tv Washington Journal CSPAN November 1, 2016 7:00am-10:01am EDT
evolved to the years. later, the role of north carolina as a battleground state read we will be joined by jason roberts, an associate professor at the university of north carolina at chapel hill. ♪ host: good morning. it is tuesday, november 1, 2016. after nearly 600 day campaign, one week from election day. stories about hillary clinton's e-mail and donald trump are dominating the airwaves and leaving the lead in front pages. and plenty of news about house seats and senate seats that will be voted on next week. some democrats are hopeful that the democratic wave could give them control of the house. we will spend our first 45 minutes talking about which party you think should control congress as you prepare to head
to the polls. are you thinking about the congressional contest in your state and district, and how would you feel about a split control of congress with democrats controlling the house? phone lines are open this morning. democrats can call (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. you can also catch up on social media on twitter at c-span the bj and on based -- at @cspanwj and facebook.com/c-span. this year's importance of the congressional elections were on the front of "washington times" yesterday. "do not forget about keeping congress." the states for congress are also high. former congressman allen west, a republican, writes that if democrats gain a majority in congress under clinton
[indiscernible] the associated press yesterday encouraging their readers to keep their eyes on the set in -- on the senate. democrats would need to pick up for seats -- four to gain control of the senate to once. if donald trump wins the presidency, democrats would need to pick up five seats. a longer stretch for democrats in the house. they would need to be dirty seats for democrats to take control. -- 30 seats for democrats to take control. " the hill" talking about down but races. there is the headline for you. "gop seeks boost from fbi down ballot." dissociate editor at "the hill" joining us on the phone. after that access hollywood tape, a lot of democrats
insisted that republicans down ballot had some sort of response to what donald trump said in that tape. are we seeing a turnabout going on with the latest clinton e-mail controversy? guest: yes, we are. republicans are seizing on this controversy and they are suggesting that democrats need to either distance themselves or somehow tainted by this. we have seen a number of candidates make that argument. the republican senator in new hampshire is suggesting that her democrat is trying to dodge and that she is not [indiscernible] so that is one example. host: is there one strategy that democrats are taking to respond to this? are they staying united in their response or are individual members in individual districts crafting their own responses?
guest: i think for the most part, democrats are fairly defiant on this. the clinton campaign has signaled its willingness to go after the director of the fbi and to criticize him. we are not seeing democrats distanced themselves from hillary clinton, certainly not in the way that republicans did for donald trump after the revelation of the access hollywood tapes that you mentioned. host: you mentioned the new hampshire race. what are others that are viewers should look at to see if or how this might impact a close contest? guest: certainly in pennsylvania in has made mention that this controversy a couple of times. he is obviously running against a close race there, so he has been both suggesting that katie mcginty is somehow ethically
similar to clinton, but also stressing the difficulty that he perceives hillary clinton to be in. he was talking in the immediate aftermath of hillary clinton being in hot water over this, so that is the kind of thing that is happening, but there is a broader issue here, where, for example, republicans are saying in general that this is a problem that the democratic party generally should be held accountable for. host: can you explain the impact of early voting? over 20 million americans of our devoted as the controversy is playing out and pastors renewed focus today on donald trump's taxes in the wake of "new york times" front page story this morning. the impact of early voting? caller: -- guest: early voting is a crucial
part of the dynamic and millions of people of our devoted. they voted at the time when hillary clinton had an even bigger lead in the polls but she does now. we'll have to see just how much of a cushion she can build up in that respect. all of the caveats extrapolating too early is that we are never really sure until election day whether these are actually new voters that have been dropped to the polls or they are simply moving their existing boats around, or getting people who would have voted for them on election day going to the polls earlier, so that is the warning about taking too much of early voting. host: we will find out in seven days. thank you. guest: my pleasure. host: that was niall stanage with "the hill."
." we are focusing on the house, senate seats that are up in seven days. the 435 house seats. how much are you focusing on them as you head to the ballot box and which party do you think should control congress? that is our question in the first 45 minutes for "the washington journal." we will start with benny democrat, california. go ahead. caller: good morning. i went to vote the down ballot. i am not sure about hillary because she appears to be corrupt and [indiscernible] republican nominee, but i do think she dictates that a vote when because of the eight years
they changed parties, so i'll go down ballot from there. host: do you feel more sure about your down ballot choices because of the information that you have received? there has been so much focus on the presidential race, but you said you are more sure of what you are going to do dumbbell it? caller: right, right. host: why is that? caller: i am not sure about hillary. i was a bernie sanders supporter and i found that how they rate the election for her to win, so i am just not sure about hillary. host: we will go to read in california. oakland, california. fine for democrats. go ahead. caller: i think it is really important for the democrats to take over at least the senate.
there are seven senate races in play, not here in california but pennsylvania, new hampshire wisconsin, indiana, nevada north carolina, a.b. missouri. right now, i'm not sure if they can take over the congress, unfortunately, because if you look at what happened after 2008, it was the first two years that obama got anything done and after that was. obstruction at the detriment to not only the people in their districts, but to the american people. i hope that republicans have learned their lesson. i am not sure, but i think they will really lose in two years the democrats show up to vote. i think it is important because this hold, a thing has just been crazy -- this whole comey they
has been crazy. host: you are hopeful for democratic senate, so that would set up a split senate and reach longer for democrats to end the house. when you talk about obstruction sounds a few awkward about things not getting done. do think split control of the house and senate, much will get done under that format? caller: well, it will be better than the situation now. i think that republicans will be under a lot of pressure to get some things done. obviously, the obstruction in the last six years including hearing the supreme court nominee are voting on that. they will have a lot of pressure from the american people in general to get things done so i think there is a greater possibility, even with the split between democrats controlling the senate and the house getting
some things done but we don't take over the house of representatives at this time, we have to make sure we do next year round. host: on twitter, the congress has been that under gop leadership, it is time to change which party leads. country ahead of party. let's go to california again mike is with us. good morning. caller: thank you for c-span. i met there is for the elite liberal media -- i and embarrassed for the early liberal media. it is really abominable what they have done. in terms of securing contests and so forth. obamacare was all liberal democrats and not one republican voted for that so the democrats have been the problem. as far as obstructionism does, i
do not get that because america does not agree with the liberal democrats in terms of a lot of policies. that is why hillary clinton is not running on policies and telling us where she stands. she does stand for bigger government, more bureaucrats and higher taxes. that is the difference between the parties. the democrats -- that is what we have witnessed the last eight years, that the democrats want government control. that is what is central to obamacare and why they made it mandatory that the government dictates what policy you get and everything and they took choice away from the american people. everything the democrats want is under more government control of their lives. host: you mentioned obamacare and that the obamacare exchanges
are getting a lot of attention going into this election because of the premium rate increases. this is the story in usa today that you can see on your screen, noting that open enrollment starts today on the affordable care act and exchanges, and they have a chart next to it showing the averages of state premium increases in various states as of yesterday. the darker the color, the more the premium rates increase. the darkest black space on this map with rate increases of 50%. if you want to read more, that is in "usa today." on the republican line, ron, salem, oregon. caller: good morning. i think the republicans to have it great for one, as they say in the liberal media, all of the media is liberal, practically. we have got to have [indiscernible] loretta lynch and obama, wink,
wink, we are not going to put her in jail, we are going to brush this under the rug, you're not going to prosecute them, you let them walk. it is all -- we need the repo act. that is what we need. that is all i have got to say. host: aisha is, like a democrats. caller: good morning. how are you? host: doing well. go ahead. caller: all right m going to say is been i pray that democrats win the house. and senate. production can get things done. what happens to obama? i do not wish for that to happen to any other president again because he is the president that has a lot to offer. the republicans in the senate ended the congress did not want
to do nothing. one other question, i believe what donald trump said that they do not sit down there and think we do not have to do anything and they sit down and do not want to do nothing, so that is all i have to say. i'm a democrat, i are devoted and eroded the clinton, and i know she is going to end. host: aisha in florida, a closely watched swing state and the newly every election cycle. our phone lines as we asked which party should control congress and how much are you thinking about you congressional votes as you head to the polls -- democrats, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. to show you one of the story from "usa today" this morning
noting that the number of women in congress is likely to reach record highs after the november 8 election, boosting female lawmakers to more than 20% of the house and senate for the first time, but also affecting the continued difficulty of achieving equal representation. the story noting that projections show that the number of women in the 100 member senate could rise of 20 to 23, despite the retirement of two democratic women, senators barbara boxer of california, who served 24 years, and barbara. the number of female members could increase by about one dozen, boosting the total from 84 to perhaps 96. also noting that the 2017 freshmen class of perhaps one dozen women in the house would be happy with what it was in 1992, when 24 women were elected in one was dubbed as "the year of the woman," but it would still be the largest --
fourth-largest bimah freshman class since 1976. we want to hear how much you are focusing on the congressional races in the first 45 minutes of "the washington journal." tad is in rhode island. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have been thinking about the gridlock in congress, which has really stated people from the left, the right in the middle. what i think should happen is looking at the senate, on the first day of the new congress, baddest only time the rules of the senate can be changed and you have to wait two more years, so i would recommend to our folks, or that they be democrat or republican, i have four recommendations.
for one -- first on, limit or eliminate filibuster. second one, a simple majority to move the question. right now, they have 51. the third one is no fast tracking of legislation. they have no problems fast tracking these trade deals. they shift through them so fast and nobody knows what is going on. the fourth one is freestanding legislation. you cannot put on any poison pills. each bill should be freestanding and it is going to pass on its own merit. after the senate gets straightened out, you look at gerrymandering in the house, but i think the senate will probably be the easiest way to go to start up the new year. thank you. host: just a new proposal that
you put out there so i understand, so you want to get rid of fast tracking and he went every bill to be voted on individually? do you think that would slow down the process, which was your concern that things are getting too slow and not getting done? caller: no. there is stuff that is good for special-interest like a trade deal. they do not fast track the health care legislation, they do not fast track anything except the deal secular jobs away. i think that will not slow anything down. no. the thing is you have got people that will insert poison pills. the bills put in our trash, and they voted on a good bill but they opposed it.
i do not think it will slow anything down. i think it is worth attempted because right now, we're in a state of permanent gridlock and i do not see anything changing unless we change the rules. host: so it is a buck anyway did the legislative maneuvering that goes on at the and of the process sometimes? caller: maneuvering it at the end of the process, what do you mean? host: with the poison pills were talking about with legislation inserting it at the end. that is what you want to get rid of? caller: yes, getting rid of the poison pills, no more fast tracking, and then the filibuster, that is another one. one senator from either party can block the whole thing first line is the issue once too, which causes billions of dollars to shut it down or whatever. that is nonsense.
one person should not be able to slow down the process can help 100 members involved. host: thank you for thinking about the process and sharing your thoughts. catherine is up next, among come rake, alabama come alive for democrats. good morning. -- montgomery, alabama. line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to see the democrats take over the house and senate because all we have had for the last eight years of the republicans denying everything, whether it was good for the country or not. they did not give it a chance only because of obama. anything obama opposed -- proposed, they always denied it just because it was obama. that is not good for the country , so i would like to see the democrats get a chance this year . host: a few more comments from
twitter, let the republicans hold on to the house and give the democrats the senate. and bobby writes -- we have seen what republican control does obstructionism government shutdowns, and we see that republicans are only about party. carol wrightson, when congress are writing big tax breaks are the rich donors, not those who legally take advantage of it. speaking of tax advantages and how you can take advantage of those tax advantages, the lead story in today's new york times focuses on donald trump's taxes getting a lot of attention today, noting that newly obtained documents and donald trump avoided reporting hundreds and millions of dollars in taxable income by using the tax avoidance measure, so legally dubious that lawyers advised him that the internal revenue
service would most likely declare it improper if you were audited. host: if you want to read more, the lead story in today's "new york times." steve, ohio, independent. you are next. caller: thanks for taking my call. i am for one party, the republican party, taking congress, having congress and the presidency because we have got big problems and the choices this year are solutions versus rhetoric. the children to not play well in the sandbox and i'm referring to people in congress, and there is
only one person who has set the agenda and identified the issues and has the background to solve the problem, and his name is donald trump. host: under your scenario, how well do you think donald trump plays with paul ryan and mitch mcconnell if republicans to maintain control of congress? caller: i really do not care. i think he ought to get rid of both of them. i do not think they have done their job and quite frankly, the next step is the republican party, whether donald trump wins or not, and he will bring in a landslide, 106 million people to not vote in the 2012 election because they cannot tell the difference, and as it has been noted, the registered and unaffiliated number of people who have voted so far is 36.9% so the best thing he said was
term limits. we have got to get new blood in and for both parties because they do not play well in the sandbox and they do not represent the american people. they represent themselves, so we have got to get people in their who really care and represent the people. the things i am sorry about is that i could not run for president this year. host: steve in ohio, speaking of focusing on the presidential election, a special section from "the new york times" today looking at the data, the upshot: going to election data, dating back to 2012. it will slip through "the new york times" section to show you how it looks. here are separate stories about hillary clinton the donald trump on the inside pages. flipping once again, a detailed political jargon of the of the united states, this is from the
2012 election coined by zip code . it shows which zip codes were won by barack obama and mitt romney for more than 5%. the yellow zip codes, those who that were the most closely contested in the 2012 election this is the method the two candidates are looking at as they head to the 2016 election. back to the phones pray to this in toms river, new jersey, republican. good morning. caller: one thing i would like to point out, correct me if i am wrong. we are $20 trillion in debt and most people think that the house is an obstruction to progress and i would just like to point out correct me if i'm wrong, most of the time, the house denies things because you do not have the money to do them.
i believe what will happen is hillary clinton will want to do all of these things as you will be shocked down mainly because we do not have the money to do it and they should not do it because it cost too much. that is the main reason why i am for donald trump because i'm hoping he will help our finances out. host: tom, the u.s. debt clock has the current national debt at $19.8 trillion and it is continuing to take up. edouard, texas, line for democrats. go ahead. caller: i think the democrats should take the house. the last few years, republicans have showed that they really have no interest in working with anybody for putting anything on the floor to talk about. what the problem is is that they have got themselves split up between the christian party and
the republican party. the republican party should be controlling the republican party, but i do not believe it is that way. they need to get somebody out of the way so they can get back to the way they used to create everybody needs health care and therefore it until they have to say, we have to help pay for it? how else are we going to do it? the 18 states that do not want to gone with obamacare, if they went on with it right now everything would be close enough to fixed up. sure, we have to fix little things, that is what we are always doing, but you cannot just say, no, we will throw it away and come up with something new. it will not be much different from what we have got now. everybody pays and that is how you make it work. if everybody just gets on the same sidelines, the only way it
will work as if everybody pays in. it is not the best plan but the only plan that will work. host: john, tennessee republican, you are up next. caller: just to hear that last caller, it is amazing. [laughter] they think that you can just make this a socialist country. they do not really believe in freedom. freedom is you go to work, you pay for what you get. you go out and pay for what you can get. yes, republicans are christians, and we stand on the side of god and there is nothing wrong with that. look, [indiscernible] whether you are atheist and you believe it or not, i call out democrats atheist. they side with baby murders, it
is just craziness. i cannot see how you can be a christian [indiscernible] and knowing all the stuff she does, at least donald trump does give us christians a voice. host: what about the republican leaders in congress? are they giving you a voice? caller: obama will not to that same he wants. whatever they try to do that is good, first of all, we need to restructure how we both for people. host: how so? caller: how? not have one party with 14 states. i understand that they have to fit millions of people in there but they are going about the other half of like new york. how did they get rewarded on
base points? from past two and 40 states and she wins 10, maybe? had this crazy. we should get back to the majority vote and the bible is what is this country stood on. when they first got off if they did not have a koran, they had the bible. host: we will go to robert in maryland, independent. good morning. caller:
i know janet reno gave us all these things and they gave people loans they cannot afford no interest loans. as you remember, this is what destroyed our economy and what we are dealing with today. if people look back on that, these are the reasons that your house is no longer worth what it was. equity in your homes are no longer what it was in 2004-2005 because of what bill clinton and janet reno did bite forcing the banks alone people money that they cannot afford the houses. what has destroyed our economy what the democrats have done to your personal checkbook, if you look what happened when the democrats controlled the house, the senate and the white house, they gave us obamacare. as rates go up this week and you have to join new policies and plans, remember as you write the bigger checks, the democrats gave you that and they cut into your main investment in your home. check with your house was worth in 2004 and check what it is worth today and you can take that back to bill clinton and janet reno, forcing banks to
loan people money and they cannot afford it. host: are these issues been heard in your senate race and chris van hollen's effort to fill the seat of barbara mikulski? we lost robert. dennis is in south dakota. sign for democrats. go ahead. caller: good morning, john. a couple things i would like to mention about democrats. they are the ones that brought social security into the nation in 1935. they passed it with a democratic president and we got social security. in 1965, we got medicare. i would like to have all those republicans give other medicare and social security. it dropped the number of seniors in can that were in poverty
programs. the minimum wage. only party that once minimum wage are the democrats, and the guy from tennessee who says republicans are the body -- the party of god. well jesus was a liberal. he wanted to take care of the sick. he wanted to help the poor, and we have got $20 trillion of debt and most of it was when clinton was in office. if we would have kept going and his rate, we would have had the debt paid off in 10 years. bush pushed the tax cut and then started the war, and we increased the debt by $5 trillion when he was in office. and obama, one thing that really kind of takes me off --ticks me
off is i'm a vietnam veteran, i served three tours in vietnam. he advises people to stay out of the military. i think he has a yellow streaked down has back. i blow those people of the water, well, it is good for him to talk at the age of 70, and he knows who will never get in the service and have to go to war neither will his sons or anybody else that is rich and can pull strings to stay out of the military. host: dennis in south dakota. he told you about "the new york times" story and donald trump's taxes. latest stories are on the a pi e-mail investigation. here's the story from "the new york times." the "in a trove of e-mails into a special computer program to allow feel analyst to determine
whether they contained classified information according to law enforcement forces. host: plenty of stories about that investigation and criticism from some editorial boards about fbi director james comey decision to unveil the latest on that investigation to members of congress last friday. here's the lead editorial in "the new york times," "james comey's big mistake." yesterday, chuck schumer, the likely leader of democrats in the next congress, after senator harry reid retires, went after only in his senate debate with his opponent. he talked about the fbi investigation and his criticism of james comey. here is a bit from that. [video clip] >> i was appalled by what
director comey did. i worked with him in the past. we talked about cleaning up the attorney's office went alberto gonzales politicized them, and that is by what makes what he did more surprising and appalling. there is a tradition in the u.s. attorney's offices in washington and the justice department, it goes down to the brooklyn das office that the prosecutor always avoids interfering with an election, even the appearance of interfering with an election. the fact that we heard today that he had to issue a search warrant for these e-mails, he doesn't even know what was in them. yes, he goes ahead and writes the letter and he knows what will happen as a result, so what i think he has them is wrong. donald trump and hillary clinton has called for the e-mails to be made public. i believe that is the right thing to do. esther com -- mr. comey should
make them all public and he owes secretary clinton and the american people an expedition for what appears to be an appalling action. host: we are taking your calls as we ask which party should control congress? a few more minutes left in this segment. brent is in west virginia, for republican, good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. to answer your question on the screen, i believe and would like to see republicans maintain control of both houses of congress because it is my firm belief that regardless of whether the democrats win or the republicans win, we are going to have to have a congress that holds them both in check. donald trump is not a conservative by any standard. in fact, he is proposing to spend twice as much money on the so-called stimulus package then hillary clinton.
it was interesting a few minutes ago that you talked about national debt and you showed the debt clock. neither hillary clinton more donald trump has any plan to reduce the national debt. they only talk about spending more money. i find it really amazing that people across this country who call themselves conservatives enthusiastically support the republican nominee, who supports not only spending more money but up until a few months ago actually his tax plan raised taxes on rich people from the reason that they were rich. he also supports federal funding of planned parenthood. he has praised socialized medicine, and then he turns in the last debate and accuses hillary clinton of supporting
socialized medicine and offer government plans. he offers a new entitlement in the form of federally mandated maternal leave and federally funded child care, so whether donald trump wins or whether hillary clinton wins frankly there will not be much of a difference. we are talking about to new york democrats. host: are you cheering for us but control to cover both? -- four split control to cover both? caller: the best would be real conservative republicans controlling the senate and house and keeping whoever wins this election in check. i suspect it will be hillary clinton. however, if we have more of the same sort of go along to get along attitude that mitch mcconnell has displayed and john boehner displayed in the past when he was speaker of the
house, i think this country will be in deep trouble. the country will be in deep trouble, anyway. it is a matter of trying to control how deep that trouble is , and we certainly are not going to control any of the problems with the trouble if we have a democratic president with hillary clinton and the democratic congress in both houses because they won't stand for whatever she wants to do. host: two other stories to show our viewers this morning. first in "the washington post." the headline in the lobbying section, "it is about to become a very busy time for k street headhunters," noting that it is high season for hiring partners at trade groups and corporations who are looking to snap up well-connected capitol hill ended ministrations staffers to better position themselves to lobby incoming congressional
leadership and the new administration. washington's evolving doors constant, but the movement following the presidential election is particularly past and periods especially when the new president is coming in and one chamber in congress is expected to flip. the story quoting a headhunter for the lobbyist search group mccormick group, saying "it is coming into what i like to describe best christmas time for headhunters. it will be musical chairs of biblical proportions." one of their story about dnc chairwoman donna brazil, cnn has severed its ties with donna brazil after hacked e-mails from wikileaks showed that she shared questions for cnn sponsored candidate events in advance with friends on the hillary clinton campaign. this brazile, an analyst for the network, was already on leave since becoming the interim chairwoman of the dnc.
on monday, seamen excepted her formal resignation on october 14. "we are completely uncomfortable with what we have learned about her interactions with the clinton campaign all she was a seamen conspirator," according to a spokesman. time for a few more calls. in georgia, line for democrats. caller: thank you so much for taking my call. yes, what i would like to say is since i was in the housing market for 10 years, i was a mortgage broker and i saw when bernanke was warning everybody that the housing market was on the wrong road. during that whole eight year term that i only did six great mortgages. i did not do the other deals. i feel very good about it. obama had to take care of that because when he went into office, the country was at the
bad state of mind. the thing that want to say about their should be taking care of congress, obama has been president for eight years. unfortunately, the whole time, the house was mainly handled by the republicans. republicans are some reason are so angry that they do not want to work on getting the country straight, so maybe you do not have enough positive republicans in there. hillary has a history of all for political history. if she was going to be impeached for things that she did wrong and for all of the different offices she held, she would have been impeached a long time. i have no problem with anyone doing anything wrong, as long as the country is handled correctly. as far as the national debt, if you are going to raise taxes every working person that contributes to taxes, i believe he should take the small portion or percentage and only
attributed to the national debt, and you should start the clock that shows the national debt was here, but now that all of the americans in the united states of america have attributed, the national debt has went down by $1 trillion, $2 trillion, so that our grandchildren will have a much level way of living. host: let's go to fred, a republican. go ahead. caller: i grew up in arkansas. the last: arkansas -- the last poll in arkansas, trump trails by 14%. they never come to arkansas, but they know that better than anybody.
we're the only country [indiscernible] from the united nations. a lot of members were rd on it. -- were already on it. host: fred, bring us to congress and control of congress. are you happy with your members of congress? caller: well, we used to be until 15 years ago and we are not anymore and we have people in politics for many -- for money.
working people have never had a chance to ask them questions. working people have never had a chance to ask them questions. even on short notice. we need to know more about the people we are voting for. host: we would love to have them on this program as well and that you ask questions, certainly something we have tried to do and will try to do. jerry in baltimore, maryland, line for democrats. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call, c-span. for the last six years republicans are controlled the house and senate. when paul ryan came in, he said he would do regular order and mitch mcconnell said, we, republicans, are going to show we can govern. they have shown they cannot govern. thereby, we need a change. when they do nothing in congress to do something in congress, which means the democrats. at least pay paid for what they proposed, and i agree with that last caller where we should be able to check on our tax returns
that 10% or voluntarily contribute 10% of our taxes to go straight to the debt or an additional 10%. i will like to see how many people would really like to pay the debt. we should have a box that shows i am willing to contribute an extra 10% of my money to pay off the debt for my grandchildren. thank you for taking my call. host: jerry, our last caller in this segment but to more tweets before we leave. ffr says divided government is meant to prevent knee-jerk reactions by one branch. the quantity of bills passed is not to a success. and one must i voted last to invest but the ticket. i do not believe one party should control in the of the government. proctor being independent. that will do it for the first segment of "the washington journal," but up next, we will
talk about the justice department and what role they play in the e-mail investigation into hillary clinton. butler, who teaches at georgetown law school, will be here. later, university of oklahoma's patrick will talk about the impact of political ads. that is coming up this morning on "the washington journal." ♪ >> after i came up with this idea, i did research information because this is the case for a lot of pieces that will be done for the competition. if there a complicated issue. it is not black and white and it is multifaceted that i had to research to get a base knowledge of what i wanted to talk about in this piece. it is so complicated that i cannot talk about it all in five
minutes to seven minutes so i had to decide what to talk about. >> i thought it would be nice to have a focal point to focus on. i interviewed my parents and went and got clips from the internet and before i started shooting, i interviewed it extensively. i talked to the pharmacist at my dad's pharmacy, i talked to my mom and her colleagues and workers and i went to the library. >> a lot of internet research to find more facts and data and statistics about employment of those with developmental disabilities and to see really what was going on. most of the information that i got off of the internet came from government founded websites, so that is how i knew that most of the information that i was getting was legitimate. >> this years's theme, your message to washington, d.c. tell us the most urgent issue
for the president and congress to address in 2017. our competition is open to middle school and high school students six through 12 with 100,000 dollars awarded in cash prizes. students can work in a group of up to three or loan to produce a five-minute to seven minute documentary on the issues selected. you can also explore opposing opinions. $100,000 in cash prizes will be shared between 150 students and 53 teachers. the grand prize of $5,000 will go to the student or team with the best overall entry. this year's deadline is generate 20 2017, so mark your calendars and spread the word to student filmmakers. for more information, go to studentcamor.ofg. -- .org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: paul butler joins us now.
he is a law professor at georgetown university and joins us as we continue our look at the hillary clinton e-mail investigation. first, did you ever come across the case comparable to this one? guest: there has never been a case like this. when i was at the justice department we had this same -- put up or show up. either prosecute the case or decline it. you do not talk about ongoing investigations. it is not fair to the person being investigated because if you put this out about how he is being investigated and she is not charged, this person has this part of her, but she never has a chance to defend yourself in the court of law, so there was a strong message at the justice department that you did not talk about ongoing cases. in receipt director comey been forthcoming about different stages of this process, it is unprecedented. host: can you give us
understanding of how the justice department works with the fbi in this case and what the relationship is right now? host: in high profile -- guest: in high profile, public corruption cases, attorneys from -- i was in the public integrity sent to -- section those are supervised fbi agents. supervised is a loaded word. fbi is the world's best law enforcement agency and its agents are well-trained. most of them have graduate degrees are things like accounting or forensic degrees. the fact is that the attorneys know the law better than the agents often, so the fbi agents typically work very closely with justice department attorneys to mention sure that everything is being done according to protocol. host: what about the relationship between loretta
lynch and james comey and what we know about the conversations between the two before the lender went to congress last friday? guest: technically, the attorney general is the boss of the fbi director. the fbi director is independent in the sense that he is appointed by the president and has a tenured term. the purpose is to specifically insulate the director and make sure that he can do is job to not have to worry about whether he is pleasing a specific attorney general of specific president. there have been issues before between attorney general lynch and director ocmey -- comey attorney general lynch says she does not believe there is a progress in effect, the idea that it has a protest and videos of police officers that this somehow hampering them from doing their jobs.
some people think that is an explanation for why crime is going up in a few cities. attorney general lynch says she does not agree with that principle and it has never been proven and the president says the same thing. director comey believes there might be something to that, said he has been willing to be independent in the past and go against both the attorney general and the president but in this issue, which is something where it is not just about being independent as the fbi director, but it is about going against protocol of the justice department, that he must not do anything before the election that might be viewed as an intervention. when i was at the justice department, that was fundamental. the idea that the justice department or the fbi could have an impact on an election was the
center of everything we were trying to do, which is nation that the united states was the country of equal justice under the law, where government agencies or were perceived as being partisan for trying to steer democracy toward one candidate or another. host: james comey came out on november 9 and talked about -- what if james comey came out on november 9 and started talking about new e-mails that have been discovered and they would look through those, wouldn't there be criticism if he had not given the american public the latest of where this is so the can be as informed as possible before the go to the polls? guest: if he had announced this new stage of the investigation after the election, of course he would have been criticized. but he would have said this i was just following the long-standing policy of the justice department. my hands were tied, i had to do that. when you look at the response,
it is not just democrats or people in favor of clinton winning the election. there are a lot of former prosecutors of people who are democrats, republicans and people supporting donald trump who said that the problem is not just that comey is being perceived as favoring one candidate or the other. the problem is that this undermines the very integrity of the justice department and the fbi because this is not done. we still have not heard a compelling reason why he did it. there is no policy that says there's a different stage in the investigation. you are supposed to make an announcement or send a note to congress. just the opposite. we are seeing an investigation that is this transparent done by the fbi because it is about the people who are being investigated. host: former attorney general holder with that column that appeared on "the washington post" website on sunday night.
it is rented in today's washington post, printing -- echoing concerns you talked about. our viewers have not read that yet and it is in "the washington post." phone numbers to join the conversation democrat, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. we will get to call us in the second, but i know you are not involved in the case, but can you give us a sense of the manpower being devoted to a case like this and then the estimates on your part and timing wise and how long it takes? guest: first, we need to talk about computer power because there were 650,000 e-mails that are subject to being looked at, so that does not mean [indiscernible] with the bureau will do first is put the e-mails in a program that will try to discern the ones that are relevant. by relevance, that means the
ones that are not duplicates of things they have already seen or that mention keywords, so remember, secretary clinton was in investigated for allegedly mishandling classified information, so this e-mail program will try to discern from this six and 50,000 e-mails which ones might have to do with classified information. that does not take a long time. the next step is the most labor-intensive. of the e-mails that have been planned, there will have to be a determination about whether they contain confidential materials. the thing is, the fbi agents are not qualified to make that determination. the e-mails will have to be sent back to the agency, less likely the state department, to see -- most likely the state department, to see the classification of the time the e-mail was sent and now because sometimes things get reclassified. we do not know.
there have been so many leaks, i'm surprised we do not know how many agents are working on it, what time they got to work and what they have for breakfast. paul butler is a former prosecutor in the justice department public integrity section, professor of law at the georgetown university law center. eric, democrat, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call and i am glad you have this guest. i think it is troubling to the public, myself included about these classified e-mails. i watched the hearings with director comey. i think he was bowing. he got to the explanation of what is a classified document and what is not an part of what was interesting to me was the classified document has to have a heading and a title at the
top, who it is from and where it is going and on that basis -- director comey talked about not having a label and if you could talk about the definition of what is and is not a classified document, i think it would be tremendously helpful, because we just seem to be going off assuming what is and is not, whether it is definitive or open to interpretation and again, i think when director comey was explaining this, i think he got cut off a lot of times by the republicans on that committee. host: if our viewers have not seen those hearings they can go to c-span.org and watch them. guest: i watched all eight to 10 hours of those hearings as they were being broadcast live.
as a former prosecutor for the justice department, it was hard to believe that the fbi director was being grilled by congress about it ongoing investigation because one of the things they came out recently is that technically, the investigation of hillary clinton was never closed. when people say it has been reopened, that is not exactly right. what the director was explaining to congress at this hearing was how he had made that determination. that is something that you typically don't talk about. the justice department has reviewed the allegations and you decline to bring charges and that -- that is the most you say. having to answer questions for 10 hours, it is not surprising that some of his statements seem confusing or it seems like he was being railroaded by
different congressmen with an ax to grind. that is why the prosecutors simply don't do those kinds of press conferences. the caller was asking how do you know what classified means. that is an important question and not an easy one to ask because there are different degrees of classifications. there are top-secret, or only specifically for someone to see other e-mails that perhaps only the secretary or people that report directly to her can see and one of the concerns is law enforcement agents to not know about that stuff, so they have to rely on other people to make those judgments. if these documents are going to be made public, there has to be a reassessment or you can say
now you know these documents will be released to the world do we need to reconsider classifications or confirmed that the classification was made. since the secretary was eating investigated for willfully mishandling classified information, it is important to know what kind of e-mails were on her private server and was there any risk to the public. the secretary maintain this private e-mail and that was not against the law in the sense that it was a crime. it was against state department policy, but it was not a crime. the alleged criminal activity being investigated was whether she willfully mishandled classified information. at that point, the director said back in july, no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case. host: clint in new york,
republican. caller: she made that server to hide her criminal activity with the clinton foundation. yes, she mishandled sensitive material and what -- and others that have done far less have gone to prison, but the state department -- the justice department is stonewalling an investigation into the clinton foundation, and that left the only avenue to go after this as the mishandled documents. he said no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute the thumb of the justice department, but the fbi chief that was investigating the clinton foundation came in with the information they found on anthony weiner's laptop, but i
suspect they also brought all the criminal activities -- all of this is noted in the wikileaks dump, you can see what she has been doing, and he stood up and said i can't have a criminal as the president, this has to be vetted to the public. host: a chance to respond, especially that others have done far less and have gone to prison. guest: i'm not sure we can point to cases were that has been true. it is not enough to mishandle classified information. you have to willfully do that, in a way that for example general petraeus was convicted of not only knowing that the information was classified but sending it to people who he knew should not have received it. there were not even those allegations at this point about secretary clinton. to the caller's point about the
fbi director being influenced by politics, if that is true, it is hard to know what his politics are, because back in july, the trunk folks were saying he was trying to bend over backwards to get hillary elected and now we hope -- now we have folks saying the opposite, that he is helping donald trump. host: do fbi agents and u.s. attorneys ever be like the are being used by congress for political witchhunts and how do they respond? guest: when i was at the justice department, i was doing public corruption cases and a lot of times, some of my cynical friends would say if you are investigating or prosecuting politicians, that has to be political work. you're working for the attorney general who is appointed by the president, who is either a democrat or republican and that has to make a difference in the answer was no, it did not.
it sounds naive, but i can honestly say that during the time that i was at the department we did not care whether the folks that we were investigating or democrat or republican, in part because that was unethical, but also because you have to get a conviction if you are prosecuting somebody according to justice department guidelines. you don't bring your case unless you believe you can convince a jury that the person is guilty. you are prosecuting someone in a jurisdiction that is elected
that has elected them to high office. when you bring a case, it cannot be about politics, it has to be about whether you can prove that a person has broken the law, so when director comey made that announcement about clinton back in july, it is not like he was saying he thought that she had acted fine, he said the opposite, that she had acted careless. a lot of people thought that it was inappropriate. if you don't prosecute somebody you are not supposed to cast -- the department declined to bring charges, so i think you can say a lot of things about director comey, but i think it is difficult to say he is being guided by president obama or attorney general lynch. host: stephen in missouri independent. caller: yesterday, i was with six of my buddies, all retired, and we were having a beer and we were kicking over everything and the consensus was we were tired of hearing about e-mails. most of us are independents, there was one democrat and one republican so we start thinking it over little more and the more we talked about it, -- either friend of mine who used to work for the prosecutor's office in st. louis county, and he said
remember when there is a search warrant issued, there has to be a basis, we don't hand them out like candy. we kicked that around a little bit, and whatever director comey and his people saw. the second thing we came to an this is where we are all at on voting is for director comey and we have great respect for him, we feel he would not have come out with this unless there was something to sink his teeth and, that he had to bring it up for pursue it. -- bring it up or pursue it5. that was the one thing that worked all of us is, is there something there? did he bring this up -- they
would be easy if there was nothing there to just forget about it. it really irks us. host: we found out yesterday that the fbi had obtained a search warrant to search those newly discovered e-mails that could be potentially relevant to the clinton probe. guest: director comey at the time he sent a letter to congress had not read one e-mail , he couldn't have because he did not have legal access to them. what happens is there was an investigation of the husband of one of secretary clinton's staffers. during an investigation, they look at some of his computers and on his computers, they saw e-mail apparently between people who were subject to the earlier investigation, we can imagine between the wife of anthony weiner, let's say they saw an
e-mail to secretary clinton from her, and they thought well, we don't inc. that the earlier investigators had access to this computer, and we wonder if they saw that e-mail, and apparently they did not have access to the computer, and so they thought well this might be relevant to that earlier investigation. in order to legally access those e-mails, there would have to be a search warrant issued, because it is just probable cause that this computer contains e-mails between persons who were subject to the earlier investigation. host: when the caller says they would not do something unless there was something there, you disagree. guest: it is possible these e-mails could begin looking of e-mails that the fbi has already reviewed. they literally knew at the time of the director made this
announcement, they knew nothing more than to and from. host: a line or republicans california is waiting. -- a republicans -- for republicans, california is waiting. caller: it does not matter if you are democrat or republican, if there is will mud in the water, you need to clear it up. i'm glad they are bringing this out, it should not stop anybody from trying to -- did not smear -- did not stop anyone from trying to smear donald trump with the locker room talk. it is about time this country got back on track. we are a country of laws, people have gone to prison for less and more and mr. weiner, whatever they pulled off of his e-mail server, they tied it to hillary
and i guess -- she wasn't supposed to have any of that information, it was not supposed to be retained, i think it is a great thing that this is happening, and it's about time. host: the caller seems to disagree with that 60 degree -- 60 day wall before an election. guest: that is not a written down rule at the department, it is just a tradition that has been followed for decades, and again the reason for that tradition is you don't want the fbi director or the attorney general determining the outcome of an election, that is a decision for the american people. it is especially important that the fbi is perceived as being objective and fair, because unfortunately, the bureau has a sordid history under j edgar
hoover of being a very partisan group that goes after folks at the director did not like, especially african-american groups and other groups representing people of color. because of that tragic history, ironically, director comey has said that he wants to end over backwards to make sure that the bureau is not being perceived as it used to be, as a kind of racist organization that was very partisan. with this step last friday of sending this letter, he is now being compared to j edgar hoover and no fbi director wants that comparison. host: independent in alabama, go ahead. caller: i called in, a few months ago, there was a gentleman on, talking about the same topics and we talked about
metadata and the attorney that is on now, and i have seen him on different shows, before and i always respected him, but i am losing respect as i am talking director comey only sent that letter off because of what they found in new york. agents in new york were investigating this woman's husband. they talked about metadata, they said that the metadata shows that these e-mails came from the clinton server. they also said that the e-mails, based on the metadata, show that these e-mails possibly showed classified information.
they started looking at it. host: what is the question for paul butler? caller: the question is, the fbi only opened this based on what they were seeing from the metadata, for him to sit hair -- sit there and act like the fbi opened this based on nothing is not really a good point. host: let's let him respond. guest: when the fbi director reported it to congress on friday, he said that he had no idea whether this new evidence was significant at all. host: in the letter that he sent. guest: the reason he has no idea is because he did not look at it. when fbi agents are investigating a case, and they
have a search warrant to look for certain types of information, and allegedly because with the wiener investigation, technically we do not know what is going on, because the director has not had a press conference about that. what has been reported is that they were investigating anthony weiner for sending inappropriate text messages to a girl. if in doing that investigation, they come across other material, if it is not relevant to the home investigation they are not supposed to look at it, so presumably they are allowed to look at to from, that kind of metadata, and they saw something to the secretary from ms. aberdeen. they think i wonder if the investigation of clinton has this ipad or iphone and they might not have it because this belonged to mr. weiner, so maybe this is something they should
know about, so i can imagine i call being made to the agents who worked in that case where they say did you look at mr. wieners ipad? and they said no, we did not and the other agents say well there are some e-mails on his computer that are from and to the secretary and the other agents are like oh, what we did not have that, we need to take a look at that. that is where we are and that is why the fbi director said he had no idea whether these new e-mails rider significant or even had artie been reviewed by the bureau. all they are doing now is crossing the t's and dotting their eyes. host: in california, larry is a democrat, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a problem with the e-mails. my problem is they came from benghazi, and the thing about benghazi is there is really only
one person to blame, and that is why the parents never wanted to talk to anybody about this. i read a fbi report in the summer of 2001 and there was a lady fbi agent in arizona and she is the one that put in the newspaper that we were training the terrorists how to fly planes in arizona, minnesota and florida. when the 911 commission came up they never talked about it, they are paying more attention to the e-mails then 9/11, and it is kind of sad when i heard donald trump no respect for our president, i don't know how military people could vote for this. host: the amount of attention the e-mail investigation has received. guest: one reason is because director comey keeps talking about it.
an earlier caller mentioned one about the investigation of donald trump or allegations concerning his tyranny? and might be an investigation by the bureau, there might not be. we have no idea, and we shouldn't. the fbi director should not make comments about donald trump unless prosecutors and agents decide to bring a case and there is a grand jury indictment. reason we are talking about secretary clinton at this point is because the fbi director has made that a newsworthy item, again less than a week before the election and the inexplicable thing is that there is no reason that he should have done that. host: other stories coming out in recent days, concerning donald trump and those close to him, ties to russia, a story
from nbc news, the fbi making to -- making inquiry to his ex campaign managers foreign ties. the story from other joe's they a lot of attention yesterday talking about russian ties. a veterans by giving the fbi information alleging that of -- alleging the russians cultivating information for donald trump. the new york times with a story today, noting that the fbi on monday -- the fbi was looking at these ties and determined they do not have anything to move forward with. guest: a difference between those stories in this investigation is we don't have the director of the fbi sending letters or going on tv or talking to congress about the status of those investigations, so when we look at what is different, what is different is
how tidy director comey has been about this specific case. host: the story notes the lawn -- law enforcement officials have not found any conclusive or direct link between donald trump and the russian government, and even the hacking into democratic e-mails, officials believe it was aimed at disrupting the election, rather than electing donald trump and the want to read that story, investigating trump. charlie in new york, a republican. caller: mr. butler, you said earlier that there was no known case of anyone being in prison for doing less than what hillary clinton did. the mother of a young sailor who is in prison now was interviewed on fox and friends, yesterday morning, and what her son did was he took a photograph, inside of a submarine and he took a photograph on his iphone of a
piece of exercise equipment and be kind -- behind this equipment, there was encryption equipment, classified, in the photo. during his court-martial, he said that he was not going to send the photo to anyone, and the prosecutor said well, your intentions do not matter, this is why we are angry. if you are a young sailor, your intentions do not matter, but if you are hillary clinton, your intentions do matter and that is why we are angry. guest: a court-martial is different than a criminal trial and remember that director comey was doing a criminal investigation and under federal law, there has to be willful proof of hand -- mishandling classified information. secretary clinton -- --
secretary clinton mishandling information is not a crime what is a crime is knowing it is classified and giving it to someone knowingly who is not supposed to have it. host: a democrat, doug, good morning. caller: i thought there was a lot being read into mr. clinton's motives and that is why so many law enforcement officers are being gunned down in the street and our current president and one of our candidates is meeting with leaders of groups whose followers are doing these crimes, maybe he is just tired of being vilified with a lot of
it promoted by the michael brown fiasco and a lot of that was proven to be a myth. guest: people who i respect have said that they don't thing that director comey is being political, so that includes eric holder, the former attorney general who said that while he profoundly disagrees with what comey is doing in the clinton investigation, he thinks that he is a man of integrity. at the press conference yesterday, the press secretary essentially said that that is what the president things as well, that he thinks that comey may not have -- may not be acting appropriately, but he does not doubt his integrity, so again, i don't know director comey but what i do know is that he is firmly invested in being independent, but what independence means --
the caller mentioned well, maybe he is concerned about people not having respect for law enforcement, well the way to earn respect as a law enforcement agent is to follow the rules to conduct yourself in a way so that everyone understands that you are not favoring one person or a group over another and a concern about director comey's actions recently is that they don't create the impression that he is being fair. host: pennsylvania, jean is waiting, independent. caller: thank you for your service, mr. butler. vince foster and cap lineberger,
this is not new, what director comey, when he advised congress and congress let it leak, we had this three days before an election, having said that, i am not surprised at anything we are hearing. i was there, in the 90's. whatever things are right minded or true or honest, i count on god to tell me, not man. i have law experience and national security experience and i say this to all of you, if you think your vote is going to count in this national election, i want you to look up electoral college. the best we can do is pray for november the ninth. we have been through worse, we have been here before, i know secretary clinton, and i am not surprised by any of this.
host: let's go to florida roberta, a republican. caller: hello. myself and everyone i know, we are still trying to figure out how hillary clinton got away with destroying all of her e-mails and her phones and not being prosecuted for that. guest: that is the problem with her information being sort -- stored on a private server. in the first instance, she was supposed to turn over documents that were relevant to her service at the state department. she got to determine, along with her lawyers, which documents were relevant, and items that were not relevant, say making arrangements for her mom's funeral or her daughter's wedding, those were not supplied to the state department.
the concern is, if she had been using an official server, all those e-mails would have been preserved. they say when you delete something from an e-mail, it never really goes away and that is true on a government server, but on a private server there is a way to make those items go away, and so what some people have suggested is there might be some of the deleted e-mails that were not able to be found during the first investigation some of those deleted e-mails might be present on this server. host: who controls the i.t. governance for the executive branch? guest: that is a technical question which raises a larger issue. when we think about search warrants, back in the day, they were very easy to understand and execute. you with to the barn to look for gas and the search warrant said
ok, go down to main street and look in the barn. with new technology, and information being held in e-mail servers or in a cloud or online, that raises a whole other set of issues, and so one of the things that law enforcement has to do is race to adapt with new ways information is stored. questions like who has access to different information, what kind of server do you use, what does classification even mean in an area in which information is now stored in a cloud. host: and we have seen stories about the development of policies over the years, not just at the state department but other agencies, to try to keep up with these advances. guest: that is why secretary clinton, who apparently is not
all that sophisticated when it comes to using new technology, she says i like my blackberry, and i know how to use it, so i want to keep using that an apparently, other secretaries of state before had done the same practice and often the rules kind of -- the policies have to catch up with technology and so at the time that the secretary was using this private server, you weren't supposed to do it, but it was not formally against the rules. guest: -- host: in ohio, a democrat. caller: good morning. bernie sanders had it right when he said that this is just a smokescreen, this is just another red herring that the republicans are pulling out and yesterday, it was called a hail mary, an act of desperation, but
i think they miss the main one and that is what the republicans did to john kerry, back in 2004. he was swift voted and that even became a verb in the american language, and i think they are trying to swiss vote hillary and i would like to know what paul has to say about it. host: you mentioned swift boats and veterans for truth, we will be talking about political ads in our next segment of the washington journal, coming up. guest: i think the american people get to decide what the important issues are in an election, so maybe you think back during that time that vote was relevant, maybe you don't think it is relevant, but the point is, you as a citizen get to decide.
the director of the fbi should not be making those decisions for the american people, it was inappropriate for him to assert himself into the selection and not only was inappropriate, it is against the rules. i hope the fbi and the department can recover from this tarnish to their image. host: new jersey, independent. caller: thank you very much. just to let you know, the tees he has been scrambled and i cannot hear any of the answers but the phone is fine. i want to ask a question about intent. when somebody smashes evidence with a hammer, it is not an accident. when someone deletes or uses acid wash to get rid of certain information, that is not an accident, that is intentional
so where does the intent come in? guest: the intent has to be to willfully and knowingly mishandle classified information, so i have a lot of respect for the way that the fbi agents may cases. if there was a case to be made, i think the world's best law enforcement agency would have made it, so when director comey said that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case based on the evidence that they had, i have to take him at his word. host: paul butler, a professor of law at georgetown university, a former federal prosecutor in the justice department's integrity sector. up next, you have seen plenty of campaign ads and we will be talking about the impact that they have made and as past and present, which ones are effective and which ones are not. we are joined by the university of oklahoma's patrick merrick. stick around.
♪ >> as the nation elects a new president on tuesday, november 8, will america have its first foreign-born first lady since louisa adams or will it have a former president at -- as first gentleman? learn more about the influence of america's presidential spouses in c-span's first ladies, now in paperback. it gives a look at the lives and personal impact of every first lady in american in that -- in american history. it features interviews with the nation's leading first lady's historians, each chapter also offering a brief biography of 45 presidential spouses and archival photos from their lives. first ladies in paperback, published by public affairs, is now available at your favorite
bookseller and as an available at your favorite bookseller and as an e-book. >> on election day, the nation decides our next president and which party controls the house and senate. stay with c-span for coverage of the presidential race, including campaign stops with hillary clinton, donald trump and their surrogates and follow key house and senate races with our coverage of their candidate debates and speeches. c-span, where history unfolds daily. >> this week on c-span2, we are featuring political radio programs with national talkshow hosts. live from washington, d.c. on wednesday, conservative radio talk show host hugh hewitt is live from 6:00 tonight. eastern. thursday from noon to 3:00, progressive radio host thom hartmann and on friday, from 9:00 until noon, a conservative political perspective on the mike gallagher show. all this week, live on c-span
two. >> washington journal continues. host: scott barrick is a professor at the university of oklahoma, joining us for a discussion on political advertising past and present. with a week left in the campaign as you look back at all of the ads that have been run, are there certain general themes that have emerged, that are specific to 2016? guest: there are a lot of themes that kind of for kerr through history, but some that you see picking up this year, we see an emphasis on the negative, and that makes sense that the fact that these are two candidates who have the highest unfavorable ratings in history all stop we also see in those ads particularly using the words of the opponent against them. host: what is an example of that, and is that something
relatively new in political advertising, or something that has been long done? guest: you can go back to 1956 and the stephenson campaign used as that eisenhower ran in 1952, saying how is that again, general, or missing to lower inflation, but prices are at the highest in history. when clinton began her general election ad campaign, it was also exclusively words from trump, spoken over the images of kids watching television or young women looking in the mirror. host: you talk about images recurring through history, happening in political ads, one new ad from hillary clinton's campaign combining past and present, coming out yesterday and is getting a lot of attention, let's show it. >> this is me in 1964 april --
in a political commercial. the fear of nuclear war, i never thought our children would have to deal with that and to see that coming in this election is really scary. >> a foreign-policy expert went to advise donald trump, and three times, he asked about the use of nuclear weapons. if we have them, why can't we use them? >> i want to be unpredictable. wouldn't you rather have japan have nuclear weapons than saudi arabia? >> what safeguards are there to stop any president who may not be stable, from launching nuclear attacks? >> the commander-in-chief is the commander-in-chief. >> bomb the [bleep] out of them. >> vote for hillary clinton, the stakes are too high to stay at home. host: the significance of this ad in this cycle. guest: you heard the tagline was
the same tagline we had in 1964 where goldwater was running against l.a. g who at one point advocated the use of tactical nuclear weapons and this has been a theme that the clinton campaign has run ads on before, you heard her announcement during her acceptance speech, a man you can date with a tweet is not -- you can bait with a tweet is not a man you want in charge of nuclear weapons. we had an actor from that campaign do another ad for clinton, i just found this out yesterday, it was the same guy who we see 50 years later talking about how he was disconcerted as a republican by seeing some of the things that donald trump had said and done. host: 1964, to remind viewers of that famous daisy ad. >> one, 2, 3 four, five, six --
seven six, 6 8 nine. >> 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 zero. >> these are the stakes. to make a world in which all of god's children can live or to go into the dark. we must either love each other or we must die. >> vote for president johnson on november 3, the stakes are too high for you to stay home. host: talking about political ads, this cycle.
what ads have impacted you? our phone lines are open. democrats can call in, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents (202)-748-8002. you talked before about as of candidates using their own words -- using their opponent's own words against them, something donald trump has done, this cycle. >> why aren't i 50 points ahead, you might ask? >> maybe it is because you arrogantly call americans
deplorable. >> you could put half of donald trump's supporters into what i call it basket of deplorables. >> maybe it is because the director of the fbi said you lied about your e-mails. >> there is no classified e-mail, was that true? >> there was. >> maybe it is because your
policies allowed isis and terrorism to spread and make america less safe and less prosperous. do you really need to ask? host: as we try to figure out what is
a good ad and what is it not effective at, is this an effective ad? guest: it does pretty well. it uses clinton's words, it picks up on a quote where her tone is a little unlikable, the use of the deplorable comment and that it also hits on some of donald trump's major themes were he feels that he is strong and she is less strong, dealing with national security and isis and hits on that notion of untrustworthiness, that he has been hitting on with this epithet of crooked hillary. there is an emotional resonance to it. host: we are talking about ad
spending. this is ad spending as of last week from bloomberg. last week was the first time it donald trump outspent hillary clinton on television advertising across the country. other charts from bloomberg in this article talking about ad spending in just the state of new hampshire for that week, 200 $3000 -- $203,000 spent by the trunk, -- you can see the comparisons across the states and battlegrounds for ad spending. we want to hear from our viewers on what is an effective ad and what ads you did not like. democrats, (202)-748-8000.
republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents (202)-748-8002. caller: i think all of the democratic ads are good, but i do think they should use more ads to show the hypocrisy of the republican candidates, and their supporters. when a reporter on a non-fox station with newt gingrich was on and the reporter asked him who he thought the best president ever in the united states and newt gingrich stated bill clinton, now, all of a sudden, he is so bashing bill clinton, the same way with o'malley, when they asked o'malley if he believed everything that was stated on
fox news, he said no, absolutely not, but fox pays me $7 million a year to say it. why aren't these ads brought up? i think the hypocrisy of the election is all about greed and money and i just feel they are so hypocritical. we know how hypocritical donald trump is, what about his supporters? host:'s -- it's the to the point you're making about using your opponent's words against them in ads. guest: that is a good point. the trouble is that in 30 seconds, there is relatively little you can do. what i have seen from his campaigns is that they will put up online videos that are one minute to four minutes long, where they can have extended transcripts and clips of
candidate saying one thing, and then saying another contradicting themselves or mike pence contradicting donald trump . we have seen similar kinds of videos from the trump campaign as well. those kinds of things are effective, i think it speaks to character and trustworthiness and we get some clips of that in the 32nd ads, but not as much as we see in those online videos. host: the follow-up videos you are talking about are relatively new in the electoral campaigning process? how effective are they? are they reaching the force rate -- persuadable voters, or is the
32nd tv commercial still the best way to try to impact those people and shift the vote around? guest: most of the ads in the videos that you see that are put up on hillary clinton's youtube channel or her facebook feed are mostly going to be seen just by her supporters, and maybe by the friends of her supporters and probably 90% of whom are also supporters. there is probably not going to be a lot of reaching those persuadable's that you mentioned, but whether or not television ads are still king is a little bit up for debate because we are in an era where a lot of people when internal the tv, they are not actually going to broadcasting cable, they are going to streaming services, where there are no ads. if they do watch something they
came over the cable, they may be time delaying it or fast forwarding through the ads so the number of ads that you need to air in order to actually have someone see them is getting higher. host: the hillary clinton campaign in the general election spent $173 million on ads, and that was through mid-october. the donald trump campaign comparison, $58.4 million spent by the truck campaign in the general election, and that through mid-october and those ads continuing for another week. we want to hear your thoughts, what ads have been effective for you. stephen wisconsin, a republican. -- steve in wisconsin, a republican. caller: an interesting topic. my question has an extension of your most recent comments, when
we watch tv, my wife and i and we haven't a flipping through and you see a republican ad on many fox or democratic ad on take your pick, and then we go why don't the opposite -- why do we see the opposite when you have a republican ad on a left-leaning station and the opposite for the democrats. how effective are those ads in persuading people, and is that politically intended, and the last part is, i'm not sure what is -- what hippocratic is. guest: the effect that we are looking for with those kinds of ads where you are airing kind of congenial messages on partisan cable, you are after a kind of reinforcement, making sure you are getting out to vote and not so much at converting those who might be persuadable.
the times you will see those kinds of ads will be those big national advise or maybe spots that appeared during the local news or national news and local markets, where you are not really targeting partisans, you are going after people who are at least interested because they're watching the news they're likely to vote, but maybe they have not made up their mind. host: jodi on twitter says the ads for the kids are watching donald trump say what he says is the ad that is the most effective for her. our kids will be the ones taking care of us when we get old. we want to show the viewers that add. >> i love the old days you know the years
to do to guys like that in a place like this? they would be carried out in a stretcher. you can tell them to go [bleep] themselves.
i could stand in the middle of 5th avenue and shoot somebody and not lose any voters. when mexico since its people, they are bringing drugs, they are bringing crime, their rapist. you could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, what coming out of her, wherever. yep to see this guy, i don't know what i said, i don't remember. >> our children and grandchildren will look back at this time, at the choices we are about to make, the goals we will strive for, the principles we will live by, and we need to make sure that they can be proud of us. >> i'm hillary clinton and i approve this message. host: one way to talk about ads and
classify them are positive ads, negative ads. in terms of strategy, when is the right time to run a positive message and when is a good time
to run attack ads? guest: classic strategy is you open with positive and kind of introduce yourself, introduce your bagger fee, make case for why you are running, then you start talking about issues, usually laying out your vision for what your major issues are and what you would like to do about them, then you go negative and just before election day you come back to the vision for the future, so that you don't leave a bad taste in voters' malthus. -- voters' mouths. we have seen a lot of attack ads in this campaign, pretty much from the beginning. clinton has come around to something of a positive message at the end of that add, where we
have ads that are kind of half negative, saying here is why this verse in his back, then saying here is why i'm good, we call them comparative ads and donald trump has had a number of those types of ads with the two america ads. i think those can be fairly effective at reducing the kind of backlash that you often see with negative ads. host: zero point before about the four-minute follow-up ads. jim writes on twitter, who spends four minutes watching online political ad? robert is in new york, an independent, good morning. caller: good morning. november 9, i will be 56 years old, i was born in 1960 and i
remember when i was seven years old, the 68 campaign and i was astute with my family members my older relatives like how we all talk and discuss what was going on during the vietnam war and the ads and everything it was happening, and i am concerned about these children like the ads you play with children listening to donald trump's terrible language, and another thing i'm concerned about with that is i think some of the things are like borderline libel. what are we teaching our kids or the young millennials? are we teaching them it is ok to lie and it is ok to say anything you want like this person is a crock or this person is a sex addict without any real proof? i am really concerned about where we are heading and my last point is back when i was a child of the 60's, you see more input and feedback from walter cronkite and dan rather and the
generation before me, arthur morrow why is it that we never see these anchors on tv, they are not allowed to give their own opinions, and i think that is another negativity that we are teaching our younger generation that no one can stand up and give your point of view or say as an anchor, no matter what channel you are on that i disagree with that and this is why, we are heading down the wrong path and we are in trouble. thank you for c-span, i've been watching it since it first started, and god bless america. host: a couple of topics, but do you want to focus on the political advertising side? guest: with regard to why political ads can get away with a little bit more, they are actually not subject to the kinds of ftc false statement
false advertising regulations that you see from product ads. they are covered more strongly by the first amendment, it is protected speech but i think we have actually seen a trend toward these ads kind of providing almost notes, saying here is where we get the basis for saying this thing about our opponent, it appeared in this editorial or this news story so we do see at least some evidentiary basis for a lot of the statements we see in political ads. host: the caller was concerned about the negativity in ads. it is hard to say that any political ad is fondly
remembered, but there is one, it was probably the morning in america at going back to 1984 campaign, ronald reagan's campaign. we want to show our viewers that at and have you talk about it. >> it's morning again, and america. today, more women -- more men and women will go to work than ever before. interest rates at about half the record highs of 1980. know the 2000 families will buy new homes today, lower than at any time in the past four years. this afternoon, 6500 young men and women will be married and with inflation at less than half of what it was just four years ago, they can move toward with confidence to the future. it's morning again, and america and under the leadership of president reagan, our country is prouder and stronger and better.
why would we ever want to return to where we were less than four short years ago? host: why did that add work? -- ad work? guest: you had lots of patriotic images and the marvelous narration. you also had a case for why we should keep reagan things are better america is prouder, inflation is lower and kind of an unpleasant negative against the candidate from the democrats . when the ad says why would we want to go back to where we were less than four short years ago we are saying why would we want to vote for walter mondale? it works on a number of levels.
host: director of the political can vacation center at the university of oklahoma, tell us about the senate. . guest: the center has been in existence in 1985 but we have the largest -- -- from internet as much as we can, but we are always happy to get the masters the best quality reproductions of these ads to help preserve our political history, and to make sure that we have that aspect of our heritage available mieshg
mieshg caller: just like the previous caller, i'm concerned about a lot of falsehoods that are out there all the time and nothing seems to be done about it. you can make the free speech argument but i think politicians are insulating themselves. i think libel or slander, i mean, they're not applicable to
them because they are politicians just like the regular laws everybody else has to abide by and also fact checking, here marco rubio is doing a lot of attacking on murphy and one of the big things he was saying before was that murphy is saying he's a cpa, and rubio's first thing is that he's not a cpa. when they fact check it and he is a cpa in colorado, but now rubio's ads are saying murph senot a cpa and now they have added to the bottom and this is fact checked. now do we have to fact check the fact checker? host: patrick meirick on fact checking political ads. guest: we have seen a renaissance of fact checking, we
saw ad watches emerge after the 1998 presidential campaign emerging in force after the bad taste that a lot of people had after the campaign. and we've seen a number of independent sites, such as politifact and fact check dot org, as well as getting fact checks up in a lot of leading newspapers but you're right, sometimes it's difficult to make a fact check stick. the old quote from mart twain, the truth can get halfway -- sorry, the falsehood can get halfway around the world before the truth can get its pants on there is truth here. the fact they can cite a fact check that proves they were actually false, that's troubling, you know the opponent
come back, the fact check which shows they were wrong. political advertising. host: clarion, iowa, joe is waiting, line for republicans. joe, good morning. caller: yes, i want to say, we all know how advertising can be very misleading, i remember the cigarette ads how glamorous they glorify smoking was, tens of thousands of people die from cancer, we have to be scrutinizing of the advertisements and not allow ourselves to buy things or things we don't need. we need to do our own research. i see that our children were highly intelligent, the cartoons they are being fed the parents need to scrutinize the cartoons and the advertisement parents need to protect the children's minds. host: stick to political ads of
the 2016 season or previous ads from previous campaigns, you want to talk about. shawn in albany, georgia a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning, how are y'all? host: good morning. go ahead. caller: god bless america, we're going to need it. i'm a christian and i believe that god is going to come soon and he'll have the final answer. however, while we're live nothing america and listening to the ads have an effect on me and my daughter. i have a 10-year-old daughter, she's like, mamafhe becomes president, what kind of role mod cell he going to be for us, and that says a lot from a 10 year old. i really just believe that i don't think either one of them is good, do the research, like the guy from iowa said, do the research and everybody has an opinion, i feel donald trump is
like rich and money is power. that is not how it goes. money doesn't make people people make money and if they put that mindset in their mind, they probably could to a lot more. host: shawn that, ad we showed earlier of the children watching donald trump's comment is titled "role models" by the clinton campaign. let's go to frank in mapleshade, new jersey, an independent. frank, what political ads impacted you this season? caller: well, the one of the political ads -- first of all i would have like to have the question and a couple -- actually three questions. number one, and then i listen --
the second one i would ask the gentleman, if he ever read or heard of dave hodges, on the internet. -- page, i'm hold nothing my hand. the headline says -- surfacing kgba agent and -- host: what is the third question, frank? caller: dave hodges, common sense show. host: all right, what is your third question? caller: well, the third question is that i came from a communist country, to america from the europe in the '50s. and the media the way they act here in the united states right now, it is very, very similar to
the communist media i remember back in eastern europe. host: patrick meirick, give you a chance to respond. guest: the first question. i don't know about percentages hillary clinton have ran more ads, most negative. on the second question, not familiar with dave hodges, viseen reports along those lines from left-leaning media like mother jones, not that trump is a kgba agent, but he's had contact with russian agents not sure that can be substantiated. the third question? i'm sorry. host: he was talking about live nothing communist russia and concerned about the messages he's see og t.v. and relating back to childhood. not necessarily a question for
you. guest: fair enough, i'll let that go. host: allen, brooklyn new york, a democrat. allen good morning. allen, you with us? caller: yes, yes, hello. i wonder if there has been discussion this year, i haven't seen any, about the 30th anniversary roughly this time of the end of the fairness doctrine under reagan's fcc, and the effect that had on the polarization of the voting population and the way advertising works. when you have 30 years of fairness doctrine eliminated, have you stations like fox and msnbc, that are able to self-select an audience for people who have one point of view and then after period of time people grow up only hearing the point of view they want to hear and never hear opposing viewpoint and get inoculated to the opinions. you end up having each of these stations advertising basically to a polarized audience that is looking to see things that confirm a point of view they
already have, instead of information that may have a possibility of enlarging their range of opinion and making them be more even handed. host: patrick meirick. guest: i think with regard to fox and msnbc, because those are cable channels wouldn't have been affected by the fairness doctrine. influence at the end of the fairness doctrine is with talk radio, gone over 90% conservative. not sure why that is so appealing to conservatives rather than liberal been attempts to launch liberal talk radio stations and they haven't been quite as successful. i'm i've sxeen reviewed books that talk about the effect of media on political polarization, they come to delivering conclusions. some think yes in fact the ability to self-select your news
and to some extent your facts can help to polarize the nation. others suggest that where we see people self-selecting they are people who are already partisans and the folks in the middle usually aren't selecting news at all and they have a lot more opportunity to select entertainment and so they're not really getting moved one way or the other. host: should note it is not always presidential ads getting the most attention occasionally, lower tier race comes up with an adthat, spreads throughout the internet. one of them was by gerald daugherty, who is running for re-election as traviscounty commissioner in texas. it is an ad featuring his wife and it's gotten 3.4 million hits on youtube.
here it is glchlt we've got room to put 2700 people in our jail, cost about $103 a day.
>> gerald doesn't have any hobbies. >> this year 3838. >> is he always like that? >> yeah, all the time. >> 3838 is probably going to be between 3838 and 4.169. >> most people leave their work at the office. >> three light rails. 60 people on each car. >> if you add two cars, talking about 300 people affected. there are a million people in this community. that is.01 to the eighth power, round it off zero. >> all he wants to do is fix things. >> this 18-wheeler parked in the neighborhood fumes all over the place, it is not a code violation. >> i think i like helping around the house here. >> please re-elect gerald,
please. >> patrick meirick, not how much you know about the traviscounty commissioner race, why did this ad work?
why has it gotten so much attention? >> you know, it's humorous at a level that doesn't really depend on your partisanship. if you listen to what mr. daugherty is saying espousing conservative viewpoints saying we need to lower the tax rate, we need not to spend on mass transit, that is not going to affect a lot of people. but the real message of the adthis, is a guy who just wants to fix things, this guy is a wonk, and we need someone like this in office and out of my house. host: time for a few more calls. stewart, line for independents, your line is up. caller: the daugherty ad was brilliant, they got their point across without having to relate to ugliness.
i want to mention my favorite ad of the season was bernie sanders ad, which i think harken back to the reagan ad, the one with the simon and garfunkel background, very effective ad. host: patrick meirick, do you know the ad? guest: yeah, you know i do. really pretty effective. in fact, there were a number of ads not officially put out by the clinton campaign made by individuals with editing software that went viral, as well. and and in a lot of cases we're starting to see the internet be able to democratize this kind of ad type message making. host: to pat, baltimore, maryland, line for democrats. go ahead. caller: hi. i want to bring up the clinton campaign ad that was related to the generals and former bush
advisors that were not supporting donald trump. i thought that was a powerful ad, a bit reminiscent of the 1964 ad by the johnson campaign, like confessions of a republican. people are concerned about the extent to which we are seeing po liticization of military officers in this case. host: for the viewers, one more ad went viral this cycle. an ad that contributed to a lot of attention being focused on
this race, important senate race in missouri. this is jason kandor, the democratic candidate there, his ad in missouri. >> i'm jason kandor and the senator has been attacking me on guns. in the army, i learned how to use and respect my rifle n. afghanistan, i volunteered to be an extra gun in convoy of unarmored suv's and in the state legislator i supported second amendment rights. i believe in background checks so terrorists can't get their hands on these. i approve this message because i'd like to see senator blunt do this. host: patrick meirick, one of the more unique ads of the cycle there? guest: absolutely. and i think that his demonstration of familiarity with the weapon shows he's not a stereo typical democrat who
hates guns. he is someone who knows guns, respects guns. host: time for a couple calls. university of oklahoma, gerald, grove, texas, line for democrats. go ahead. gerald you there? all right. stef stefanie is up. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: good. you are on with patrick meirick. caller: hi, patrick. my comment is when i was a
usually usually, broadcast stations are really weary of disallowing a political ad. they usually don't want to get into saying, no, we draw the line here. and it goes back to the community standards such that maybe if an ad showed graphic images of abortion or something like that, they might say, no, we're not going to air that, otherwise, they usually let these go. host: patrick meirick, professor at university of oklahoma, director of political communication center. pcc.ou.edu. appreciate your time on the "washington journal." guest: happy to be with you. thank you. host: up next, open phones on the "washington journal" to end our program today. we can talk about any public policy issue you want to discuss. phone lines are open, can start
calling now. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents 202-748-8002. we'll get to your call necessary just a minute. >> as the nation elects a new president on tuesday, november 8, will american have first foreign-born first lady since adams or a former president as first gentleman? learn about the presidential spouses from c-span first ladies. now available in paperback. first ladies gives readers a look into the personal lives and impact of every first lady in american history. first lady system companion to c-span well-regarded biography series and features interviews with first lady historians, brief biographies of 45 presidential spouses and archival photos from their lives. first lady necessary paperback
host: it is open phones in the last 35 minutes on the "washington journal" today. as you're dial nothing for open phones, we want to take our viewers to the battleground state of north carolina, where c-span bus is making a stop today on the campus of the university of north carolina. the visit is part of the c-span battleground tour and to discuss the latest from the tar heels state, joined by unc associate professor jason roberts. professor roberts, national polls showing the presidential race tightening across the country. are we seeing that on the ground in the battleground state of north carolina? guest: unclear at this point, we don't have a lot of new polling out of north carolina as of late. we have seen in the early votes,
also suggest that the votes coming in much as earlier polling predicted it might. guest: early vote total, how many people have gone to the poll so far in north carolina and what more can we tell from the north carolina, one of the states that puts out a lot of information about early voting? guest: in 2012, 4.6 million people voted in north carolina. as of yesterday, we have about 1.6 million early votes in thus far, about a third of expected vote total at this point. it is hard to tell a lot about this the people who voted are likely to vote anyway, but "new york times" gets running count of this and estimating significant lead for hillary clinton of the people who voted up to this point, but nothing about that would change the earlier estimate of a 5 to 6-point clinton lead. host: talking about early voting, are we seeing impact from the recent devastating flooding in north carolina?
how is that impacting this election cycle? guest: there have been places where they have had to move polling locations because of the flooding. the voter registration deadline was extended in 35 counties due to flooding. i haven't looked closely at incoming county data to see if we have declines in the county. i wouldn't be surprised if we see that happen. host: if north carolina is going to turn one way or the other on election night wrshgs should viewers be watching early returns? what is early tell for where north carolina is going? guest: the big population centers are wake county, where raleigh is located and mecklenburg county. the clinton campaign is there. a lot of college educated people, who if they are republicans, and trump, republicans who live in the area are college educated, work nothing professional jobs, that
is where i would keep an eye out. host: you are keeping an eye on the senate race, as well, one of those closely watched races, senator burr trying to hold on to his seat against debra ross there. take us to the latest in the senate polling and what we know from that contest. guest: we have three competitive statewide races. presidential race competitive gubernatorial race and the burr-ross senate race. of the three republicans running in the three races burr is probably in better shape than any of the other two. but the polling has been razor thin probably too close to call at this point. burr has not been as active a campaigner as national campaigners would like to see. he didn't start campaigning until october. he has picked a quick fight with the raleigh news observer banning them, not telling them where campaign events are being
so they can't cover him. he is running a quick thoughted campaign and his supporters says he's always done that. republicans are nervous about how he's handling the campaign at this point. host: we talked to the hill newspaper earlier in the program about the down ballot impact from the recent hillary clinton e-mail investigation announcement from the f.b.i. on friday s. it having any impact in that north carolina race? guest: it is hard to tell. at this point more than any percent of people made up their mind who they are voting for, the e-mail story is not good for the clinton campaign, not a new piece of information for voters who care about these things. the news one way or the other for more than a year. so it's hard to imagine it changing minds of many voters. there could be late deciders who maybe republicans who go back to trump or undecided who go to him, but it is hard to imagine having a large effect at this
point given how much this has been a news leading up to now. host: before we let you go, give update on the governor's race, i know you mentioned it there for a minute, but what is the governor looking at, govern pat mccrory, what does he need to do to hold on to his seat next week? guest: it is tough. the hb2 the bathroom bill, has been controversial in the state. it hit the fan when a lot of basketball games were in north carolina and north carolina basketball bipartisan issue here. a lot of people were upset about that. something that helped the governor, the flooding earlier, by all accounts his administration has done excellent job responding to floods in eastern part of the state, allowing him to appear to be about politic necessary closing weeks of the campaign. their hope is to help shore up support in the eastern part of the state. host: jason roberts, unc,
appreciate you joining us on "washington journal." guest: thank you. host: if you are in the area the campaign bus will be outside the unc at chapel hill. thanks to our cable partners from time warner cable for hosting us while in raleigh. the visit is part of c-span battleground state tour during this final week of the election. open phones here on "washington journal." turning our phone lines over to you, our viewers to talk about public policy issue and campaign issues you want to discuss. suzanne in mineral virginia, line for republicans up first. good morning. caller: yes. i was just wondering since they made marijuana legal in the capital, why won't it be legal everywhere else? the government and the president and everybody is at, makes sense to me. thank you for taking my call. host: legalization of marijuana in washington, d.c.
marijuana on the legalization on the ballot in five states this election day. see if i can name them, arizona nevada, california, massachusetts and maine is where it is being voted on. we focused on that topic yesterday on the "washington journal," if you missed it. c-span.org, is where to check for that program. steve is up next, st. paul, minnesota. good morning. caller: good morning. when i ran for office twice, one for the alaska legislature and once for the local assembly, my handlers told me while i was going door to door, not to mention my opponent's name. i thought that was a mistake. i thought that -- kevin mier or
whatever, a lot of things my handlers told me i thought were counter intuitive and mostly took their advice they were experienced and i thought they knew more than i did. it was a great experience, i recommend it, i think people who have not considered running for office might want to do so. there are lots of things to think about before making that decision, but it is a great experience. host: did you win either time? caller: no. host: would you ever run again? caller: not now. host: are you still -- caller: i think i'm too old. host: are you still involved in civic issues in st. paul, minnesota? caller: yes. host: and what issue specifically in st. paul are close to your heart? caller: veterans affairs. i have a nephew who is a vietnam veteran with agent orange and
took me a long time to figure out how to navigate the va health system, but i'm really interested in homelessness in veterans working with friend in alaska, who is trying to build a village for veterans, a housing first project, so we just keep plugging away on it. host: thanks for the call from minnesota. sara up next newark, new jersey. open phones on the "washington journal." caller: good morning. i used to be a republican, so i changed to democrat. when you look at the way republicans nominee donald trump, the way he is talking about people, bullying people, you know, my children are so young that when they come back from school, they are complaining about donald trump.
and i don't see why america should take donald trump, or want him for president. i want my children to be well responsible, not like donald trump. i want them to know what donald trump is saying is not right. my children do agree because they have seen donald trump booed and bully on women. i don't want their president to be the president and when donald trump decide to win, i know a lot of other countries that are not going to respect america again f. america -- countries and not put a bully as a president, i think other countries will like disrespect america, but right now people respect america. i am voting for hillary, all my family, we are going to vote for hillary. we need hillary in the white house. we need a woman that can respect cause. we need a woman that when people
see them they will respect that president. host: all right. let's head to the line for republicans. orlando in valley, alabama. orlando, good morning. caller: yes, sir. we were talking about ms. clinton talks about children and doing things to help children. i think that is a wonderful thing, but we have a problem here. i was working back in the '80s and '90s and i'm 68 years old. i remember when clinton signed bills with china and the nafta bill and they sent people from china into our countries, the people had to get trained or they didn't get severance pay. all the people voting for hillary, they ought to ask the older people, older people are voting for trump they saw jobs ripped away, couldn't afford
college, they lost their homes, that is basically one reason we had to housing bubble, there were so many homes on the market because so many homes were repossessed. not from bad loans, but from people who couldn't get work anymore after the destroy of the workforce in the united states. host: orlando, the opinion page of "u.s.a. today" in today's paper, the editorial board of "u.s.a. today" with their memo to candidates telling them to stop bashing trade. they end their lead editorial by saying remorselessly rhetoric on the campaign trail, including trump's over the top attack on nafta, and clinton's flip-flop on tpp, appeals to voters, but does not reflect the reality that robust trade helps in innovation and ambitious nation like the united states, the opposing view in that column is written by senator sharon brown,
the democrat from ohio the headline on that piece, trade agreements sellout workers. take a look there today on that topic. host: jane maine independent. good morning, jane. caller: yes, i would like to know why c-span, "washington journal," doesn't have the news anymore in between the segments. host: what do you mean, jane? news updates from c-span radio? caller: no, in between every segment, you used to have news where the woman would come on and it showed her giving the news and it would be like two or three minutes and she would give the latest new necessary between every segment. all of a sudden that stopped and instead you have a lot of advertising about future c-span segments. why you stopped having that
news. host: c-span radio is still around, you can listen to c-span radio, all the news there, here on the "washington journal," as well, we try to give you as much news of the day as possible. check out our various platforms and of course c-span.org, as well. elaine is in california, a democrat. good morning. caller: i would like to know why the american people would vote for donald trump who has never paid taxes and how they're going to keep running the country? he doesn't pay his workers. what is the matter with all of us. i'm saddened by the fact that people are so unbelievable, they do not even think why i would like to know how anybody could vote for donald trump. host: elaine when you say people don't even think, is it a new phenomenon you are seeing, something have you seen in previous elections? worst today than in the past?
caller: i'm sorry. host: is people not thinking worse today than in the past? caller: yes. host: why do you think? caller: they don't think. they don't think. they are not aware what is going on. this man has never paid taxes, how is he going to run the country? if we all did that, how would you run the country. host: why do you think people aren't thinking as much in this election cycle than in the past? caller: they are not thinking, you are correct about that. they are just -- to the gentleman who said he lost his house, well, in california they lost their houses because they put down $1000 and then they didn't ever earn enough money to buy the house. host: okay. caller: and -- and when president obama took over we were in a recession here in california that the unemployment rate was 13%. we have come a long way from that. it is less than 5% now.
host: elaine in california bringing up donald trump's taxes the story, the lead story on front page of the "new york times" getting a lot of attention today. the story noting newly obtained documents show in early 1990s as he scrambled to stave financial ruin donald trump avoided reporting hundreds of millions of dollars in taxable income by using tax avoidance maneuver so legally dubious his own lawyers advised him i.r.s. would likely declare improper if he were audited. thanks for this maneuver outlawed by congress donald trump essentially potentially escaped paying tens of million necessary federal personal income taxes, the story noting tax experts said the maneuver trampled a core tenant of american tax policy by confirming enormous tax benefit on donald trump for losing vast amount of other people's money, money investors and banks entrusted to him to build a casino empire in atlantic city.
the story is in the "new york times," if you want to read on that. mary, new hartford, new york, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you today? i'm wonderful. very distressed. number one, hillary clinton should not be allowed to continue with this race. she is a criminal, but more important, if some horrible chance comes apart she does win this election, these people who are voting for her, do they realize she has an outstanding warrant from egypt, then she has to go to egypt to face criminal charges and they have been trying to extradite her for over a year now. so if she does become president, she has to face this and forget the country. let me take it a step further she has done nothing there is no county or anything in new
york in particular upstate new york, who is voting or wants her to win. the scam she pulled at hotel syracuse, when she was senator of new york state, she got $15 million from a business person in the middle east, i believe from pakistan. host: okay. on the latest on the f.b.i.'s investigation into hillary clinton's e-mails, here is a story from the "new york times" the analysis of clinton's e-mails had begun. the story noting the f.b.i. began loading trove of e-mail into a special computer program to allow the bureau to determine if they contained classified information, we'll look for further information about that story as it comes out between now and election day and this investigation perhaps going on past election day. we will continue to keep you updated. lisa, charlotte, north carolina,
democrat, go ahead. caller: yes. thank you so much for taking my call. i want to say several things about north carolina. first is our education, my question is, where is the money? in our state, pat mccrory cut 3000 jobs for teaching assistants assistants. we are in a point where we're very behind as compared to the nation as far as our education goes. while he has said that he has allowed the or provided for teachers to receive a raise, that really is misleading because on average there is no
especially new teachers earning 50,000 a year. decades ago when i was in school we were dealing with some same issues, students to share books because there is not enough textbooks, you know, other issues like smaller class sizes, which we don't currently have, so that students get more of an individualized education and just in general the number of teachers. we also have a lottery which is supposed to give us approximately a third of the income for our education. i don't understand why this is not one of our main topics in
our state. and i think for the most part it is uneducated people who don't really understand the importance of this. host: lisa in north carolina. as we've noted, competitive governor senate and presidential contest in north carolina. today the "new york times" put out a map from the 2012 election cycle showing where the zip codes were that voted for barack obama in blue, for mitt romney in red and yellow on the map showing the closer contest between -- closer zip code between the two and the state. that is what the map looked like in 2012. we'll get a different picture, snapshot of the north carolina map and all the states' maps in a week and see how those change after four years. john, englewood, new jersey, an independent. good morning. caller: good morning. good morning.
i have a comment. that is that i believe that donald trump was allowed to get this far because he is the only candidate that hillary clinton could beat. that is my comment. host: john, explain your comment a little bit more. he was allowed to get this far? are you -- we lost john. dwayne is in wisconsin, a democrat. go ahead. caller: hi. i just think this the republicans are selling out in voting for trump the ones that do vote for him. they run, they have always run holier than thou party, moral majority. they will never run under that platform again, you know, if any democrat had the history that trump has, oh, it would be crying bloody murder, you know. and as far as like the 12 women that come out against trump for
improper contact, you know, why don't they take polygraphs, i have not heard anybody say, let's take a polygraph, trump saying let's take a polygraph. i know it can't be used in court. release of income tax, he doesn't release income taxes, he says he could do anything to anyone and not lose votes. that works both ways, hillary has her base. he has his base f. hillary does something wrong, gosh, it is the end of the wrong, but trump can do all this stuff they would never allow before trump and it is the biggest hypocrites in the world and they know it, they know it f. this was one of theirs running, you know it is just they are so partisan that, is my comment. host: sandy on twitter with prediction about polling in the last week of the election. wait until polls are released tomorrow, i predict more tightening via trump speaking
of twitter and social media, the white house yesterday putting out a statement about their social media transition plan when it comes to the next president of the united states, whoever that may be. on twitter, the twitter handle potus, will be made available to the 45th president of the united states on 2017 the white house announced. the account will retain 11 million followers, but start with no tweets on the timeline. potus 44 maintained by will contain president obama's tweets and will be accessible to the public on twitter as archive of president obama's use of the account. the white house statement note og instagram and facebook, incoming white house will gain access to white house user name url, and retain the followers but start with no content on its timeline. in terms of tweets by the
president, twitter putting out yesterday some of the top tweets by president obama over the past eight years. here is a few of them. the most retweeted tweet from the president came after the supreme court gay marriage decision. today is a big step in march toward equality. he said that day, 26th of june, gay and lesbian couple consist marry just like anyone else and also in the top five was president obama's first tweet on the 18th, first tweet six years in he said, hello, hitter, it's barack obama, they are giving me my own account. and one more of the top five tweets the president's play list from last summer, been -- from this summer, been waiting to drop this play list, he wrote. what is everybody else listening to? steve ncharlotte, north carolina, an independent. steve, good morning. caller: hi.
i'm commenting about the huma abedin abedin anthony weiner computer there. serious breach in international security i'm not sure why no one has mentioned it. this is a classic spy honey trap and he is so right for this, i don't know why he wasn't being investigated before. thank you very much, i appreciate it. host: dean, detroit michigan, a democrat, up next in open phone. caller: good morning. i just want to make a few comments, because it is very hard for me to understand why working class and poor people would fall for the republican party. first, there is a scripture that says my people perish for a lack of knowledge. i just wanted to give a little history, the republicans. first of all it was republican president nixon who opened the door to china and we know what's happened since with them becoming a big, major player in
our economic situation. and then, another thing, unions are the ones who built middle class with bargaining for better working conditions, better wages and better benefits. republican president reagan accelerated the assault on unions and we have seen the decline of the middle class over the past 30 years. nafta, was a republican policy that was drafted under bush, one, who talked about one world order and nafta was part of the 1992 debate between clinton, perot and bush. finally, nafta was finalized including incentive for businesss to move overseas, under the republican leadership of newt gingrich. clinton signed it into law, but nafta was a republican policy. and under the republican
congress repeal of glaspiegel pushed by phil gra ham who at the economy collapse called the people affected by it whiners and president bush on one of your q&a segments either january 2015 or 2016 took responsibility for tarp, which was the program that bailed out the banks and did not hold them accountable for helping the people who were damaged by their policies. and the auto bail out was approved by democratic president obama, so everyone in ohio and michigan should be voting democratic. it was republican mitt romney who would have let the industry go bankrupt, which not only would have affected the auto industries, but their suppliers mom and pop stores, the food industry, the steel industry retail industry and republicans
have put their party ahead of the welfare of the american people. host: that is gene in the heart of the auto industry. angela is next. san pablo, california, an independent. good morning. caller: yes, my name is angela ezell, i want to talk about for a second the so-called locker room talk. as opposed to what hillary has done by lying, you know, by destroying documents. even a resident can't do that. it doesn't compare. my father was a drill sergeant for 22 years and i worked around a lot of men that talk just like he does and as opposed to her lies are nothing. host: dorie, florida, line for
republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. i i -- one, because of lack of knowledge and the other because of the bible. i don't think she's read the bible completely, and i was democratic and i feel shame i voted for obama and i sure not going to vote for hillary. i'm voting for trump. and he is more political than the other ones. i'm voting for him. people -- and targeting smart about what this lady did because the working people right now are not any better, at all. and went up on medicare, so this lady is nothing, but a liar, she has a lot of secrets, yes, come out. and the people start reading what is going on on her. i give trump more american and
he cares for this country and the people because he's not lying on people. you know he give up hope to this country and i'm very much afraid this lady wins, very much afraid this lady win because they are -- people they are naturally -- host: all right. we noted that c-span bus is going to be at unc chapel hill today from 10:30 to 12:30 if students want to go to the student union and check it out want to show viewers papers from the battleground state of north carolina. this is the winston salem journal with their lead story this morning focusing on forsythe county asking if it is the difference maker to the front page of the new necessary record from greensboro, headline
there, ballot box blahs, early voting turnout is down from 2012. the front page of the sanford herald tim kaine touts early voting the vice presidential candidate visiting north carolina at the wicker civic center in sanford. some of the front pages today as the c-span bus is focusing on the battleground state of north carolina for battleground series. mark is in california, an independent, good morning. caller: good morning. i read a story today on the internet and it had to do with trump has an internet, secret internet provider in his office hooked up to a bank in russia and i guess that would be one reason that he may not want to release his income taxes and i
just find it very curious that the -- it was actually taken down and then no one was put up after the "new york times" started doing the story about it. host: mark, i think the story you are referring to is the slate story, the headline on that story that came out yesterday was a trump server communicating with russia, question mark, this string a group of scientists set out to determine if hackers were interfering with trump campaign and found something they weren't expected, if you want to read the slate story. the trump campaign responded to that story, here is the article from the guardian newspaper, the trump campaign denies report of the trump organization tie to russian bank. denies slate report and said the activity on an organization
server indicated the report indicated that there was some sort of sustained relationship with russia, the trump campaign denied that. you can read that story in the guardian. tony, antioch, illinois, a republican, good morning. caller: good morning. good morning. well, this is a really complex, real conundrum, you want to call it. i'm a veteran of the fifth infantry. i was kind of leaning toward trump, but you know what, his initials dt stand for damion tarn and i wonder if he is the son. he is not preaching or promoting unity, it's just nato, and giving nuclear weapons to japan and germany. this is -- we're in big trouble
here unless we all -- we have the best twof choices right now it is hillary. you know what, god bless hillary, shield be the first president of the united states who is a woman and lead us out of the nightmare we're in. the kgb, putin was in eastern berlin and lo and behold, trump is communicating with him f. he get necessary oval office, nice for the kgb to put a bug in the house? host: to arline, san francisco, a democrat. good morning, arline. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. my -- i don't understand the big deal about hillary clinton's server. colin powelll used a personal server when he was with the state. i worked in department of public health we investigated complaints against nursing homes, i had a department of public health server at my office and then i had a personal server at home that dealt with
my personal life. so i don't understand what the big deal is about hillary clinton's persecuting her for her using a different server. and also, i already voted for hillary. thank you. host: steve in riverton, wyoming, republican. steve, go ahead. caller: yes, can you hear me? host: yes, sir. caller: my question is, if hillary does get elected with the e-mail things that are going on, will she be possibly persecuted and also, this is the first year i've really got into the election trail and done a lot of research on the internet and what are the best links culook at to find the truth? host: steve.
you decide your own news sources, i will point you to c-span.org and our program. what got you involve third degree year as opposed to previous years? i think we lost steve. last caller in today's "washington journal." that will do it for us, we'll send our viewers now to the national press club, where an event is going on talking about immunotherapy and cancer research event. we'll talk about the latest research and using the body's own immune system to treat cancer, that will get started in just a minute here and we'll see you back here tomorrow morning at seven a.m. eastern four a.m. pacific. >> good morning and welcome to the national press club, where news has happened and will happen for over 108 years.