might disagree is syria. beginning in 2011 when i was on the hell i followed syria from a nuclear perspective. as viewers may know north korea build a plutonium reactor in -- the israelis is widely believed
destroyed in eastern syria. this is a reactor that could have given the aside --assad regime the material for nuclear bomb. as the syria conflict grew it started as everyday people protesting, arguing for more reform against the regime, arguing for human dignity and the askand regime responded with guns and attack dogs and interviewed -- imprisoned the planned overtime, secretary clinton, president obama called him a reformer and my friends and i were criticized for not doubting that he was a reformer but over the last three years we have seen he is no reformer, he is a pillar of instability. viewers especially, look upon
line testimony by a syrian defect code name cesar. before the house foreign affairs committee, look at these photos of it. the syrian regime has been documenting the torture and killing with photos of each victim of as many as 10 to 20,000 people they have arrested and detained for little or no reason. these -- it reminds one of the things you saw in the holocaust, in a seated bodies, tortured human beings who died awful deaths. that is the stuff we're seeing going on. that is not a reformer. this is the sort of thing a lot of people, both sides of the aisle, maybe you had this in syria. i thought there were a lot of things we should have done. i thought secretary clinton and david petraeus and leon panetta was secretary of defense and general dempsey, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, in 2012 urged the president to do the
things with the counterterrorism fund, to build a moderate opposition, something ambassador ford, on the record saying we should have done, we might have avoided the metastasizing terror threat. and the use of chemical weapons, you worry how that will echo throughout the international system. >> do you want to respond on syria. >> the key was my have. there has been a lot about secretary clinton's comments about obama but if you look at the full transcript no one really knows what would have happened and i do agree on syria but also the arab uprising in general. >> the u.s. has been a bystander except to nietzsche and intervention earlier in libya with the lack of follow-through but places like egypt as well so on syria, we would have to sit
and talk about it but increasingly people in this administration and others has obvious problems and to me it is a problem that the solutions are not so obvious these days may be in part because of our inaction. more in part because of 1-acters in the region have been doing. syria is a consequence of the brutality of the assad regime but the broader middle east cold war, she averse is sunni and a fight between saudi arabia, all of these countries have an enormous amount of oil wells and they are throwing that around with weapons and money and it is dangerous sectarian agenda. >> are we to blame for that? >> maybe but primarily the people and their leaders in that region. we need to hold them responsible and accountable. >> we could have seen a different scenario. i am not certain given the historic forces at play.
but i do think in 2014 going forward our actions in iraq this summer will likely lead us down a path i hope towards engagement and as i said before the right challenge is how to calibrate that engagement to get all of these actors in this game to basically stay the hand of intervention. >> the atlantic piece from august 10th that sparked some much of this debate, hillary clinton's failure to help syrian rebels halt the rise of isis. we will get as many of your calls as we can in the last 20 minutes or so. let's go to steven in massachusetts in our line for republicans. >> how are you doing? i would like to talk to robert zarate and find out ukraine, vladimir putin took crimea. it must have taken him two or
three is just to plan what he wanted to do. here it is my question. before the 2012 election, president obama was sitting down with vladimir putin and president obama had been caught saying to vladimir putin wait until after the elections. i would like to know if you know what he meant or could you give me your opinion? >> thanks for your question. actually president obama was sitting down with mevedyev. he said after the election, more flexibility. a hot mike caught that. my sense is that was regarding things like nuclear arms negotiations, missile defense. it is hard to know what he meant because a lot of statecraft takes place outside the public's view. whenever there was between the united states in the united states and russia before the
election it is gone, it went away when the russian military occupied crimea and the russian military drives 300 convoys for humanitarian purposes towards eastern ukraine and we see the ukrainian government doing some really good friends in trying to contain the pro russian rebel threat, nationalist threat. my biggest worry i will say today is we also have 50,000 russian troops massed at the ukrainian border. if god forbid vladimir putin does decide to mobilize his forces in the ukraine, i worry what can united states do at that point? that is why i think today even now we need to do more in terms of the tearing, dissuading the russians from going any further. >> new york is next, bob on our
line for independents. >> thanks for taking my call. this discussion about president obama's foreign policy. as an independent i find it terrifying because the country is so divided that if you discuss anything that is anti obama, you are a right wing or neocon, really major problems facing us on the horizon. the important one is that of the iran having nuclear weapons in the near future. talks by all measures failing and the administration floating aimlessly playing golf and not paying attention to what is happening in the world. these are major events. the president went on vacation, susan rice went to congress and asked them to revoke the war powers the president has. the secretary of defense asking congress to take away the power the president has. this is strictly an issue where the president has -- he wants
authority, less authority to engage the enemy. if we have to do this. >> this is something you heard about? >> caller: i am not certain. >> maybe bobby knows more about it. on iran if i could respond i do think this administration has had a very focused approach containing and engage in iran and the last two years of the bush administration's approach, we can debate the merits of it but there was a multilateral approach, the peas 5 plus 1 to engage iran and nuclear talks, whether it works or not, not many people put a high percentage of success including the president himself. the u.s. has been deeply engaged. when people talk about the middle east and us withdrawing there is confusion. when i go to the you a eat, you look at what the navy is doing,
we're guaranteeing the security of the gulf to this day, something that began before president reagan. nobody else is willing to pay those costs. e-book get literally $100 billion of weapons we sold to oil-rich gulf countries to defend against iran or regular exercises or vigilance against terrorism. we could have a tactical debate about whether talks will succeed or not but the strategy has been one of deep engage and with bipartisan support so i think when you look at the middle east it has been making sure iran did not get a nuclear weapon and you will probably disagree with me on this but there has been some success that has been bipartisan. on the issue of work hours. >> on the authorization for the use of military force what we have seen happen is the white house wants to repeal but 2001 operation -- and
counterterrorism activity, i heard lawmakers say it needs to be updated if anything else those that national-security adviser rice brought that. un iran, yes, there has been bipartisan consensus. where it starts to break down is the question of pressure. for over a decade there has been a diplomatic track starting with the european union and includes the united states and the p 5 plus one security council in west germany. the question today is is it all carrots and no sticks? all diplomacy and no pressure? the question is if you look at this deal that iran has on the table from the united states, why hasn't he taken it? there's the prospect of comprehensive sanctions relief. the administration came down a lot of basic issues. policy in iran in 2012 was
stopped, ship and shed. ship all nuclear material outside, there was a turkey/brazil plan, should out of iranian territory and shutdown most troublesome facilities. the rack plutonium reactor, the enrichment facility buried deep within a mountain on a facility that used to be owned by the i r g c and large-scale centrifuge. we backed away. the administration backed away from its own policies and right now you saw secretary clinton telling jeffrey goldberg she would prefer to see zero enrichment or very little. she is cagey about what jerry the means. you heard senator menendez and others argue that we need south african style inspections and verification transparency in iran. south africa got rid of its nuclear weapons program, one of the most intrusive regimes of inspection we ever saw and what
we have today is nowhere in years that. again, the policy at the end of the day, this is where we may see something going if there is no serious good deal before november 25th towards more nonmilitary pressure, more sanctions in waiting list >> new jersey next on the line for independents. >> one question. what is it with obama sending 1,000 troops building up to another iraq and building up to a vietnam in the 1960s slowly building up more and more soldiers, a full-blown war in vietnam? >> a slippery slope that people have brought up, it is a concern but a concern the commander in chief himself is worried about. we talked about this. i wish he would talk a little less about the limits and more about what we're going to try to get done. i don't see is this--not even apples and oranges, it is apples
and spice girls, something completely different. via non became a national tragedy and there was a slippery slope in part because why that happened there was a perception that this war in vietnam was part of an overall fight against the soviet union and a strategic logic that was articulated and found political support on both sides. >> a larger picture of containment. >> iraq is harder for people to understand and in part it is of consequence of what we were saying, the president hasn't articulated yet the broader threat that is posed here. because he has not done that i read as a signal that this will be a very limited modest engage in. that combined with the fact that he is trying to get all of those iraqi leaders and the people we invested so much in and of often disappointed us and those who served every there, our soldiers, not being willing to fight for their own country so i don't thing we're seeing a slippery slope here but the last
point is it goes back to a broader point of making sure congress and others are brought in on this. having a national dialogue, whether it is a war powers vote or not, we need a broader conversation about that. >> host: herbert is on our line for democrats. good morning. >> you got to remember, what hillary said, go back to the initial point. colin powell should be on these shows making people understand that if you break it, you own it. this man has military experience. to be accepted as liberators, i am a soldier. we have a relationship with soldiers. get out of the sand. you can't look at these deferments like dick cheney mitt romney or rush limbaugh, these guys never fought the, when you got to go back and get colin powell here, the expertise that
when you are saying but colin powell has a better understanding. he sat down with obama. when obama talks to him about what he meant, that is why you see this situation bettors and you would. there would never be a syria. >> host: on colin powell's assessment of iraq? >> colin powell has a long record of serving his country honorably both as a man of the military and later as a civilian secretary of state. any president would be foolish not to listen to former secretary of state, secretary of defense, etc.. i take a caller's point but putting aside the point, the fact that there are real threats, growing threats, metastasizing threats in syria, in iraq, islamic state which again some of our most senior
national security leaders called a homeland security threat even though it is thousands of miles away we see threats also in iran, not only state that is trying to get nuclear weapons capability, state-sponsored terror, it itself is an outline to rogue regimes like assad, a proliferation of missile technology, it worked with north koreans on missiles, in ukraine, russia, we see a return of great power rivalry. talk about bipartisanship, i brought a copy of the national defense panel's report. this is a congressional mandated report chaired by clinton and secretary of defense, william perry, it is a bipartisan report that includes a member of the board, and michele floor lawyer,
successor who was also under obama and it lays out if you will a lot of threats, return of terrorism, great power rivalry, nuclear proliferation, makes the argument the path we are on right now, cutting one trillion dollars off of planned defense spending, that is unsustainable given the growing threats in the world. we can't be roading our military and national defense. you want to talk about bipartisanship that is a document everyone, i would encourage your viewers to focus on this document because in terms -- i am glad brian raised the idea. the national defense policy, the united states institute of peace's web site which is a government agency, this was a congressional in mandated report. >> host: time for a few more calls for robert zarate and brian katulis. let's go to carolyn in tyler, texas on our line democrats.
>> caller: good morning. let me start by saying i like washington journal and i watch your show all the time bottommost admit it allows callers to call in your particular format and some of these things that they say, they put out there as fact, go unaddressed or on rebutted. for example one of the gentlemen that mr. robert zarate spoke about, the need for president obama to reach out to congress more, i think he specifically mentioned him not attending some of the fourth of july picnics and so forth. we must recall president obama went into office, he was trying to reach out to members of congress and he was met with criticism in everything else,
they refused to reach out to him. there was a caller from desoto, texas, who was critical of just about everybody, president obama, john kerry, valerie jarrett, she wanted to replace those people with condoleezza rice and madeleine albright. by the same token there are people who feel the people, people he surrounded himself with, we must remember condoleezza rice was criticized and i am sure madeleine albright was too during their administrations. >> we try to bring in experts for all sides of this discussion but the caller addressed robert zarate if you want to respond. >> sure. i think we agree on this point so it is not just me. carolyn from texas. is also not just us. it is members on both sides of the aisle. this president among his many
virtues will not be his love of congressional relations. other presidents, this is a matter of historical record, lyndon johnson was a great example. he loved frankly to go to congress and getting people's faces and get them to do stuff. this is a president who does not like doing that. that is just his style. is not a criticism. it is an observation. there is an opportunity especially if you end up with a republican congress, both the congress and the president have an option, two years of gridlock which no voters will be happy or do you try to find some modus vivendi and at minimum discrete issues of public policy in domestic and foreign realms where you can move the ball forward incrementally and maybe even more. >> we agreed on a point that president obama could do a better job on congressional relations but it takes two to taint especially on international issues and i did raise a number of issues that
there's a certain strength in the democratic party but increasingly republican party that doesn't want to support types of trees and things that i think are fairly benign. this consensus on internationalism needs to be rebuilt. one opportunity, whatever happens in the senate could possibly be easy street agreements with asia and europe. people think about the economy or commerce that this administration rightly thinks of the proposed trans pacific partnership, the trade deal with asia as part of its strategy dealing with the rise of china and also part of its strategy how you actually grow the american economy at home by export driven growth and whether that works out or not is a question but when you look at 2015-16, that agreement and the proposed agreement with europe, it is a foreign policy issue, not just an economic issue, it is one opportunity to build a consensus that this is how we engage in to make sure it is not
just sending troops. >> the president and congress in peril, reauthorize promotion authority because these agreements have no legs until the president has trade promotion authority. i talked to my friends on capitol hill, you have not seen the administration with trade promotion a story but it is something every president needs if they are going to push forward a strategic trade agenda. >> we just have a minute or two left. dave has been waiting in mississippi on our line for independents. >> caller: my thing is with foreign policy, you guys ought to look where the money is. foreign policy follows the block. in the ukraine, when that first started heating up, we sent john kerry twice and the third time joe biden went over and when he
leaves the ukraine his kid heads up on $100 billion natural gas business over there. >> following the buck. it is an important point. economic statecraft is something john kerry talks about, not in the sense of what you are talking about but how we actually when we're talking about trade deals, how do we expand this zone of stability and prosperity. .. prosperity echo we ? we had that with the wto. we need something new for the 21st century so it is a different issue than what the caller indicated. but i think that the economic considerations are important. host:
it used to be the government would say if you publish this story it violates national security and somebody will get killed. that's not good enough for me. i want to hear who. i want to hear specifics. obviously i don't need to know how they are going to get killed, i just need -- you mean you need a case officer in tehran and tell me how. the second thing is they always demand the request to hold something back comes from somebody very high in the government. if the press person asks for it i won't even take the call. it's got to come from somebody
in the white house. it's got to come from the head of the cia and the nsa. it can't come from the press person. usually when you say that by the way all of the requests go away because they are not quite willing to ratchet up that high. they always insist that they ratchet it up that high to offer very specific proof. and i would say still most of the time we go with the story but if somebody argues are there stories we have held over the years, stories that standard? yes.
why do elected officials remain in office for longer. these days? that is a question we looked into on the washington journal. we spoke with a reporter investigating the rates. this is about 40 minutes. >> luke rosiak is an investigative reporter that specializes in the database reporting and is also the reporter of an ongoing series on congressional incumbency. his story that is out today in the washington examiner americans keep reelecting incumbents over and over. you write it is the most inexplicable paradox in politics americans revile congress and its inhabitants yet are voting the same individuals into office far longer than at any time in the nations history. what do the stats tell us today? >> guest: 150 members had been in office for 20 years or more and 53 had been for 30 years. so these are the career
politicians out of now. if you go back in the history of the country 100 years ago there was 26 members that had been there and virtually excuse me, 26 have been there for 20 years and virtually no one only six he had been there for 30 years. there's a lot of career politicians, there is a new phenomenon. and then at the same time -- and i think it's often been throughout our history it certainly seems that it is rising lately and these factors are directly at odds with one another and it's really a bizarre phenomena that they exist in tandem. >> a career politician can be seen on the chart from the washington examiner. beginning in the chart 1800 to 2002. the blue line here the number of the members of congress who have been in office for 20 years or more can see that rising. the orange line have been in 25 years or more and in the green line the members have been in office for 30 years or more. what are the main reasons why
they are staying in longer? >> guest: to be fair to congress is growing in size since the founding of the nation, and they have a long dated but there are many reasons why we should not be occurring. rarely, i mean, technology is huge. the internet allows the barrier of entry for discourse in the country and it allows anyone to gain a platform and make their voices heard and it lets the smart and ambitious people engage in the public discourse and in the 17 and 18 hundreds there was a time when you have to basically be the delet a dele league to participate in the democracy. and they all have the ability to print the pamphlets and distribute them and just communicate with the electorate which was tremendously difficult. we know the population has grown and we are a pretty inclusive society with a lot of different viewpoints and yet we keep turning to the same few people to represent us.
whether it is bush or the clintons or john dingell coming back to the same person and electing them again and again and it's white with a country of 360 million people it is pretty strange that we set our sights on such a narrow group of people to represent us. >> host: we are talking about the pieces in the ongoing series of the members of congress and the power of the incumbency with luke rosiak of the washington examiner. if you have questions or comments during the segment of the washington journal republicans can call (202)585-3881, democrats (202)585-3880 and independent (202)585-3882. when you talk to members of congress and report on this, what do they think about this? are they happy with the job security that incumbency provides? >> guest: there is a fraction of congress in support of the term limits, and there's the exception that virtually all of
america, a large portion of americans support term limits. but, it is one of the few issues where the congress and the general populations couldn't be more out of step. and that is because it is almost a conflict of interest. americans support term limits for members of congress will be the ones that have to vote on such a measure and that would be basically undermining their own job security. there are a few members of congress who support term limits and one of them that i spoke with is tom marino the republican from pennsylvania is in the second term and he talks about how you are in this washington bubble you do become distant from the average american. and he talks about how people call him sir and they want to drive in the show for cars and i can drive my own pickup truck. it's kind of a bizarre world that you are in and the longer that you are in the less you are able to relate to ordinary americans and nancy pelosi and he was kind of in the news i think two weeks ago because nancy pelosi wagged her finger
and called him insignificant. and why is a member of congress and significant about presumably because he hasn't been in the office since 1983 like nancy pelosi has. but that is sort of an odd way to promote the work in this country. unless you are basically throwing the taxpayer salary for a decade after decade. so he sees it would've the virtue and term limits and he's introduceintroduced the bill bay every year that would cap the number of years the congress could serve. not surprisingly it hasn't gone. >> host: if you want to talk to luke rosiak about the term limits, the phone lines are open and especially we would like to hear your thoughts on the issue of term limits. but one other issue that you explored in this ongoing series is that specifically when it comes to the senators if they are around longer they are going home last. what data did yo date did you lo find out about the travel?
>> host: this is a document that details how they spend the official office budgets and i was trying to think of ways people have the sense that they've been in washington forever and they've lost touch. and i wanted to gauge sort of mathematically whether there was any truth to that and one of the ways that i decided to look at it is how often do they return to their state's? so, i competed to how often each senator returned home. and what i found was a direct correlation between the legs of time that they have been in washington and the frequency that they go home. succumbing you see people like diane feinstein who is in her 80s and she goes on to california only nine times a year or jay rockefeller that only has to make a quick trip to west virginia and he somehow manages to do that nine times a year and both of these members have been in office for decades and it just seems the correlation quickly became evident and then you kind of separate factor of the age and they are linked if you spend 40 years in congress who are
naturally going to be pretty old by the end of it and it will be a physical matter where it's difficult for some of the members like thad cochran wh who would conduct doesn't even live in the state that he represents to go home and that is reflected in the travel stats. >> host: you focused specifically on harry reid of the majority of the senate. what is his travel? >> guest: they were astonishingly low. we know that kerry reid is an important guide with things to attend to shoot in washington but it's the voters from nevada that give him the power and it turns out that according to these records, he only goes from about four times a year to nevada. so, when he's making judgments about the policies that affect americans coming and he's come g about being the guy from searchlight, it turns out that scarcely -- he hardly ever even sets foot in nevada. >> host: as we are showing the chart that goes with your story on the senators traveled home to the bar on the left and the average number of trips home each year the top line that the number began serving in the
congress. read at the fa a far lower end m carper at the top. >> guest: it's kind of cool because he is following in the footsteps. he's riding the rail from the union station to delaware and he does it most nights so during the week he is going home to delaware. to the point of harry reid the fact that he has a high-profile leadership position is a very good excuse but it's not entirely absolve. tom carper is a very important senator. he is the chair of the the government affairs homeland security committee and he still manages to make time for his constituents, so it is possible and he deserves credit. there are a couple other members do deserve credit because they go often not living as conveniently as delaware. as he goes home every weekend to oklahoma and he does it even
though he's the ranking member of the committee and importantly tom coburn is the guy that also term limited himself. the term limits come up again because he is only the second term in the senate and he hasn't been doing this for decades so they haven't had the opportunity to weigh in and he said that he would serve two terms because he wanted to make sure that never happened. >> host: if folks want to check ou out the stories in the chart where can they go to find the work of? >> host: go to the washington examiner.com. >> host: we'll take your question we will take yourqueste next half-hour and start with shirley on the line for republicans. good morning. >> guest: >> caller: i'm happy to talk with you on c-span. i found that the american people seem to come to fear the government right now. decent people go there and they
are corrected sooner or later and i think every time a congressman should be introduced would be to see what was the net worth when they went in and how many years have they served into the net worth now because we know of those that have become millionaires and they like royalty. it's like getting an appointment with the pope to try to talk to the congressman anymore. and even if you go to washington, d.c. and try to visit your congressman there is no chance of that. they become royalty and we the people have no voice anymore but i certainly be leaving the term limits. but the exposure of the net worth going in and coming out. >> host: the topic of the net worth going in but the members
havthat the membershave the fine report, correct? >> guest: the members are different and far wealthier than the average american. but part of that comes back to we didn't cast the net when we are electing the members of congress because time and time again we turn to what we know. at the same time we are saying that we revile congress so there are 360 million americans out there that are suitable candidates for the office way is it that we keep electing the same people again? why is it that john dingell took over his father's seat in 1955 and he has held it since that time? and it looks like when he retires this year his wife is going to get it after that. it's hard to belief that there has been no one in the last 100 years that hasn't, just by virtue of sheer chance hasn't been more qualified than a member of the family but it keeps coming back to what we know and we are not going to break out of that cycle and