tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN May 3, 2016 4:00pm-6:01pm EDT
meeting earlier today looking at the future of the queen peninsula and the problems of north korea. that is dismal. looking at the past is actually exhilarating, somewhat fun, because what it demonstrates is we actually know something. and their air -- there are windows into the soul of the country that should help us understand what will be happening on friday. you will be seeing in the newspaper commentaries and on of news, i'm afraid a lot baloney about the congress, a lot of reporters don't have familiarity with north korea. i do not know how much homework some of them do.
fair amount, i think. ont i wanted to do is based some of the documents that james has put together, primarily the hungarian documents on the congresses.he sixth some sense of perspective for what you will be seeing or whether reporters will be seen -- seeing this time around. and you can make yourself the comparisons of what is very new. first thing to note, of course, is that what is important, and it becomes clear in the hungarian documents, the lens that you bring to the congress will influence your interpretation of what is going on. it is not a great insight, but you need to keep bearing that in mind. the lens that the north koreans
bring to the congress will not be our lens. so our interpretation of what there was is liable to be different from the way that somebody in the north korean leadership and somebody like the man on the street will see it. there is utility to comparisons between and among the various congresses. but you have to be very careful, because these congresses are often context specific, they depend on what was going on around and at the time. the absolute comparisons will not get you as far as some might hope. but just, let's go through a list of things i that will jump out at people this time around. and looking back at the fourth and sixth congresses, they were
there too. the first thing that will jump out will be the bad apple section of the speeches, the reference to the anti-party elements. up inoes not only show congresses, but is sort of is the meat and potatoes of a speech about where the party is and how far it has come. why is this important? hasuse of the bias that crept into observers' view of kim jong-il -- kim jong-un's grasp of power, people will say, they are looking at using a party aliment that elements. and that there are still problems in his base of support. well, that might be, but the fact is, certainly in 1961 and 1980, and i am pretty sure in
1970, there are references to crashing that you can party elements in the party. -- anti-party elements in the party. so you need to make a judgment on whether this is new or different, something about the wording that is different, or is it just throw away lines that belong in a speech. same thing, criticism of moscow and beijing. ofs -- if there is criticism the chinese, either implicit or veiled, probably is not going to be explicit, a lot of people and northee, china korea are having a fight these days because the leader of china does not like kim jong-un. they are angry because the north koreans do not show the proper respect in developing their own nuclear capability. if you look at the congress in
1980, there was loads of criticism of both the soviet union and china. and not very thinly veiled, either. complaints about dominationism, which was a reference, a clear reference to the soviet union. complaints about the superpowers like this who that is -- superpowers, guess who that is. and assumptions that there could be no compromise with the imperialist. who had been engaged in that? this comes with mother's this senseth korea, of independence from big powers, needing to forge their own path and their need to push back on what they see as the big
neighbors stepping on their own prerogatives. i am pretty sure that we will see it again. in northonstant theme korea, so we should not jump to far in making conclusions about what it tells us about the present day. the generational change in the which james mentioned, in the six party congress kim jong-il himself said that there needed to be a change in the leadership to reflect changes in the composition of the party, for the generation. s. so, you will probably see more of that this time than in the past, but this is not a brand-new thing. in the, the turnover north korean leadership at each , muchcongress tends to be
more than you are -- than you used to see in the soviet party. pointmber that at one the leader ofd to that korea, i am jealous you get to roll of these people, i am stuck with deadwood. it does not mean purges, it just means this is what they do in north korea, they change leadership. between the congresses, there is not frequently a lot of change. at congress, you may see suddenly it will grow from the numbers we have now to, they may add six, or seven, or eight people. this is part of the tradition of the way that they operate. know in thetion, i
documents that we were looking at, the hungarian ambassador in to sayd unkind things about a proposal that the north koreans made for a democratic republic. , which did not look to be all that new. in fact, the hungarian ambassador said it is difficult to support it. well, i will not say the whole word. he said the suggestion was not new,! . actually, it was. it amazed the north koreans that people do not grasp it. the dprk was a new definition of unification. in the past, the north koreans had put forward the idea of the
confederation as a way station, on the way to total unification. going to the phases of unification. the d.c. arce was the new definition -- dcrk was the definition of unification. and it held true through the 1980's, the concept allowed them more directly, more formally, with the republic of korea that, for example, in the late 1980's when the two prime ministers met, the north koreans referred to him by his proper title, the prime minister of the republic of korea. so my view was that, and as a matter of fact, i was around in 1960, i was doing the analysis groups of the congress and a remember chewing over this
thing, but my view is that we might see something pretty important. congress, int this terms of principles or underlying philosophy, which would then govern new initiatives toward south korea, even though things are terrible right now. but kim jong-un is looking in the long term, he will leave her in the rearview mere, so he needs to have a philosophical towardor a new approach south korea. same thing with the economy, you may not yet see something quite 's startling as gorbachev approach at his party congress, but kim jong-un is already far down this road on this new
philosophical basis on the economy. the problem is, it has not been codified, therefore those people who are operating in the markets on the basis of this new idea, do not have any top cover. it could be ripped away at any moment, so nobody wants to go too far in risking their next on this. -- necks on this. my question is, does he provide a philosophical basis that provides a floor, so that people are fairly confident that they have come to this new plateau and can operate from that level? he may not do it. i am just saying, if we do get it, it will likely be no wants -- nuance, and people will think, we better look again. a couple of real simple things,
and you are sure to see on the television, shots of the fireworks, or buildings that have been painted and people will talk about how people were working 14 hours a day to clean up the city in order to make it pretty for the congress. yet, they did that for the sixth congress and the fourth, so that is what they do. for us on the outside, we might ,hink, what an extraordinary depressing use of labor. north koreans are used to this and they grumble, they always grumble, they always grumble and nothing comes of it. so, i am not surprised. the city will look better. under kim jong-un, the character
of the city has changed completely. that is external, i am not making moral judgment, i am just saying that the city looks different. it has new buildings and new commercial establishments. there'll be a big parade, there always is. fireworks are going to last however long, maybe one hour, two hours, three hours. in 1961, the hungarian ambassador noted it was an extraordinary display of fireworks, so extraordinary that the mongolians even asked to use the expertise of the north koreans. this is part of the playbook that the north koreans have. they pull it out from the last congress and say, we did this, we did that. the question will be, what will kim jong-un do that is different, that will be interesting. his grandfather gave a six-hour sixth partyhe
conference. will this young man give a six-hour speech? or after a half hour, will he say ok? let's watch and see what his approach to organizing his party is like. guess that is, i it. i would advise you to tune your antenna as you begin to see the press reports coming in and mentally say to yourself, ok, i know that i happened before. or oh, this looks new. thank you. >> thanks, bob. us are notof qualified to ask these questions, what this is all about, maybe we will bring these gentlemen back in a week and tell us. up the floor to
the audience, i have a question of both of you. clarify if you will, why now? happening in may of 2016 as opposed to the conference two years ago when they held the last conference two years ago, or another 36 years? why was it necessary or beneficial to do it in the spring of 2016? bob: the first question is, why kim-jongere one under -- it is as if something needed to get back on track. kim jong-il under they needed to
get back to the process of moving toward a normal situation with the party. the party conference was the first step of 2010. the 2012 conference was too soon for there to be a congress for kim jong-un, but it was an important meeting. surprised thatso he is having one. i am not sure about the exact time, we never are. he may have, as suggested, he may have thought that things would be better with the south koreans and it would be more propitious. do not forget, last august there was an incident in the dmz, there was a kerfuffle and a buildup of tension and it suddenly resolved itself and it looked like south relations would move, might be moving ahead.
and then they fell apart. i think the north koreans were very disappointed by that. adjust, buthad to he needed to have a congress. if you wait for the right moment on the peninsula, you will be waiting a long time. james: i agree. said before, there was a party, of restoring the the authority of the party, and the conferences again, they have functions.re limited there is only so much they can accomplish, so the congress was inevitable, something we could have predicted when they held these two conferences, because centralto replace the
-- at some point. conferences again, in theory, are supposed to replace up to 1/5 of the central committee. so i think it was something that we should have expected. again, why now? who knows. but it is certainly something that we should have been aware, would have been in the works. >> one last question for me. g up to thisportin conference, we have been warned about the baloney we are likely to read, so maybe i have been reading it already, but some of the press reporting as an aside -- emphasized the number of foreign delegations, including heads of state who have attended previous conferences.
previoustrue of all conferences? and assuming the speculation about the new conference is correct and that there will be very few, at least senior foreign leaders there, what if anything are we to make of that? >> what about all previous congresses? james: i believe there was one where they did not invite as many foreign delegates. it was either the fourth or the fifth, i do not remember. but certainly the eighth, there was a large number. mom got me was even there -- mungabi was even there. of course, there are only a few communist parties in the world
today. be aou expect there to smaller number of delegates. suspect the number of international press will make up for that. [laughter] james: for the smaller number of delegates and the communist parties. seeing the same thing, that they expect very few people. i do not think that is an indication of -- indication delegitimizing the congress in any way. the attendance of foreign delegates was largely ceremonial veryhey would give these celebratory speeches that
really, they are was -- there was very little substance. of the meat and stuff,the real important the meat and potatoes of the congress started with the leaders. -song speech for example, he spoke about the way forward for the party and that was often after the speeches delivered by foreign guest. s. we may expect it will be shorter because of the limited number of delegates from other countries. bob: i agree. fewer communist parties, so this is a communist party event, you do know what to invite heads of state, you invite party heads.
and in one way, i think that north koreans are relieved, because they had a heck of a time figuring out the protocol for the chinese and the russians. so now they do not have to worry about that. just looking ahead, it occurred to me, if you want to get some sense of the themes that will probably show up in kim jong-un 's speech, on april 30 the government, the party, and the minor party, issued a joint statement declaring victory at u.s.nd of the u.s. ok -- and curry and exercises. it is -- it is quite long and i think it will show how they are building up the military and that now provides the opportunity for them to
concentrate on the economy, what they have accomplished in the economy, where they think they will go. i do not know if you can get a hold of it, it would be good to have, so that you can just check through it and see how close it is and how much of a taste they want to give us ahead of time. these are the two sides. >> ok. let's open it to those in the room. i want to ask you to wait for a microphone, that you identify yourself, and that you keep comments or questions brief please. who would like to go first? kathy. i saw you, and i will go there and it. -- there next. kathy: thank you. it is great to learn something rather than to just comment on
something. obert: we know who you are, but maybe not everybody. a formerthy moon, alumna of the wilson center. and one question, the comments is regarding the question about the expectation that there will be few foreign leaders. apart from the fact that it is a party event, it is also true that the u.s. and other countries, western countries, diplomaticaging , laos, and vietnam places like such to urge them not to send members or not to go at all. as part of diplomatic sanctions, one would say, not just economic
sanctions that are in place. my understanding is that some of these countries, it is not like the u.s. is twisting there on, they are also set up and they -- fed up and they feel like they would look bad showing up to the event. that is that part. the question is, i have been curious, there are lots of people who will be defending upon -- descending upon north korea, who are these delegates? what do they do on a day-to-day, month to month, or year to year, or decade to decade level, besides the random conferences? they seem to have little occasion to meet. so what do they do? and what are they expected to do when they return to their local areas? expectations from the ruling elite.
and also, might there be expectations from the local level that they are expected to meet. i am looking at them as a bridge, anyway, not just as people who will go listen to kim jong-un and return home. they must be doing something, so what is it? bob: the party is the conveyor belt, the way that the center sends instructions down and gets feedback back again, that is why i think kim jong-un wasim jong-il decided that fine, but the military cannot do that. especially if you want to make progress with control, you need somebody who can listen to what orders, on and transmit
so these people are the ones who are designated. if you are a central member and you are living in the province, you have clout and you are listening to do his -- to who is above you and you are listening. james: they come from local parties held and -- cells and committees, they are elected to go and represent. they used to be the one delegate for every 1000 members of the korean workers party, elected to go and attend the conference and then they would elect a central committee. and they go back and they give a full report on what occurred, they distribute materials of the congresses to the people, they hold local discussions and local party cells, transmitting the message. where was this
transition for 36 years? what were they doing? bob: that was one of the problems that became more and more clear. intended tohinery facilitate the smooth operation of the economy and other things was being very creaky, because the center had no good way of guiding what and was going on. kim jong-il would go on these guidance things and so with the it was notter, but sufficiently for example, to re-energize the economy.
don't forget also, they were still recovering from the famine. that just, that plays havoc with central control, right? robert: over here. you for member: thank the very interesting talks. ofm at the institute america. i have questions on the upcoming congress. you mentioned about whether kim jong-un will provide a philosophical basis for the korean people. i wish you could elaborate more. i believe that north korea has endorsed the idea of kim jong-un supporting the idea of increasing the military and i forget the second one, but what
other philosophical basis can he provided people? the second question, so that now willts -- panel expects it not be much different compared to previous congresses, if there were to be any differences in the upcoming congress, what can kim jong-un do and what kind of phrases can we expect from him if he wants to make differences, when one of the toughest sanctions ever placed on north korea has occurred. and china is showing a different attitude compared to previous times. china is showing more willingness to cooperate with the u.s. government. so if there will be differences from kim jong-un, what kind of phrases and actions can we expect from this congress?
james, do you want to talk about the philosophical basis? said, it all seems so temporary and at any moment it could be, they could all be kicked out and arrested. this'll be athink philosophical basis, it will be a practical policy that originated in 1962. song decided decided after the cuban missile crisis, he felt the need to further demilitarize so they scrapped the serve-year plan, which was at that time supposed
to focus on light industry and instead decided to simultaneously continue the development of heavy industry, which from 1953 had been the main focus and at the same time simultaneously develop national defense industries. this is a modification that was needed at the time to deal with he extra security environment. >> they've come up with this new concept, which is self-development. it's only come up in the last six months or two and it's very much identified with kim jong-un. and the concept issue don't need imports. it's better to replace domestically made goods for the imports.
if, for example, that is amplify sod that people are encouraged to focus the economy on demest maybedomestic production, that would imply that they have more freedom to do that. that in order to make that work they have to be given the incentives to, etc., etc. i'm not making any predictions. i just -- it's a wait and see. i do think he might pivot. i've said this before. i think he might say our nuclear power is strong enough. we are -- we have hydrogen bombs and therefore we have enough of of fense that that part byong-jen has been fulfilled and the second part, which is the
economic development is therefore what your focus is going to be. not that they're going to give up nuclear but that it gives them space to negotiate on it while they're focusing on the economy. >> yes, over here. mike coming right now. >> officer of korean affairs for the state department. so the public support for kim jeong is enough higher than the prior regimes and he's done much better in terms of allocation and external infrastructure, rebuilding infrastructure but is the public aware of defensive sanctions? there's higher scrutiny on the cyber programs and a lot of n.g.o.'s are experiencing difficulty. how will that play into the party politics? >> if you look at that joint statement i talked about from
april 30th, they make a big point about ho, ho, ho, the sanctions are actually good for us. it's like spinach. you make us work harder. you can't catch me. like the roadrunner. so they're not going to ignore it. i think what they're trying to get the people ready for is this is going to start to bite but we don't need all these goodies that are coming in. we can live without it. i don't know that they've felt it yet. and i don't know how much the regime is going to try to buffer this stuff. >> they've already warned about the possibility of another arduous march. the economy -- which is what they used to describe not only the famine. they actually, i think would be the third or fourth arduous march.
e first being during kim yong-il's activities in north korea. and i they used it again in 1956 during this incident in the party and then used it again during the famine. it's a period of really tightening the belt. just recently they warned of the possibility of another arduous march. i think they realize that it could -- they could hurt but yeah, they're not necessary little making secret of it all. >> who's next? back in the very back. >> hello. i was particularly interested -- to u talked about the the confederation system and what the current relations were
regarding south korea and united states, there has been a very -- it hasn't been very great with all the peace talk and now north korea wouldn't [unintelligible]. how do you think they'll bring that into the -- in terms of talking about their external oreign policy? > yeah, last autumn, their aramis 'tis at the needs to be replaced and -- or mis'tis needs to be replaced and therefore they need to discuss that with the united states but that did not in any way, shape, or form indicate that the nuclear subject could not be on the table. they were simply silent on that.
in fact, they said, as long as you ignore our proposal for or mistist, our nuclear strength the going to grow implicitly. if you deal with our proposal on e armistice, our nuclear strength will not grow. you can put a leash on it. that's still out there and the question is going to be whether he wants congress to make a formal proposal or, as sometimes happens, for example, in his new year's addresses -- again, he lays the groundwork in a couple of sentences and then five days later the formal proposal comes out. which would be along the lines of how can you expect the nuclear issue to be resolved as long as there's no peace member kim -- mechanism in place?
we have to deal with that issue and then all concerns of the united states will be satisfied. and it's going to be up to the united states to decide whether this is something worth probing or if, once again, they're going to throw it to the side and say, as the president said, not good enough. come back with something better. see, kim jong-un doesn't want to be in the position of having something he proposes rejected. that's a bad idea. so leave it to somebody else. let the foreign ministry get rejected. you know. >> i wanted to -- not about that but -- i completely agree with that point that, you know, rather than stick his neck out, he may reference it but then leave it for a broader approach. you were hinking as
talking, bob, earlier, about the bad apple section of the speeches. and i was sort of rung through he congresses in my head and every single congress there was a bad apple component. 194 . through the the south korean communist, the foreign minister after the establishment of the n rk. cuo-un. was again pa the north koreans denied the existence of a cult anymore but said there had been a cult. im ill son university, i can't
explain, he said. 1961, you have the anti-party. the events of 1956 being discussed. anti-party group. 1970 you have the last group that was purged and it was from this time that you have, of course, the you knowtary leadership system that's created as a way to eliminate different opinions in the party. and it's usually when you have different opinions -- this part of the book in working on it, bob mentioned earlier. you have this notion of faxalism in the party that continues to -- it's the lens through which we view north korean politics today and if you look at each of so youases where kim ill hink -- kim ill sung and his
pred assistors are thinking about -- it's not so much a difference of opinion. it's just different policy positions that you being advanced and when they are against those of the leader, these people are purged, labeled faxalists and then they make it into the bad apple part of the speech. something elsewhere we need to develop a better understanding of how north korean politics work. again, we continue to view north korean politics filtered through this lens of factional rivalry and conflict and that leads us to question the legitimacy of he leaders and their strength. >> other questions, comments? on't be bashful.
yes, sir? you have a microphone coming right over to the table. around the table. >> thank you. thank you very much. 'm benjamin, foreign service officer. i don't know very much about the north korean system but certainly in the soviet system, there was a party structure and there was a government structure so at every level, there would be -- if it's the same, if it's similar, there would be people in the north korean system running things. so it seems to me that what's happened has happened, simple my that the party structure has simply at roified and i think you both suggested that now their efforts to strengthen it
again, to reinvisit gate -- reinvisit rate it is perhaps because the governmental structure hasn't been producing results. could you comment on that? >> actually this red expert thing is pretty interesting in north korea. because there were some signs that kim jong-il and subsequently i think kim jong-un was giving the nod to the government to actually take control of some of the economic development impliffletly telling the party and the ideological types, stay out of this. this is for the government do. it's never been clear how sharp that was to the outside, how sharply the division was and how carefully it was reinforced so maybe that's something else to look for this -- in this
congress, to see if somehow the implication is that expertise should be allowed to flourish and that ideology has its place but shouldn't be running the whole show. >> yes. >> thank you very much. with the very service. i have read some chinese news reports kind of complaining that the chinese some -- communist party leadership hasn't been discussed at all with the d.p.r. caseworkers party regarding the party congress so i want to hear your comments on what is your dprk rhythm pb -- and the sanctions. the second part of the question
is do you think kim jong-un is interested in improving relationships with beijing? >> who wants to start? i imagine both of you have something to say. james? james: how much time do we have? one thing to be mindful of. this is something that comes out through anages of the last seven -- 70 years, the rhythm between china and north korea, despite what he we think in washington. what you see emerging from the documents is that there really is a profound sense of mistrust going both ways. beijing.y toward there's a chance that china has been meddling in north korean affairs on more than one
occasion. there's also the sense that china is less than respectful of north korean sovereignty and the north koreans pick up remnants of this middle kingdom mentality where they feel that china is trying to reassert its tradition about hedge money over korea. , that of course, leads to the meddling and it doesn't surprise me when relation sour or -- and i -- i'm shocked more by the ct that people seem really perplexed by the souring of relation between north korea and china. even as recently as the mid 2,000's, china's add to north korea was not and was up and
down. it hasn't been consistent. there have been periods of souring of rust and relations. this is -- again, something else to keep in the back of your mind as you're reading reports in the newspaper about the relationship of china and north korea. over the past second decade, i would say -- at one point i actually went through and tallied up. of the came up with out past 70 years, this is when relations were pretty good. vs. just ok vs. really bad. in fact, ed say that the majority of the years, the elationship was not so good.
the north koreans, it took them a long time to get over perceived offenses or meddling in their internal affairs. >> that's right. things aren't good now. kim jong-un does not seem prepared to kiss and make up with the chinese. even if -- the chinese had wanted to think it was true most of last year before the test and it was the north koreans who were holding back, not the chinese. people tend to think the dynamic chinese bigging the to let them back in the house. it's really the other way around and the chinese were pushing, pushing to try to get back in and the north koreans weren't having any of it. because of what james said, they've been through this so many times and they live next to
each other. the geography is pretty powerful as a predictor of the future. so they always make up because they have to. they absolutely have to and every time things go bad people in washington say this is it. the chinese are just through with the north koreans. so far the cycle has always come back to a more balanced approach and then it gates little bit better and then it gets worse again. so we're in the middle of a psychen right now and the north koreans are not crazy enough to completely severe their relations and the chinese were not, for example, surprised that north koreans were angry at them for voting for sanctions and just sort of shrugged it off. so they'll live thank you -- through period, presumably and five years from now will be back to normal. >> there are two documents.
if i could get everyone to reeled these two documents, it would make things so much clearer. here's an october 19, 1973 conversation between kim ill sung and a bill bulgarian and an east german report on relations between china and south korea. there's also a 1986 conversation mong kim ill sun and a mongolian official. the second one was a 1977 -- g.d.r. east german report on the relationship between north korea and china. you can see where the north koreans are very consistent about their message. here the relationship went bad at this time because of this and they keep adding on to it and the message is pretty clear. we don't trust china, we probably never will and but we
deal with them because we have o. if people would just look at these three documents, it would save us a lot of time and it would also, i think, lead to some rethinking about our policies toward north korea and outsourcing our policy toward north korea. there's even a section on the digital archive here. sino-ded.r.k. relations. right here. there are several hundreds of documents on the relationship over the documents -- decades and you can see here these three conversations. look at them all. they're great. fascinating stuff. but those three conversations
are three records i hope people look at. >> digital archive.org? >> org, correct. >> in the back there. >> hello, steven costello. east project. the con texts for this congress, i wonder if you could guide us a little bit on the purges in north korea since kim jong-un came to power. wharked we take from the number, the seniority of the officials, the reasons given, how should we view the purges as opposed to what happened in the past? thanks. >> i think some of it -- there are you know, i've only seen what is available through the public and i haven't seen anything classified but my sense is that in some of these cases, including the case of his uncle, it was a difference of opinions
again. here was a guy who was promoting something that for many north korean officials is unconscionable. and that is opening and re-forming the economy, like china. getting closer to china and perhaps even following the china model, which would lead to a loss of freedom of action, would put the system at great risk. you know, how do you convince them they could -- when you're so vulnerable you could open and reform and let bigger powers come in and tell what you to do and what not to do? en they didn't even join the council for economic assistance in the 1950's and 1960's because of that. kim ill sung was suspicion of his allies. and you'd see him saying in
conversations, for example, with this great period of enter korean dialogue in the early 1970's, yeah, we don't want to be a small country with lots of holes in the tpwhrounled. to other people he was saying when we're no longer allies with the soviets and the chinese, same thing. we're going to be a small country with lots of holes in the ground. and the purges back in the 19 70's and 1960's were often because you had these different opinions. i think it's the same thing here, where you had a different opinion and the north korean solution to this is to simply purge these people and -- but in sun tec.of jeong i get the sense he was perceived to be that much of a threat, even in exile they felt the need to get rid of him through the execution. but i would say that in many of
these cases, it's again, purges because of differences of opinions. >> bob, do we have a very good understanding of the internal dime takes get to this question? not simply on who's being purged and why? but more generally. you've been out of government for a long time now. what can you tell us? do we have a clue or are we all guess something bob: on this i think we're guessing. but the part that you don't have o guess about is that it's a totalitarian system with a single individual at the top who has the full range of human emotions and nothing to hold him back. you know, lyndon johnson had a temper. but he wasn't allowed to execute people. so he didn't.
kim jong-il used to execute people but it wasn't a big public thing and so we didn't get the feeling that oh, god, this guy is out of control. songtec thing was so unusual, so dramatic and these silly stories about the dogs tearing him apart and everything. that it has krystalized in people's minds that this salmonster. we don't actually know. i know south korean people say it's 70 people. which isn't really very many, anyway. less than texas executes -- we don't know how many people have been executed. people disappear. on a few occasions they've shown up later wearing the uniforms and still having stars on their
shoulders but they have other responsibility so we need to sort that out. we need a better sense of who's actually never coming back and who is still around. and whether or not kim jong-un has changed the normal procedure under kim jong-il, of sending people to the countryside for three months or a year or two years and then when they're reformed, they come back and boy, will they behave themselves. we haven't quite seen that yet. chi-yun hey.e with we don't know if he's going to fall into that pattern of dealing with people as well. james: i think with the election of a new central committee, i think we're going to have a better sense of who is in the
upper echelons of power in north korea and who is no longer there. although, as bob pointed out, they sometimes just change and you can't look at that and necessarily interpret it as well, this guy was purged because -- bob: we throw around the word "purge" when all we're talking about in some cases are replacement or held room or whatever you want to call it. so we just have to be careful with that. >> well, that is a good note on which to conclude. i'm sorry there are a couple of hands here they haven't gotten to. [applause] thanks to all of you and we look forward to seeing you back here real quickly. we are adjourned. thanks. >> i want to thank really quick kick -- quickly
corrected itd we toward the end of the. -- the periodre that i was there by establishing a government. .hen to bring about security violence was way down, but unfortunately, when we left the vacuum was filled by rival powers. violence escalated and we have isis now. >> sunday night. recently our campaign 2016 bus took a visit to virginia for its primary. students, professors and others learned about our coverage.
able to shed also his thoughts with us about the upcoming election. great --onored 7'9" .even ninth graders you can view all of the winning documentaries. indiana voters are at the polls for the primary today. for the democrats, 97 delegates up for grabs. we covered hillary clinton's speech earlier this afternoon. later, we will have bernie sanders at a rally in kentucky. we have it live here on c-span. the online news publication vox data about ther primary.
people are mostly searching for donald trump. this map shows you the areas where the top search was isis in tan. cities, population growth from 2000 until 2010 was the result of immigration. we will have the results tonight. 57 republican delegates at stake. we will have candidate speeches and your phone calls here on c-span. that starts after our coverage of senator bernie sanders'rally in kentucky. from our first guest is
indiana. how did indiana become so important to this process? guest: if donald trump winds, it , it puts him on the path to win the nomination. there is a huge shift that takes place depending on who winds -- wins. the realyou look at clear politics combination of polls when it comes to donald trump, it is 42% he is registering. ist about his message that resonating? guest: there is a big manufacturing a base among republican voters in indiana. captured thatas
message. he is talked about the jobs that carrier has outsourced. that has resonated with his base. resonated problems beyond the hard-core republicans. john kasich is still getting about 50% of the vote in the state. 15% of the vote in the state. was pence's endorsement halfhearted. he did campaign with ted cruz yesterday, but when you issue an endorsement the friday before and you are praising donald trump as much as you are praising ted cruz, it shows a limited ability to get momentum.
host: and you saw the announcement that he made it to reach out to women photos -- voters. guest: minimum traction. ted cruz is doing every play in the playbook, but as we saw in the polling numbers, donald trump only expanded his lead. that is a large plot -- part because of his deal with john kasich. that has backfired in a big way. host: we will talk about indiana the 2016 aspects of primary. you can call in. indiana voters, if you want to get your thoughts about what goes on in your state today. on the democrat side, how many
delegates? a big portion of the delegates are up for grabs on the democratic side. the workers have gravitated more toward bernie sanders, but hillary clinton and did well in pennsylvania last week or did can continue her momentum, that will be a big sign of moment for her campaign. how much effort is hillary clinton putting into this state? guest: not much. she only made one appearance in indiana, just a couple of days ago. her message was tailored to a general electric. -- electorate. clinton might get a win in the state that is technically in a bernie sanders'will house.
expectations,d and she is the nominee and sheld trump is the nominee, is test driving a general election message. that is it fair to say those in indiana are seeing this much attention for the first time in a long time? guest: for a presidential election, of course. indiana is later on when nominations have been decided. obama squared off in republicans wehe have not seen a race like this in a long time. goes theuming that it way we think it will, that it is on to california. what can we expect moving toward that state? guest: california republicans could be somewhat anti-climactic. indiana, thene
momentum may shift tonight. if donald trump winds, he could put the nomination away by winning california by a large margin. indiana is crucial. trump with theld mass less -- necessary to win. has expanded his lead in indiana. the picture is looking good for him. again, here are our phone numbers. let us here first from 10. tim is an wilson, north carolina. he is an independent. go ahead. good morning.
i am an independent voter, i used to be a democrat. first sanders is my choice, and donald trump is my second. of feel like iot do. trump -- his position on sending our jobs overseas. said that he have has benefited just like the other big corporations have, and i agree with that. but he is one who has benefited, and he sees how the system is, and he had to compete with other people. for theade a change american people. that is why they hate him so bad. the republicans got exactly what d, because they've
been pushing these policies, policyade and every bad has been pushed by the republicans. they have been against obama. really what they need. if you look at the republicans now in the way they are voting, this is the reason they are voting for donald trump. i don't think the man is prejudiced at all. if you look at his background, he is not prejudiced at all. but the man wants to make america great again. , think he's very truthful because he comes out to speak. heard nobody else -- if you want to go to the moon, you infer the stars. if you fall -- fall short, you will still make a dent. with other guys, out half-baked plans. that is why we get nothing done.
host: we will let our guest respond. guest: that caller had an optimism in donald trump, that he can win over voters. immigration coming and trade are issues that donald trump think the complete his advantage over hillary clinton. is problem for his campaign his this artistic, his comments about women, his , they maybility overwhelm those advantages. host: those comments he talked about, talk about what he faces as far as overall looking at his character. guest: he has a long trail of provocative, unpopular comments toward women, hispanics, muslims. turnout be a one-man machine for democrats in the
general election. immigration in a different way than most toublicans, that could play his advantage, but there are so baked into thegs cake, it is hard to see how the pros outweigh the cons. will play a little bit of what he said. we don't want a president who is liable to explode at the latest twitter storm. when you are talking about someone who is to be commander-in-chief, who is the have their finger on the nuclear someone of good and stable and steady judgment. and the third thing you want is character. most importante aspect of any president or vice president. [applause]
you want someone who has struggled, someone who has known loss. you want someone who is honest, who tells the truth and does not lie all the time. you want someone who stands by their principles. you want someone who has principles. [laughter] [applause] who does not have one position the morning and one position at noon and one position at night. host: what is the take away from that? guest: that message from ted cruz about character, sobriety, it has been echoed by republicans. it has not worked in voters my spirit in a normal election environment, these would be sharp critiques against donald trump, but trump is a teflon
candidate and it does not seem like this line of attack has not changed the mind of republican voters. host: steve from missouri. hello. caller: thank you. my comment is, most people are not voting for nobody. they are voting against somebody. and donald trump is for himself. it is about him. one thing about donald trump, at least he will ruin it for the republicans. all i have got to say to the republican voters out there is make sure you have plenty of kleenex's and handkerchiefs because on election day, you will need them. host: what do you mean he will ruin it? caller: he will ruin it for the republican party. they will lose the house and the senate and the supreme court and the presidency. i don't really like the democrats that much, but the problem is the republicans are the most corrupt and the most crooked of the bunch and they
have been asking for this for a long time, for 30 years, since ronald reagan. donald trump is going to ruin the republican party. thank you, donald. i appreciate it. host: what about that idea? ruining it for the house and senate. guest: a lot of republicans think that could be the case. the worst-case scenario with donald trump is that he could certainly cost republicans to the senate. that could easily be gone. the house where they have the largest house majority since 1928, it could be in jeopardy if trump is so toxic to a lot of republican voters and energizes democrat voters who might not normally show up. the potential is there. there is a lot of debate on what the upside is and what the downside is. it is clear trump has a lower downside than other republican candidates out there. host: for the congressional
committee, are they preparing for a trump candidacy and how that might affect the election? guest: the senatorial committee, the congressional committee, have both been preparing for a donaldor the prospect of trump or ted cruz. how to make sure the senate is up for reelection and have some a separate brand from donald trump. host: here is bill, independent line. caller: hey josh, i am over here in pennsylvania and there is not a chance the democrats will take the senate seat away from pat toomey, because no one knows the lady who is running against them to begin with. i want to ask josh, what is the scenario? i noticed last friday was the first time we heard the fbi talking about any kind of criminal thing against hillary
and her people. what is the scenario if the fbi comes back and in diets -- indites? if hillary is indicted, do they bring in biden or john kerry or one of the other establishment? in my opinion, i can tell you from up here, there are a lot of bernie sanders people who will not vote for hillary and i could go back to an interview i saw with jim webb. he said he would positively not vote for hillary because he could never see her being commander-in-chief. it is not far-fetched to say a lot of millennials will not vote for that lady and stay at home.
guest: if hillary clinton is indicted in that unlikely possibility, it is late for candidates to change nominees, but it would add a wrinkle to the campaign. the caller is right that if you look at hillary clinton's numbers in pennsylvania, it is not good. the problem for republicans is trump and ted cruz have historically unfavorable ratings for a presidential candidate. is going to be a race to the bottom. pennsylvania might be a good example of that. and that is a -- host: that is a race between pat toomey and katie mcginty. guest: who received millions. this is a race the democratic party is heavily invest it in and they will expand whatever it takes to get her name up there and they think in a blue state like pennsylvania, that will be
in to win. host: republican line, this is richard. caller: i was listening to bill kristol earlier and he was asked a question, if trump goes ahead s the nomination, would he vote for him, and he said absolutely, i will not vote for trump, and they said, would you vote for hillary clinton, he said no, i cannot vote for hillary clinton. donald trump is the sole reason the establishment hated ted cruz so much that they let trump slip in there with one third of the popular vote, and now he is in control and the establishments, , mitchl kristol mcconnell's, they would just give it to hillary clinton, which means they would maintain their power and hillary clinton will win, it is absolutely just like the rich kid who does not like the way the game is played so they will take their ball and
go home. that is exactly what has happened to the party. thanks. guest: the results of this republican nominating process has backed up what the caller is saying. trump is a little under 40% of the republican vote. you have around half of the party that does not like trump and does not want him to be the nominee. but this is democracy and the fact he is building momentum in the final stretch of the process. they also wanted to be over and just settle it may not have a heated and contested convention. host: i will give you the headline. gop leaders surrender to trump. why is this happening? guest: lobbyists and strategists see ted cruz as a weak nominee as well as donald trump and they want this to be over. divisive convention is worse than just settling in
getting behind a nominee like donald trump and dealing with the chips as they may. host: let's assume he wins in california. you talked about a pathway. at a time we get to convention time, will be see the magic number hit and will it still be an issue as we talk about it today? guest: if he wins indiana, it is very likely trump could be stopped. it is quite likely he will have the necessary delegates to clinch the nomination before we get to cleveland. that is why indiana is so crucial. it is a momentum maker and is trump winds, it sets him up perfectly to exceed the lead. host: tony, hello. caller: thank you. i have three quick points. could you tell me what trump means when he says make america great again? is that back to slavery, child
labor, and another point, why do poor whites vote republican? -- if you do not want illegal immigration, why not punish corporations more and then they will leave? i do not have an issue with immigration. i am for it altogether. but punish the people that hire them and take advantage of that. thank you. guest: these are all issues in the campaign. the african-american vote is interesting. any way trump wins the general election against hillary clinton, it would be better than your average republican does with african-american voters and certainly president obama ran up and 2012. 2008
if there is any unlikely path, i do not think it is likely but trump would pick off maybe 20% of the african-american vote and it would open up opportunities. host: let's talk about bernie sanders, leaning over superdelegates is mr. sanders'only real shot. guest: as implausible as it sounds. superdelegates have been hillary's from the beginning. established officials who do not view sanders very favorably. the fact that he is not winning races and primaries and he is losing badly in the number of pledged delegates as well, suggests it is almost impossible for him to convince superdelegates he is more plausible and deserves to be the nominee. host: he talked about an idea of going to a convention. all of these things happen even though the numbers tell another story. guest: he wants his platform, his ideology to be represented in philadelphia. he wants to hold onto to his leverage as long as possible.
the question to me is how harshly does he attack hillary clinton now that it seems exceedingly implausible have to get the nomination. he is trying to keep enough chips on his side so when it comes to a platform discussion, he has some leverage to get the party to move a little more toward his worldview. host: what does hillary clinton do with that? does she adopt some of senator policies or incorporate that in her own? guest: this is the fascinating question. does hillary clinton and move to the left and pander to some supporters, or does she look at those likely to nominate donald trump and say, this is a great opportunity to move to the middle and perhaps run up the score in a general election looking at states like indiana, georgia, arizona, to really expand the map and get a mandate for her broader message in the general election. she has shown signs of doing
both in the last few weeks but i think she is more likely to go the latter path. throw a few rhetorical bones in bernie sanders direction but realize she has the opportunity to run against a weak republican nominee and run up the score in a general election. host: no chance of more progressives pulling her to that left? supporters still pushing her though she might adopt a more moderate path? guest: with trump is a nominee, they do not have as much leverage. the vice presidential selection will be a key indicator of how hillary clinton is thinking. if she goes to elizabeth warren or sherrod brown, that she feels she needs to throw a bone to liberals. i think it is more likely she will go to a more moderate direction like jim kane, someone who is a little more able to broaden the party.
host: indiana voters, if you want to get your thoughts, here is your phone number. tom is in ohio. independent line. pushed the wrong button. tom, hi there. caller: good morning. i thought you hung up on me. next-door to indiana here. the first caller there, i am just like your first caller. bernie sanders is who i want, but donald trump is my second. it looks like they're going to give it to hillary because the democratic party is just as crooked as the republican party. what i want to say, the idea that we have got a government over the last 30 years, that is purposely set -- said
a lot of people cannot get a job and they want to say here, here is your $10 an hour. the worst bill ever. host: thank you. guest: this is trump's potential. that people in both parties, sanders supporters and the republican party can form a sizable bloc in the general election. clintonate like hillary with a run for money. only the working class space in both parties.
a narrow number. there are a lot of other constituencies that are likely to give clinton in advantage in the general election. if hillary clinton offends the bernie sanders supporters and has positive use of donald trump, there is the potential to peel off some of the bernie supporters. host: what happens to the eight years of obama policy? what does hillary clinton due to that? guest: it is threading a needle and getting the energy she needs from supporters. there is disaffection that many democrats feel. underneath the top line numbers, people who were young, in college and have trouble getting a job, then don't have the direction of the country. african-americans have been dealing with racial relations for the past few years. hispanics dealing with
immigration reform, not sold on the direction of the country. even though democrats said they like obama, there is a lot of disaffection that the bernie sanders movement is showing and there is a big question on how the united the democrat party will be. caller: yes. look, these people calling in talking about hillary clinton is a liar and all of that. you to tell me one line hillary told. sanders ate nothing but one of those good old boys and he is trying to tell the democratic -- he is not a republican. he is not a democrat. he is trying to tell people things and i hate to see people -- he cannot get elected so sanders is trying to tell stuff.
the caller talking about hillary clinton's trustworthiness not being solid and that is the case. that is the challenge she faces. do not trust her and she will have to overcome those obstacles. twitteris is roy off of asking you -- today in the washington post, president obama had an op-ed looking at that topic. trade is a campaign issue. how do the candidates handle it? guest: it is fascinating hillary clinton came out against it, one of the few times she broke with , she has been trying to connect herself with
the president on almost every key occasion. that is one time she distanced herself. trump used it to his advantage were a lot of working-class view trade agreements very negatively and there is an undercurrent of on thection with trade democratic side and bernie sanders has capitalized on that as well. thank you very much for letting me speak for once on your network. you guys are great. i stopped watching a lot of networks. i am almost ready to get rid of cable tv. i have been at from supporters since june 16 when i sat in my chair and watched him on tv announce he was running and i cried. i called his campaign office five times and said you cannot just build a wall about letting other people in there. very short story,
i do not want to take up all your time, in this country, my father was in world war ii and i grew up with kids with their fathers in world war ii and i held a draft card in vietnam in my hand. i was never called and i would ive went in and a second or am worse off in my life than i have ever been ever, and i have watched over the years, never paid more attention to what is going on now. trump is an honest man. i can read him by watching him. he is a successful man, he is a builder. needs to be ran like a business. what we have had here in the past over the past 40 years, not counting reagan if i'm in that territory, we need a guy who knows what he is doing. this guy is a strong leader. thise -- if people in country do not wake up and see where we are headed and what is going on, but we are worse off than we have ever been before. we need a man like trump. take a be a woman but trump is a man and a leader and he reuven it. that is what i want to say and i
want to thank you again, c-span, for being a fair and honest in network. thank you and god bless you. guest: the combination of disaffected voters along with the view that donald trump is a successful businessman who has a different profile than most traditional pub -- republican candidates, it is a potent combination. one thing i have reported on is a lot of trump voters voted for mitt romney in 2012 in the primary and one of the reasons they supported prime -- romney was because he was a businessman and a success story. trump was winning the majority of moderate voters in the final stage of the race and a lot of them share views like the caller that they had not been able to catch a break and they look at his success story as a developer in a very positive way. those rallies, the violence that has occurred, what is your take on what those events mean as far as long-term campaign? they play to his
advantage in a republican primary. this past weekend, there was a lot of violence on the democrat side. i think it goes both ways. frankly, he has been able to tent down at the rallies themselves on some of the unrest being taken. host: let's hear from donald trump talking about these rallies last night. mr. trump: the truth is, at the trump rallies, it is the safest place you could be. we look out for each other and we look out for everybody. had one in california recently, 31,000 people. it was unbelievable. and then you read -- you do not read about that. you read about, they had some problems outside. people were burning the american flag. i do not want them burning the american flag. >> boo! outside, notople inside. many of them are bad people.
we have gone for days, you do not see it. majority, theent good americans not speaking up are with trump. we are in a polarized country right now. what trump's and comments reflect shows how do distant we are from each other. in indiana, a viewer is watching. how are you doing? i am leaning the republican side and we are talking on the don ticket. i do not think republican voters care because they did nothing for them when they took back the house and the senate. i would rather have seen the democrats take everything over there are a lot of trump voters in indiana. host: are you a chump supporter? caller: now i am, yes.
i'm going for trump this time. i cannot see voting for hillary. the fbi is holding on to see how the polls look before they cuff her and bring out someone else. what ultimately convinced you to support him? what is it about him? you have to have strong borders. that is the main thing. if you do not and you have people coming over here not knowing who they are, 70% of them are probably on welfare, you have got vietnam vets in the street who cannot get anything, you swim over here with seaweed on your back, you get housing. it has got to stop. any impact from the endorsements trump received? you know that, of course. you need a strong man. of ourhe john wayne
time, even if he is kind of a buffoon, i still love him. guest: thank you. trump has a committed base. we have seen this, polls have shown, it is very little in -- very little of new information you could give to trump supporters to change their mind. the second they start to get endorsements from washington to make alliances like ted cruz did, they loose support. trump has been rocksolid with his base, 35% or 40% of his party. a tweet talking about the funding he got from bobby knight and those things. i guess that matters to indiana and's. guest: i do not know if celebrity endorsements added a lot of momentum. trump was already doing well in the first place. i think bobby knight's
enthusiasm contrast a lot with mike pence's war -- a endorsement of ted cruz earlier in the week. host: republican line, good morning. my question and comment is it is fascinating donald trump is primarily a centrist democrat at least on another of social issues, etc. primaryce, i think this policy -- asut much as in past primaries in my experience. and i would be curious to see what your guest thinks, is if trump gets the nomination, and apparently he will, that the democrats have one. policy wise, he seems pretty hope desperate close, he and hillary to what is your opinion? guest: trump is not that much different than jim webb, a
populist democrat. democrats have shed a lot of their working-class, socially conservative supporters and voted for republican presidential candidates but they have not been trueblue republicans and do not share the wall street wing of the republican party's views. these are now the chump voters and they did not have a home in the democratic party not that long ago, they viewed the toeralism as an anathema where they stand but they do not like the economic conservatism of the republican party. trump has found an untapped constituency that has been ignored in recent years and that is what makes his support so notable. what does this tell us about a direct matchup between trumpet hillary clinton. guest: she would have the potential to win in a big way to her there are not enough working-class white voters to bring the republicans to a majority and they will need to win other groups to build upon that.
clinton is very not likable but has a base she could rely on that is just as big if not than working-class whites. the best case scenario is trump could make inroads in the midwest where there are a lot of classwide voters and maybe change the map a little bit in his favor, but i think the downside is substantial for a trump nomination and there is a really democrats could have a historic sweep with a clinton and trump hatch up as well. from new york, an independent line. thank you for holding on. you are next. good morning. a couple ofve comments and i'd appreciate it if you would just let me get them in. the gentleman she does before what it he was not sure was hillary clinton actually lied about and why people call her a liar. the first reason was the fact that when there was the benghazi terror attacks, she told everyone it was because of a video, which has been proven to be false. when thea mother
bodies came home, she said we will find whoever made the terrible video. this has been proven to be false. hillary clinton is not to be trusted. she says whatever she needs to say out of convenience. when we talk of any election, the other thing seems to be that we talk about it in a vacuum. i am not a trump fan, but i could never vote for clinton because i find her dishonest. big picture,at the we have to understand the democratic party, including hillary clinton, are responsible for obamacare and the arabian nuclear deal, and not only is it not popular, but the iranians have yet to sign it. there congress actually chose to make a ratification that they will continue to develop nuclear weapons. growth.had very little personal take-home payment has been down. these are all things the democratic party has to own. we talk about hillary clinton and don't trump, i am no trump fan but it is an obvious choice when you compare the two, especially knowing hillary
clinton had her hands in benghazi in libya, the iran nuclear deal, all the foreign-policy blunders including the russian reset, an absolute night air. host: thank you. guest: one thing we underestimate with hillary clinton is the depth of antipathy toward her and president obama, whose numbers are better than hillary clinton. when you look at the people who really dislike both the president and hillary clinton, is -- the0%, so, this problem is that trump also breeds a lot of antipathy from the other side. this election is likely to be a race to the bottom but clinton, there are a lot of people who do not like trump and a lot of moderate republicans who really dislike trump, but they will still vote for him over hillary clinton cousin the depth of resentment toward the democratic party and hillary clinton is so great. host: is there any sense it will finally come out between
now and election day? guest: i have no independent sourcing on that but i do know the justice department does not want to affect the results of an election. you would think if they are going to have a resolution to this, it would happen sooner rather than closer to the convention and the general election. less likely the longer we see this drawn out. host: politically, does it matter? guest: it does. if there is an event, an indictment, terrorist attack, something that could happen and change the trajectory of an election, we are in a time when there is such volatility in the electorate that even big events that could happen between now and november could change the trajectory of the race. york, democrats line, joe's next. hello. caller: good morning. the hillary clinton camp needs bernie sanders. forget castro, forget brown.
she has to take bernie sanders as her running mate. the polls as they stand right now may show hillary with the lead, but once you have both the nominees, you are going to see a turn. trump is essentially, if you crazyer in the 1970's, eddie, appliance salesman, this is trump. people who have any confidence in donnie trump, and i understand why he would have people, i am going to be disappointed. it is very important who folks take as their running mates once they are nominees of their parties. pay attention to trump takes as a running mate. he just wants to win a popularity contest. he does not want the job. when heaid so right said i'm concerned about his lack of curiosity about the position he is ticking. that is the problem.
he just wants a popularity contest win. camp needs sanders and without sanders, trump wins the election. the landscape of the country is changing and this is the last chance. guest: crazy eddie, the shtick worked selling electronics in new york but eventually it faded as times change. that is the problem for donald trump. he is been on tv for a year, we know to expect. in a general election, will people tire of the controversy , therovocative miss provocations that he has caused? it is a big risk for trump. host: there has not been an inkling of who the candidate will likely be. guest: the question is who would want to be on a trumped ticket? a lot of people you could talk about would be great matchup's, great compromise to donald trump. i hear a lot of resistance to wanting to -- if he loses badly
in a general election, that would potentially remain at least on that running mate for a long time. it would signal a sense of desperation almost if you had to put sanders on your ticket or even elizabeth warren, it shows you are worried about losing some of those sanders supporters to donald trump and that is not a place hillary clinton wants to be. host: next in south carolina. yes, good morning, thank you. i wanted josh to comment on why he thinks governor kasich has not been more possible -- popular. i think he would make a great president and would reach across the aisle and build more consensus than anybody has done in a long time. , maybe i am out of step with the rest of the world, so i would like to hear his comment. guest: it is a great question.
his moderation does turn off some of the more conservative elements of the republican party. he was considered the most moderate republican running from the outset and a lot of conservatives from the get-go said they could not support someone that moderate. i picked the bigger problem currently is he does not have any money he has been living off of the land ever since he jumped into the race. he is not able to advertise in a lot of these states. been his should have base. he should have done well in pennsylvania and connecticut but he did not have the money to advertise. the super pac did not have a whole lot of money either. we know john kasich because we follow this stuff but a lot of voters hear about him on tv and don't much about him. when donald trump is on the tv all the time and has the degree of resources he does, and john kasich is trying to get free media attention to compete against donald trump, it is not a formula for success. more call from pennsylvania, hans is up next. caller: what american voters of
both parties do not seem to outcomes of the elections have been predetermined. the reason for this is there was a princeton university study available on youtube that demonstrates the electronic voting machines can easily be reprogrammed for the purpose of flipping the votes. stalin had made a comment one time that it does not matter who votes, but it matters who counts the votes. this is what has been going on in american elections. the final, in analysis, when it comes down to trump and clinton, the machines will be hijacked and clinton will be winning regardless of what the popular vote is. people need to go to youtube and electronic- look up voting machine fraud. a lot of information on this, a resource people have to look at and realize their votes really do not count anymore. guest: that sounds like a
conspiracy theory more than anything. i do not know if that really deserves much of a response. host: california, when do we finally say ok, we have got our people? whoever wins indiana on the republican side, -- if ted cruz somehow comes from behind and diffuse donald trump and all of the sudden, he has the momentum and he would be the guy who has the big upset. heading into states that are much more favorable to him and donald trump. if he loses, it looks like his campaign would be all but over and has a clear path if he does win indiana. >> there is normally seven
telephone service in indiana in the past month and that is fewer than the nine public phone calls in the last month before the wisconsin primary, or the 17 before new york's primary. a layer of uncertainty before tonight's high-stakes primary. we will find out how it plays out when the results come in. and 97blican delegates democratic delegates at stake in the indiana primary. live results program with candidate speeches and your phone calls will be right here on seat c-span. we will have bernie sanders was live in kentucky at 7:30 p.m. right here on c-span. american diplomats are scrambling to secure a new cease-fire agreement in syria this week following days of fighting which fractured a two-month truce. john kerry literally thousands of lives have been saved because of the temporary halt in violence since february. inia's largest city is
danger of spiraling out of control. here are his remarks. kerry: good morning, everybody. that too. good evening. started today,et i want to quickly say something about the situation in syria. metreturn from geneva, i with two key partners and the un's special envoy about how we can reinvigorate the sensation of hostilities across syria, and particularly, in aleppo. aleppo'saround morence have suffered
violence in most areas than the entire course of the war. they have suffered an outbreak of intense violence of breaches of the hostilities over the course of the last days. ont includes today's attack the hospital. , i condemnedgeneva what we are convinced was the regime's attack on the hospital whichppo on april 27 in more than 27 people, including the last pediatrician, was killed, and many others wounded. today's attack on a hospital appears to be rockets that have come from some area of opposition and we are trying to determine precisely which.
the bottom line is there is no justification for this horrific violence that targets civilians or medical facilities, or first responders, no matter who it is. whether it is a member of the opposition retaliating for the regime in its brutality against civilians which has continued for five years. we condemn any of these attacks, no matter who commits them. we urge all of the parties to take immediate steps to halt the violence that is plaguing so much of the country. i know this requires patience on one side and the other, because it is very easy to stand up and say, well, they attacked and now we have to go back. in the meantime, if that is the lowest common denominator of action that leaders resort to, they are not leading.
whether you're doing is making innocent civilians the victims of those decisions. the hostilities was put in place precisely to give the people on the ground for innocently caught between these actions some breather, some ability to be safe. and work this out at the negotiating table which is waiting for the parties to come back in order to resolve this issue. that is why we are working urgently right now to reaffirm hostilities nationwide. much of the nation remains quiet and has remained quiet even as these outbreaks have taken place. there is a huge distinction between the south and the north particularly. but, there are areas where even where it was bad a few days ago, we have made progress particularly in eastern
gutha were there has been a meaningful decrease in violence and saturday morning. even right now at this moment, about a half hour from now, our teams will have another meeting in which they will try to finalize what we have worked on for the last 48 hours in order to try to bring this to a restoration. the minister was in moscow earlier. he and my counterpart and sg and cochair of the task force have made comments publicly. made clear hev hopes within hours we will be able to work this out as our teams on a military to military bases are working through the details that need to be implemented so this can be restored. we are particularly aiming to try to restore this in aleppo,
syria's largest city with a violence has increased significantly and in danger without a sensation reinstituted, in danger of spiraling out of control. ireign minister lavrov and discussed the need to reaffirm the sensation in aleppo as soon as possible. we are in agreement on that. let me emphasize that today foreign minister lavrov reiterated that there is no solution to this other than after negotiate -- at the negotiating table. our teams are engaged in these conversations so that we can try to establish a more sustainable mechanism than what was put in place previously. we know from the relative calm that was established after it began in late february --
remember, many people do not think it would take hold at all, has held through february, late march, through marched into april and now into may. it is only in the last couple of asks it has become as frayed it has and hopefully we can be restored. has and hopefully can be restored. take the rate at which civilians have been killed, about 200 a day, work out the math. andrally thousands of lives many people have received assistance you hadn't previously. know that a lot of us bear responsibility here. those who support the opposition, those who support opposition have an obligation to work with