CSPAN - Washington Journal 09/16/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 16, 2025 07:00-10:00 - CSPAN

02:59:55

Washington Journal 09/16/2025

Participants

Main

donald j trump

admin 10:16

john mcardle

cspan 37:28

Appearances

barack obama

d 01:34

jd vance

admin 01:27

kash patel

admin 02:41

pam bondi

admin 00:30

pat fallon

rep/r 01:54

spencer cox

01:16

Clips

boris epshteyn

00:24

glenn ivey

rep/d 00:06

julie kelly

00:22

kristen welker

nbc 00:04

mimi geerges

cspan 00:02

patrick s j carmack

00:05

sean spicer

00:14

Callers

penned patriot in vegas

callers 00:36

roy in north dakota

callers 00:08

tax slave in pennsylvania

callers 00:21

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Key issues impacting the U.S.-UK relationship.
		And we'll discuss the September 30th government funding deadline, political violence, and congressional news of the day with Wisconsin Democratic Congressman Mark Pocan, a member of the Appropriations Committee and the Progressive Caucus, and Republican Texas Congressman Pat Fallon, a member of the Armed Services and Oversight Committees.
		Washington Journal starts now.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
		It's Tuesday, September 16th, 2025.
		The House and Senate both meet at 10 a.m. Eastern, and we're with you until then on the Washington Journal.
		We begin with a discussion on social media and its impact on American culture.
		Over the weekend, Utah Governor Spencer Cox decried social media as a cancer that has gotten us addicted to outrage and hating each other.
		This morning, we want to know if your views on social media have been impacted by what you've seen online since last week's shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
		Let us know on phone lines split as usual by political party.
		Democrats, it's 202-748-8000.
		Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Independents, 202-748-8002.
		You can also send us a text.
		That number, 202-748-8003.
		And on social media, on X, it's at C-SPANWJ.
		And Facebook, it's facebook.com/slash C-SPAN.
		And a very good Tuesday morning.
		You can go ahead and start calling in.
		It was Sunday on Meet the Press that Utah Governor Spencer Cox talked about the cancer that social media is having on society.
		This is Spencer Cox.
spencer cox ▲ ● ▼		The damage that social media and the internet is doing to all of us, those dopamine hits, these companies, trillion-dollar market caps, the most powerful companies in the history of the world, have figured out how to hack our brains, get us addicted to outrage, which is the same type of dopamine, the same chemical that you get from taking fentanyl, get us addicted to outrage, and get us to hate each other.
		I'm seeing it in real time since the tragic death of Charlie Kirk.
		I'm seeing it in every corner of our society.
		The conflict entrepreneurs are taking advantage of us, and we are losing our agency.
		And we have to take that back.
		We have to turn it off.
		We have to get back to community caring about our neighbors, the things that make American great, serving each other, bettering ourselves, exercising, sleeping, all of those things that this takes away from us.
kristen welker ▲ ● ▼		Well, Governor, you referred to social media as a cancer on Friday.
unidentified		That's an incredibly strong word.
unidentified		Do you believe that social media played a direct role in this assassination?
spencer cox ▲ ● ▼		I believe that social media has played a direct role in every single assassination and assassination attempt that we have seen over the last five, six years.
		There is no question in my mind that cancer probably isn't a strong enough word.
		What we have done, especially to our kids, it took us a decade to realize how evil these algorithms are.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Spencer Cox on Meet the Press on Sunday, plenty of articles in today's papers about the impact of social media, and we'll get to those, but we mostly want to hear from you your reaction to those statements by Spencer Cox and also your views on social media.
		Have they changed since what you've seen over the past week since the assassination of Charlie Kirk?
		202-748-8000 is the number for Democrats to call.
		Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Independents, 202-748-8002.
		We'll start in New York.
		This is Rob, line for Democrats.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hey, dude.
		Thank you so much for C-SPAN.
		God bless.
		You know, I'm probably addicted to C-SPAN at this point.
		But, you know, the thing that scares me about what's happening on our Internet is that there's apparently reports that Russia and China are doing things on our Internet to influence our thinking and our behavior.
		So, you know, when you If you think about that, causing us to have even more emotional responses to one side or the other side.
		I got plenty of Republican friends.
		I have plenty of Republican friends that, and sometimes I think I have more Republican friends than I do Democrat for some reason.
		I don't know why that is.
		And I'm actually, you know, on many issues, I do side with Republicans.
		But one thing I never do is get into any heated sort of exchange with my friends that have, you know, the alternate view on the other side.
		Never.
		And I try to understand my friends when they have sometimes I have a few friends that are a little strict and stern in how they view some of what's going on.
		But, you know, we always come together as friends and put it aside.
		But I understand the positions and the arguments from the Republicans, some of which I agree with, some of which sometimes you find people are a little bit too have allegiance to a conspiracy theory.
		So what do you do then?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Rob, can I ask you?
		You mentioned the state-sponsored actions to fan the flames, and certainly a concern that has been brought up by political leaders, by national security officials, something that they've tracked over the years.
		So if it's a state-sponsored threat to the United States to try to divide us, should there be a state-sponsored response to that?
		Should the federal government do more to regulate what's said or the images that are seen on social media?
		Is it up to the government?
		Is it up to the social media companies?
		Is it up to individuals who can help here?
		Everybody, you know, but you'd be okay with a federal response to try to tamp down on some of this?
unidentified		You know, when you hear a wild theory that you know is not based on anything, when you can see on the internet, you get that gut feeling that this is either AI or somehow it's generated in such a way that you know it's not based in fact or reality.
		Yeah, I mean, I wish that our president would have passion over this type of thing, you know, when it comes to dealing with, you know, Russia and China.
		I think that he talks the talk, but he doesn't walk the walk.
		So there you go.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Rob in New York Line for Democrats.
		This is Bennett out of Severna Park, Maryland, Line for Republicans.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		Thank you so much for having me on.
		I wanted to talk about the Democratic Party's strategy of having a big tent of supporters.
		One thing that Democrats need to understand about conservatives is that there is an acceptance issue of a lot of the public behavior among Democrats.
		In the last few years, Republicans have been forced to accept things like dragged storybook hours at public libraries, indecent displays and parades.
		And now what we're learning about with this shooter is that he was engaging in anamorph, sexualized, fetish stuff.
		And just as political violence is a greater than 50% Democrat Party issue, I mean, there's really no question about it.
		It's between 50% and 100%, without a doubt.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So, Bennett, bring me to this.
unidentified		This behavior is absolutely greater than 50% on the Democratic Party as well.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Bring me to the social media question that we asked here.
		Have your views on social media, what we're seeing online, and how people engage with each other.
		Has it changed since Wednesday, one way or the other?
unidentified		I think people use social media in order to score points against each other.
		They don't talk with each other.
		I think people need to get off social media completely.
		It's completely toxic.
		And people can't control themselves.
		I think that people are replacing normal human interactions in the presence of humans with an online dialogue.
		And when you have such anonymity that you can hide behind screens, it gives you the perceived freedom to act in a way that you wouldn't normally do.
		And it's creating a toxic environment.
		And it really is a negative feedback loop that becomes exacerbated.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Bennett, would it surprise you that what you just said just then sounds a lot like what Hassan Piker, and he's a progressive liberal social media influencer.
		He's on Twitch and other channels.
		It sounds a lot like what he told Politico in his interview.
		So he was supposed to have a debate with Charlie Kirk in two weeks.
		He's debated Charlie Kirk in the past.
		Again, he's an influencer on the left.
		And Politico asked him a series of questions.
		They asked, how do you maintain your humanity, twitching and then absorbing images like the one you saw today, and just being on an increasingly digital world?
		This was his response.
		And it sounds a lot like what you just said.
		He said, my family, my friends, and going out in public, I think is the perfect antidote to the vicious nature of the internet.
		People become a lot more cruel under the guise of anonymity.
		There's a cliché like, oh, you wouldn't say that to my face, or you're a keyboard warrior.
		And in some respects, that's true.
		He goes on to say, I feel like a lot of people are far less vicious when they get to see the other person, when they get to be around the other person.
		And recently, before the internet, before the technological availabilities, that was the overwhelming majority of our interpersonal relationships.
		It was always in person.
		It was always face-to-face.
		And I think we've lost that.
		And that's how I try to keep myself as grounded as possible, which is ironic, of course, since the political violence such as this one also makes it harder for me to go out in public.
		But that's why I said I can't let fear dictate my life.
		Again, Hassan Piker, popular left streamer.
		What do you make of those comments and how similar it sounded to what you just said, Bennett?
unidentified		Oh, I would agree totally with what Hassan says.
		And, you know, I don't agree with what a lot he says, but he sounds like a very intelligent individual when it comes to that issue specifically.
		I think the question that America needs to be asking itself is what leads people to self-isolate behind a computer screen for significant periods of time and Allowing themselves to become immersed in dangerous,
		twisted content that I mean, when the framers talk about it, when they talked about the First Amendment, they did not talk about some of the things that people engage in today.
		There's been this evolution of thought, and I think the online community just creates an environment where these niche ideas can flourish and they become expanded upon in such extreme ways.
		And it's just sad to see.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Bennett, thanks for the call from Severna Park.
		This is Chris here in D.C., Independent Line.
		Chris, good morning.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		I've never been a fan of social media.
		I don't have any of the platforms.
		And I think, you know, I like that we're having a pretty civil discussion right now, even though there's some, you know, a political ideology going on and conversation.
		But, you know, I don't think the government should get involved.
		I mean, there's always this preaching of, you know, smaller government, smaller government.
		And we're seeing that that's actually going in the reverse direction right now as the government is getting involved in everything.
		But, you know, this can of worms has been open.
		And I don't see it going back because too many people feel it's a way not only to express their voice, but make a profit and push agendas at the same time.
		So I'm just not a fan.
		And the people at the top who run these companies definitely don't care what's happening at the bottom because they're super rich and they're getting rich.
		And, you know, although I don't agree with everything that the governor of Utah said, especially how, you know, he's releasing some of the facts and everything else, I think that his statement about social media is spot on and correct.
		And, you know, it's exploded since COVID.
		We're going on a very, very dark path because there's going to be, there's, what, probably millions of podcasters and influencers and everything out there who have very young, influential, able-to-be-influenced people, especially kids listening to them.
		And as the gentleman said before, absorbing content where they can be in the privacy of their home, they can be anywhere at any time and just flip on the phone and get the content that they want that might not be correct content.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Chris, let me ask you this.
		You said you don't think the government should be involved.
		I imagine that that's a free speech argument, right?
		That the government shouldn't define what can and can't be said.
		Is that sort of where you stand on that?
unidentified		Yes.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So what about this as a way for the government to get involved?
		Congressman Randy Fine, Florida Republican, has proposed legislation to shed light on the flow of money behind some of the ideas that spread on social media.
		This was his quote: I'm filing a bill requiring protesters and influencers online to disclose when they're being paid and by who.
		These are political actors, no different than political candidates who have to disclose where their support comes from.
		Would that be a good thing for influencers to have to disclose if they're being paid where that money has come from?
		Would that help at least shed some light on where these ideas might be coming from?
unidentified		I'm open to considering that only if the politicians would do it as well.
		So when they're campaigning or when they're pushing an agenda, well, let me just say, go back to the campaign thing.
		Ever since Citizens United, you know, corporations have exploded their input into financial coffers.
		And we, as the, where's the transparency?
		So I'm for transparency on a level, especially if it's transparency across the board.
		And if you're going to be pushing for internet companies or whatever to be disclosing their income or where, you know, where their money is coming from, I think that politicians should be obligated to do the same thing.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Chris, thanks for the call from DC.
		Let me head to Penfield, New York, Republican line.
		Stan, thanks for waiting.
unidentified		Yeah, thanks.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Yes, sir.
unidentified		Yeah.
		So, well, I guess, you know, in the society with our laws, you know, as far as free speech, capitalism, you know, I guess this is the risk we run.
		It had to happen, right?
		Because is it a risk worth running?
		No.
		No, because look what we're becoming, you know.
		The capitalism side, money, right?
		The freedom of speech side, you know, telephone tough guy.
		That's what we used to call him, you know, back in the days.
		I'm old school.
		We used to call him tough phone tough guy.
		You know, because you can hide, like the other guy said, you can hide.
		You know, you don't have to.
		You know, you're just free to say whatever you want to say, and nobody knows.
		Nobody knows who you are, where it's coming from.
		So, you know, telephone tough guy.
		So, but as far as trying to mitigate that, not in a society with free speech, you just can't do that.
		You know, as far as what you just said about the government regulating it, saying, you know, who's paying you, where is this coming from?
		That may be a good idea because that just may expose people and they'd be scared to get exposed.
		That's just the point.
		You know, everybody's tough for a tough guy.
		You know, as long as they have that anonymity, then, you know, they go and do that.
		But yeah, if you expose them, then it may curb it a little bit.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Stan in New York to social media, Facebook.
		This is Rebecca writing in: We've long known that humans have a problem with groupthink.
		The need to be part of a group is a big problem.
		Social media can provide you a group that seems to think like you.
		It can desensitize people.
		It can help normalize abnormal behavior.
		Ultimately, though, Rebecca says the problem seems to be an individual's blind faith in the information that they're receiving and then acting on it.
		That from our social media feed on Facebook.
		This is Derek in Oklahoma City, Independent.
		Derek, what's your view on social media in American society today?
unidentified		Honestly, I believe social media is affected the masses.
		Independent, as far as how they feel about situations, beyond, you know, the killing of Kirk, you know, you have the stuff that they put on there with the police.
		Do you have the stuff they put on there with what's going over in Israel?
		And then we got to go back to common sense.
		That's my personal opinion.
		We need to get back to common sense.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What does that mean, Derek?
		And it's helpful, by the way, if you turn your TV down.
		It's easier to hear you when you're calling in.
		What does that mean to go back to go back to common sense?
		How do we put the genie back in the bottle in a world of every kind of social media imaginable?
unidentified		I would say just like pick up a book and read.
unidentified		You know, pick up a book and read.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And it's Derek in Oklahoma City.
		It is just about 7:20 on the East Coast, having this conversation about social media in the wake of the killing of Charlie Kirk in the wake of comments by Utah Governor Spencer Cox over the weekend calling social media a cancer on American society.
		Phone lines for Democrats, Republicans, and Independents.
		As you're calling in, here's the schedule for today on Capitol Hill.
		The House is in at 10 a.m. Eastern.
		The Senate is in at 10 a.m. Eastern.
		Over on the other side of Pennsylvania Avenue at the White House, President Trump is set to leave about 8:30 a.m. Eastern for a state visit to London, to the United Kingdom.
		That happening over the course of the next couple days.
		Also, today on Capitol Hill, 9 a.m. Eastern, FBI Director Kash Patel is set to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
		We're going to be covering that over on C-SPAN 3.
		We'll be here on the Washington Journal until 10 a.m.
		So, plenty of options for you this morning, a busy morning here in Washington, D.C. Back to your phone calls.
		This question about social media.
		This is Lynette in Illinois.
		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Hello, good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
		I just want to say that when we say the government steps in, the government represents the people of the United States.
		So it's not the government stepping in.
		To me, it's we the people.
		And we do need some help and protection because these companies, the owners, they're so rich, they need some type of regulation and incentive to do the right thing to protect us.
		Because right now, there's no law that prevents them from being sued.
		And also, when they do something wrong, they try to just pay a few million dollars to each user, which amounts to about $100 per person.
		And that's really not an incentive to do the right thing.
		After they've done something wrong, they pay us a few dollars and then the case is closed and they go back to doing something else.
		But they are just so rich.
		And I think that it's because of greed.
		And just like in the 1800s, when the Civil War was starting, just like that same situation where the greedy wanted people to work for nothing as slaves, the government had to step in.
		So it's we the people that need to step in and protect ourselves.
		And then the last thing I want to say is I do respect that governor in Utah.
		I'm very thankful that he talked about getting along and taking a different approach.
		And I wish that or pray that our president will take an approach to reach out to the Democrats and be peaceful with them and not call us demons.
		And because I'm a Christian, so it offends me when he says I'm demonic or when they talk about Democrats being left and terrible.
		I feel like if the president wants the peace prize and he's helping in Europe and in Israel, why doesn't he help the United States get along and love one another and be peaceful?
		Why can't he reach out to the Democrats and why can't they try to get along?
		To me, that is what's worthy of being getting the peace prize.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's lying.
unidentified		And thank you for taking my call.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Lynette in Illinois.
		You mentioned President Trump.
		Yesterday in the Oval office, he was asked about whether social media companies bear some responsibility for the spread of hate online.
		He responded, as well as his attorney general.
unidentified		That causes you to radicalize online.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		By the way, when I say that, that's my opinion.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I think you as radicalized online based on what they're saying.
unidentified		Do social media companies bear any responsibility for that?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I'm going to have to ask, I don't know, I'd ask Pam that question.
		I don't know if you or Todd could give an answer to that.
		Somebody has to bear some responsibility.
pam bondi ▲ ● ▼		You know, and President Trump, I've always told parents, you've got to watch what your kids are doing on the internet, what they're doing online, what they're listening to, what they're reading.
		They're all online.
		They're all on their phones all the time.
		Parents have got to monitor that because this starts when you're young.
		This starts when you're young.
		When you listen to these groups, when you watch these shows, and parents have got to just be vigilant.
		So sure, that's part of it.
		And they're meeting kids online who they think are kids, and they can be anywhere in the world and talking to them.
		And yeah, they are being radicalized.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		You know, he went bad, and he just went bad very quickly, in a sense, because he sort of led a very normal life, a life of, you know, great education, schools, everything else.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		But somewhere along the line, something happened.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		President Trump and Pam Bodhi yesterday from the Oval Office, here's a few of the headlines from the front pages of today's papers on this topic.
		This is the Washington Times this morning.
		A dark online world of gaming and memes emerges behind Charlie Kirk's assassination.
		And this from the New York Times this morning.
		The White House threatens a crackdown on the far left in the wake of Kirk's death, claiming a network is behind the violence.
		Comments from Vice President JD Vance, senior White House advisor Stephen Miller yesterday saying that the White House vowing to do more to crack down on the far left.
		We'll talk more about that with some of our members of Congress who will be joining us later this morning.
		But for now, your phone calls asking you about social media and your views on it in the wake of Charlie Kirk's assassination.
		This is Tony in Detroit, Michigan.
		Good morning.
unidentified		I don't think that social media is to blame.
		I believe that people get stuck on one side and then they only listen to what fits their way of thinking.
		See, it's more than just one side to any equation.
		It's more than just the way you want it to be.
		There's also the truth.
		And when you have this mental gymnastics that goes on in this country, like Donald Trump and his team, they spew forth a lot of deception.
		And but then, like I said, it's a mental gymnastic.
		Next thing you know, they're demonizing the Democrats who are cowardice almost.
		Like if someone from the left opens their mouth, oh my God, it's the end of the world and they are demonic.
		But if the right, all day long, they spin forth these things, these evil suggestions and things, and then, oh, it's not them.
		So it's good to, social media is good overall, but people only want to hear what they want to hear when they want to hear it.
		And until Trump is put back into this, we're always going to have problems.
		And that's my take.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Tony in Michigan.
		Let me come back to Vice President JD Vance's comments yesterday, making his comments while he was hosting Charlie Kirk's podcast as a guest host on that program.
		This was the Vice President yesterday.
jd vance ▲ ● ▼		The last several days have been extremely hard for our country.
		They've been hard for me, hard for my family, hard for the countless people in this building who knew and loved Charlie Kirk.
		And of course, they've been hardest most of all for his darling wife, Erica, and their two beautiful children.
		The thing is, every single person in this building, we owe something to Charlie.
		He was a joyful warrior for our country.
		He loved America.
		He devoted himself tirelessly to making our country a better place.
		He was a critical part of getting Donald Trump elected as president, getting me elected as vice president.
		And so much of our success over the last seven months is due to his efforts, his staffing, his support, and his friendship.
		I don't think that I'm alone in saying that Charlie was the smartest political operative I ever met.
		Everyone knew him as this fearless debater, this guy who would take the conservative message into hostile places and inspire younger generations to have courage.
		One thing that's hit a lot of those young Americans over the last week was how Charlie was there for them when others were not.
		When they were afraid to speak their minds, when they were afraid of what a professor would say, when they were afraid that they would be shouted down by their peers, Charlie was there, showing them that they could be courageous and that they could be bold.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Vice President JD Vance hosting Charlie Kirk's podcast yesterday.
		Back to your phone calls.
		This is Alex in Delaware, Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, I used to tell a lot of people that the internet and computers was the worst thing ever invented.
		And now there's a lot of people that I know tell me that I was absolutely right.
		And I wish there was some kind of way that they could do away with the internet.
		This world would be a way better world because it's not causing anything but trouble to everybody in this world.
		And that's all I got to say.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Tyler, Texas, this is Carol, Line for Democrats.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		A couple of things.
		I believe there are pros and cons of social media without a doubt, especially as it relates to our young people.
		I'm a retired teacher, but I still substitute teach in our schools.
		And this is the first year that the state of Texas passed a law requiring our students to not have their cell phones out to keep their cell phones up.
		And from what I've seen so far, it's working.
		And of course, when they were out during the course of the class, they are still absorbing a lot of social media.
		As far as the government getting involved here in Texas, I think it was just last week, a memo came down from Texas Education Agency put out by our governor, Greg Abbott, To fire teachers who are on social media speaking negatively about Charlie Kirk,
		which is quite interesting to me that something like that is just now coming down surrounding a person of the character of a Charlie Kirk.
		But here again, the government is getting involved here, even to the extent of firing teachers.
		I think it said close to 800 have been, they've gone through their Facebook, social media, whatever records and looked at that, which is astonishing.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Caroline, I've heard that be referred to in the past couple days as a form of cancel culture.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Would you use that term?
unidentified		Yes, yes, because definitely it's going to make you think twice about what you is dealing with our freedom of speech is what it's dealing with, what you post on social media.
		Now, last thing I'll say is this regarding Governor Cox of Utah and him saying it's a cancer.
		Well, you know, as I said, there are pros and cons about social media.
		But what's interesting to me, speaking of social media, somebody posted on Facebook the pictures of 15 to 20 white young males who have engaged in shootings over the last, I don't know, year or so.
		I don't know the time period.
		But so if indeed social media is driving this, white males are not the only one on social media.
		It's black people, young black people, brown people.
		So I can't buy that that's what it's all about.
		There's something else going on.
		And I'll end by saying this.
		I agree with Jor Reed when she says there needs to be a larger conversation held on why are young white males so angry?
		And I don't think we can blame it all on social media for the reasons that I just stated.
		I think there's something else going on.
		And really, the only people who can hold that conversation would be the people on the right.
		There needs to be a conversation because something else is going on with our young white males.
		Thank you for taking my call.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Carol in Texas.
		This is Tom in Connecticut, Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yeah, Governor is a little off on his message.
		The cancer comes from the legacy media and the Democrat leadership who are at this point the left is the far left while the far right is not the right because the far left is the left because they are openly calling the Republicans Nazis, fascists.
		They're promoting this ultimatum for their listeners, people on the social media, to openly attack it and use violence.
		And that has to be resolved.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Tom, in your mind, whatever you see as the far left, how much of the left is the far left?
		Do you think the far left represents 50% of the people on the left, 5% of those on the left?
		And in your mind, as you envision it, what is the far left and how much of half of this country is the far left?
unidentified		A few months ago, I thought it was just a small percentage of the far left.
		But I'm starting to see that there is a really large population of leftists.
		They have the old Marxist-type mentality of the rich and the poor and the class.
		And it's the contagion from Europe has infected the United States with Marxism.
		And we still have a conversation.
		Victor David Hansen is an example of free speech that tells the story rather than promotes violence.
		And that's my opinion on the situation.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Tom in Connecticut.
		This is Vickia on Facebook.
		Social media is a tool and in the hands of people with bad intent.
		It's a weapon.
		I don't blame social media.
		I blame the person with bad intent.
		Everybody wants to skirt personal responsibility.
		If you get in a wreck, you don't blame the car.
		You blame the driver.
		This is Gilbert in Ohio, Independent.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hello.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Gilbert.
unidentified		Yeah.
		John, I talked to you about seven weeks ago.
		I'm glad I got you again.
		But, anyways, if you can help me out here, I do believe social media is a cancer.
		And Democrats and Republicans and the socialists or whoever, everybody, politician uses social media to try to emphasize their power.
		I like to say yesterday you guys were communicating in regards to the sensitivity.
		And the law in this country has been watered down so much that this country just don't take the law.
		The law is not done properly anymore.
		They've watered it down.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So what does that mean?
		What do you want to see, Gilbert?
		The law?
unidentified		For example, you bring up immigration a lot.
		My dad became a citizen in 1958.
		I had an uncle in 1951 that was allowed to join the army during the Korean War, and he got his citizenship papers.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So, Gilbert, bring it to excuses that bring it to social media.
unidentified		Follow the law.
		Follow the law.
		I'm talking to all Democrats, Republicans, whatever.
		Let's follow the law.
		Thank you.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Gilbert in Ohio to the Garden State.
		This is Mike.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		So I would first like to say that, you know, social media is largely a vehicle for misinformation and disinformation.
		I mean, we've lived with social media for over, you know, close to two decades now, and that seems like that's what the output is.
		I'm a software developer.
		What can be regulated is the algorithm that drives curated information by emotionally manipulating people.
		We could possibly write a regulation to have these companies disclose their algorithms.
		So we know people or society in general have a better understanding about how these algorithms work and how they're manipulating people.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So Mike, if we know that social media company X has an algorithm that really drives the most content intended to outrage you, you think people will walk away from that one and the market of social media will improve?
unidentified		I think so.
		I mean, the companies that generate these algorithms, right, they're working with neuroscientists, right, to elicit the response of always staying on their site, right?
		Because ultimately they're driving ads, right?
		So you have neuroscientists, mathematicians, and software developers building a system where a user gets on and they're emotionally pushing the buttons of the user.
		And sometimes it's rage, and sometimes it's desire, and sometimes it's whatever emotion you can feel just to keep you there.
		Right?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Mike, do you use any social media yourself?
unidentified		Yeah.
		You know, I started working as a software developer in 2000, right during the dot-com boom, working on internet systems.
		So I've been in the middle of it, you know, for my entire career.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What do you use on a day-to-day basis?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What do you want?
unidentified		So I've uninstalled my apps because I realize it's just too emotionally manipulating.
		So what do I use?
		I use TikTok.
		I use Facebook.
		I'm a Democrat, right?
		So I use Blue Sky.
		I use Reddit.
		And you can tell when you go to these systems.
		You go to the software and you're feeling fairly regulated.
		And then in less than five minutes, you're angry.
		So the software is really, really good at really emotionally manipulating people.
		And that's the real danger of social media.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Mike, thanks for the call from New Jersey.
		This is Gerard Baker in the pages of today's Wall Street Journal.
		Charlie Kirk's assassination unleashes the anti-social media.
		It's a lengthy column.
		Here's the final couple graphs.
		What hurts especially hard in the wake of such a terrible event is the grifting quality to all of this.
		The rapacious, unending hunt for clicks and likes and donations and descriptions kicks into a frenzy as a young man lies dying.
		This reflects a paradox of our newly democratized digital media, he writes.
		The overwhelming majority of Americans are decent people, appalled by violence, eager to respond with a constructive determination to do what we can to root it out.
		But the discourse is led by a small minority of opportunistic ghouls.
		Not to mention, I suspect, a significant number of foreign enemies successfully promoting bitter divisions among Americans.
		He goes on to say, a historian will object that alarms about the contemporary media landscape are ahistorical.
		The modern web is only the latest forum in which the appetite for the worst of humanity has played out.
		The Romans had their gladiatorial combats in packed arenas.
		The medieval British had their public disembowelings and executions.
		There was no social media to blame for what went on in the minds of Lee Harvey Oswald or Sirhan Sirhan.
		True, he says, but it isn't much of a consolation.
		The current public American temper is getting more and more like that of the French Revolution, the terror of the 1790s.
		A civilization at war with itself, ever more willing to justify internal violence.
		Gerard Baker in today's Wall Street Journal, just about 15 minutes left in this segment of the Washington Journal, asking you if your views on social media have changed in the past week in watching what has played out on social media in the wake of the death of Charlie Kirk.
		This is John, also New Jersey Independent.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, thanks for this opportunity.
		I view social media as an amplifier of a signal.
		It takes somebody's input and throws it across millions and millions of people, which was never possible.
		The signal is in an old form.
		I mean, it even has a Latin name, ad hominem.
		That is, it was a debating technique.
		Don't believe that guy.
		He's a bad person.
		So what he says can't be true.
		That has a Latin name.
		It's a debating technique.
		And now we've connected and human, people are, you know, most of us can't afford a lot of downside to our decisions.
		So, you know, we can be scared away by somebody telling us that something terrible will happen if we do this or that.
		Because, you know, downsides are scarier.
		They hurt us.
		They take away some, you know, we feel like they'll take away something from us or hurt us.
		So now you plug that signal into an amplifier called social media.
		And it's designed to get clicks and to amplify that hate.
		I think the solution's got to be training our kids on how to sort the baloney from the signal, get rid of the noise and try to find the signal, at least know that it's noise and that you got an amplifier here that's amplifying hate.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		John, if we're to train the kids to do that, do we know how to do that?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Can we sort the baloney right now?
unidentified		I think, you know, that's a good question.
		You know, it's the kind of thing that I think you got to get to kids in public schools, you know, like a certain kind of skepticism.
		How do you, how do you, I don't even know how do I find out what's really true after looking at social media.
		It's not easy, right?
		It's full of, you know, like the crazy stuff seems to outweigh the signal.
		The noise is louder than the signal.
		I don't know how to solve it except, you know, schools and parents got to teach their kids to be skeptical.
		That's about all I can say.
		I don't think there's an easier way out of it.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		John, thanks for the call.
		Richard, Minneapolis, Republican.
		Thank you for waiting.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		Good morning.
		You know, I want to make a few points here.
		You know, back in the 50s and 60s, we never had this.
		Sure, we had Harvey Oswald, but not to the point we have it today.
		You know, it's so messed up on social media.
		I got a friend that said China attacked one of our aircraft carriers.
		He got that from watching social media, and he believed it.
		You know, and then the reports say TikTok.
		In China, they have a much different look at TikTok because it's more educational.
		But here in the United States, people are looking at all sorts of weird things that have no value, no meaning, just something that's odd.
		And I want to make one analogy to the shooting here in Minneapolis.
		I'm a Republican, and I believe that they should limit these magazines to a few shots.
		You know, it's a duck-hunting country here.
		Very, very hunting country.
		And, you know, there's a law when you go out hunting ducks, you only get three shots.
		You got to put a plug in your shotgun.
		Yeah, I know the ducks aren't as valuable as humans, but geez, we give ducks a chance.
		If we had a limit on the magazines or the guy would have to pick up another gun, we'd maybe have a chance to jump him and take him down.
		So we give ducks a chance.
		Why don't we give humans a chance?
		You know?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		It's Richard in Minnesota.
		This is Terry in Missouri City, Texas, Line for Democrats.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, John.
		You got my name right this time.
		It seems like whenever I call in, you're on the air.
		So obviously you have topics that are of most interest to me.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		I have got to say, Mike from New Jersey, the software developer, he is 100% right.
		There is a documentary on Netflix that came out about four or five years ago that I would encourage the viewers to try to find.
		I'm not pumping Netflix.
		I'm pumping the documentary.
		It's called The Social Dilemma.
		And I don't know if you've had any of the folks on from the organization that created that, which is the Center for Humane Technology.
		The documentary will totally explain what is happening to us with social media and what it is doing.
		As Mike said, it is designed to keep us as users giving as much screen time as possible because the more we're on those platforms, the more advertising money they make from ads.
		One of the things that they talk about, and the people in the documentary are essentially the designers, the early designers for Facebook and Google and Pinterest and X.
		And they talk about some of the things that they, some of the psychological things that they did after receiving psychological training for how to basically jack our brains to make us want to constantly stay on those platforms.
		Things as simple as the thumbs up or thumbs down on Facebook.
		We want immediate gratification.
		When we make a comment, we want to see, excuse me, we want to see how many people like it, how many people dislike it, what's the reaction to it.
		And so you stay on that platform looking for that.
		And while you're there waiting to see how many comments or up likes or downside down thumbs you got, you're scrolling in other places on that platform.
		Things like if you haven't been on Facebook in a while or people you haven't necessarily interacted with for a while, you'll suddenly get a little pop-up.
		Ooh, you missed this story about John and what he's been doing lately.
		That's to get you signed back into Facebook and give them more screen time.
		So when that documentary first came out, it really, I was struck by just how addicted even I was to social media.
		It also has like a dramatic storyline through it to where it shows you how a young person can become radicalized by constantly being on social media and having, like Mike said, kind of beating the rage machine because the algorithm continually pushes the content that you've ever searched for.
		One last thing I'll say, or two last things actually.
		Social, the tech industry refers to people that are on those platforms as users.
		The other industry, the only other industry that refers to its customers as users is illegal drugs, people who are addicted to drugs.
		They're considered users too.
		Last thing is people need to think about why they are able to now use their Google emails to sign in to other platforms.
		Your information, it just gives the social media platforms another in to see what your interests are so those algorithms can continually push whatever you search for on Google, whatever you've done on Google.
		Now the social media platforms have that.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Terry, you recommended the Netflix documentary.
		Can I give you two recommendations?
		Two recent books we've covered on book TV.
		And you can watch the authors talk about these books.
		The first is like the button that changed the world.
		Martin Reeves explores the origin of the like button, certainly the topic that you brought up.
		And then one that we aired, I think, just this past weekend on Book TV, Lee Tillman's, If You Don't Like This, I Will Die, a social media influencer talking about being on that side of the like button.
		So two books that have gotten a lot of attention that we've covered on Book TV.
unidentified		Thank you so much.
unidentified		I will definitely check those out.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Devin is in Fort George, Maryland, Independent.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Honestly, I'm kind of struck by the last caller and how succinct they were and what they had to say.
		Kind of, I'm not sure, kind of put me into a, I'm just a little shocked.
		I agree with the sentiment.
		But anyway, my point being is that I think that a lot of times what happens is people take information out in the public eye and they assume that it's with good intentions.
		They assume that the person saying it has your best interest at heart.
		They're telling you because it matters to you because they care about you.
		But unfortunately, that's not actually the case.
		They want something, just like everyone wants something.
		Money, fame, glory, whatever.
		All that lame stuff that influences every person to act in any way.
		And I'm not trying to hand wave away human interaction as though it's some sort of boring and bland thing to be gone about.
		I guess I'm a little worked up because I haven't quite thought too critically about what I wanted to say.
		I'm just listening and I'm kind of being washed over with the ideas of the American population and I appreciate it.
		And being able to come to a place where there's a level of earnest that I haven't exactly been able to experience in social media.
		And I think that might be another Root to the problem with social media is nobody's out here trying to be earnest and honest and truthful and vulnerable with other people.
		Everyone just wants to make money or push accelerationism or make things worse or whatever.
		You know, I'm not sure exactly what every person's motivation might be, but I do see that people are typically a lot on the dumber side when it comes to information and they just assume that no one is being influenced by anybody else, that they're just saying things because they believe them at every time.
		On something like this, C-SPAN, you can probably assume, maybe, that I'm not being paid any money to say anything.
		I can't really see what I have to say as being particularly profitable, but I would like to say that I'm not being influenced by anybody and I feel as though that my thoughts are my own and I'm not being paid.
		And I think if I wanted to say something in particular, it would be that social media, if it needs to do anything, is that it needs to force people to make clear when they're being paid by someone to say something, be it government from some other country on the other side of the world, or whether or not it's a domestic company here in America.
		We have conservatives that go about their day pushing messages for money regularly, same way as we have Democrats and leftists and accelerationists on the far right side on the actual far right side.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That proposal that you make, I don't know if you heard earlier, we talked about it.
		Congressman Randy Fine, a Florida Republican, has legislation that would do that for social media influencers, for protesters, and others, but to disclose if they're being paid for content.
		So that's something that he had talked about, legislation he's proposing.
		Appreciate the call from Maryland.
		Just a couple minutes left.
		I did want to note two more columnists, younger columnists for USA Today, Sarah Pequino and Dace POTUS, joined together to write a column today.
		The headline, After Kirk Assassination, Gen Z is watching.
		This is what they write in part from that column.
		The video of the shooting was nothing short of horrific.
		It was also inescapable.
		It quickly made the rounds on social media, particularly on X, as people found out about the event.
		The video isn't the first time that we've witnessed someone's death proliferating online.
		This occurred in 2020 when George Floyd was killed by police officers in Minneapolis.
		It has happened regularly for the past two years as both the Israel-Hamas war and the war in Ukraine have taken thousands of lives.
		At a certain point, we're becoming desensitized to suffering.
		While one could argue that these videos and images are important for understanding the gravity of these situations, they write, it's also worth considering what it does to us mentally to be inundated with the trauma of others.
		When we share these videos, we reduce a person's life to the act of dying, denying them recognition of their full humanity.
		We allow them to become talking points in our never-ending discourse instead of seeing them as individuals with the capacity to love and be loved.
		Individually, we must ask ourselves what good comes from sharing these videos.
		Continuous exposure to the worst parts of human nature cannot be good for our mental health.
		Social media companies, they write, also need to do their part by at least providing a warning label to keep videos like the one of Kirk's death from just automatically playing online.
		Take a couple more calls here.
		This is Michael in New Jersey.
		Democrat, go ahead.
unidentified		Okay, I want to make a couple of points real quick.
		First of all, even though I'm a Democrat, I support the Utah governor's comments.
		Now, I was, I'm prior to government and military, and you know what?
		I don't play social media.
		I don't do any kind of social media platform at all.
		And my life is very simple.
		I keep all that garbage out of my life.
		I really do.
		I just watch the news.
		I don't even, I may do YouTube.
		So my life is really simple without any social media, and it's really hurting our children.
		It really is.
		It's influencing them to do things like flash mobs and crime.
		It is really silly and is detrimental for our children.
		Second point is: Charlie Kirk was a good guy, but I've watched some of his YouTube videos.
		This guy didn't even have a college degree.
		And he went on these campuses, literally, and I don't know why the colleges even allowed it.
		He challenged these kids on opinions, on things, like he was entitled to do that.
		Okay?
		So I think part of the thing is that he brought it upon himself.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		All right, that's Michael in New Jersey.
		This is Ernie in Pennsylvania Independent.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, John.
		It looks like I'm the last one here.
		And the one aspect of censorship is you limit the time that somebody has to talk.
		Just two things here.
		Social media is a tool of the CIA.
		This was written in an article July 11th, 2011 by Money Watch.
		And ex-formal CIA director William Casey said, we know that our disinformation campaign is working when American public believes everything that is false.
		And people got to realize these social media, Facebook, Twitter, Google, their purpose is dual.
		Dual purpose.
		What is it?
		For them, the leaders and the rulers to disseminate what they want the public to jump on.
		And number two, they spy on your comments, your relationships, and all that.
		So we're in a matrix, and people are trying to realize what the truth is.
		And one last observation: how could you have a major crime scene, Charlie Turk, and then have everything picked up immediately?
		Nothing was left there for forensics, and nothing was there to collect any evidence.
		It was scooped up by people that most of them were hammers, and they picked them up.
		I mean, even ambulance services won't pick up a body.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		All right, that's Ernie in Pennsylvania, our last caller in this segment of the Washington Journal.
		Stick around, more to talk about this morning.
		Coming up in about a half an hour, Democrat Mark Pocan of Wisconsin joins us to talk about the upcoming government funding deadline.
		But first, after the break, it's Phil Dickinson of the Atlanta Council to preview President Trump's state visit to the United Kingdom.
		That begins today, and we'll have that conversation right after the break.
unidentified		High school students join C-SPAN as we celebrate America's 250th anniversary during our 2026 C-SPAN Student Cam Video Documentary Competition.
		This year's theme is exploring the American story through the Declaration of Independence.
		We're asking students to create a five to six minute documentary that answers one of two questions.
		What's the Declaration's influence on a key moment from America's 250-year history?
		Or how have its values touched on a contemporary issue that's impacting you or your community?
		We encourage all students to participate, regardless of prior filmmaking experience.
		Consider interviewing topical experts and explore a variety of viewpoints around your chosen issue.
		Students should also include clips of related C-SPAN footage, which are easy to download on our website, studentcam.org.
		C-SPAN Student Cam Competition awards $100,000 in total cash prizes to students and teachers and $5,000 for the grand prize winner.
		Entries must be received before January 20th, 2026.
		For competition rules, tips, or just how to get started, visit our website at studentcam.org.
		And past president.
		Why are you doing this?
		This is outrageous.
		This is a kangaroo quarter.
		This fall, C-SPAN presents a rare moment of unity.
		Ceasefire, where the shouting stops and the conversation begins.
		Join Political Playbook Chief Correspondent and White House Bureau Chief Dasha Burns as host of Ceasefire, bringing two leaders from opposite sides of the aisle into a dialogue to find common ground.
		Ceasefire this fall on the network that doesn't take sides, only on C-SPAN.
		Washington Journal continues.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		The Atlanta Council's Phil Dickinson joins us now to preview President Trump's state visit to the United Kingdom this week.
		And it's actually President Trump's second state visit, dating back to his first term this time, though, with a different monarch.
		Phil Dickinson, how unusual is it for one head of state to have two state visits?
unidentified		It's very unusual, unprecedented, in fact.
		I think this is one occasion where it's certainly fair to use that term.
		It's only the fourth state visit by a U.S. president, and for two of those to be President Trump, that says something about just how important and significant that is, and just how eager the British government is to invest early and build good relationships with this administration.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You can't drop a history nugget without telling us the other two.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Who are the other two presidents by state visits?
unidentified		President Bush in 2003 and President Obama in 2011.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		How did this one in 2025 come about?
unidentified		So when the Prime Minister came and made his first visit to the White House in February earlier this year, in fact, it was the day immediately before the Oval Office meeting that President Trump had with President Zelensky.
		I think Keir Stamer would say that his Oval Office meeting went a lot better.
		There was a lot more bonhami and friendliness.
		And the first sort of flourish that the Prime Minister did at the start of that was to pull out the letter from the King inviting the President to this state visit.
		I think as soon as the election result was clear, number 10 in London would have been figuring out how best to build good relationships with President Trump, knowing that Keistama, the Prime Minister, is not necessarily cut from the same political cloth as the president.
		You know, he's more of a buttoned-up lefty London lawyer type, which doesn't necessarily scan as very MAGA, but the Prime Minister has really worked hard to build that relationship with President Trump, and this is kind of the icing on the cake of all of that work.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So what's on the agenda?
unidentified		Well, state visits are kind of in two parts.
		The president will arrive later today, but Wednesday is the day for all of the royal pageantry where he'll be greeted by the king, all of the pomp and ceremony, the sort of inspecting of the troops, state banquet, white ties, all the great historical, fancy things that you associate with a state visit.
		And then on Thursday, it will be government business, you know, a UK-US bilateral government summit held at Checkers, which is the Prime Minister's country residence.
		So on the agenda there will be on the bilateral side, the trade relationship, trying to pin down some of the details of the trade agreement that was struck earlier this year.
		And they'll be looking to have some big investment announcements, some big ticket wins that both sides can sort of celebrate.
		And then, of course, there'll be the big foreign policy questions, which for the Prime Minister, first and foremost, is Ukraine, US support for NATO, and what the US presence in Europe looks like going forward.
		And also Gaza as well, to see where they might be able to lean on the administration to put pressure on Prime Minister Netanyahu in a helpful way.
		It's a very tricky subject for the Prime Minister domestically.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What is a successful state visit look like by the end of this visit for Kier Starmer?
unidentified		I think they'll be holding their breath until the press conference happens.
		So that will be taking place on Thursday.
		And as you know, there's a lot of unpredictability around press conferences with President Trump.
		But he'll be hoping really that the investment in all of the pageantry and the respect paid to President Trump will pay off there.
		He'll have nothing but good words to say about the UK.
		And then they will be able to show some to the domestic audience in the UK some tangible wins, either a sort of a cutting of tariffs on steel and aluminum exports to the United States, new agreements around tech, around civil nuclear, things like that.
		So a mixture of the personality and the conviviality of the visit, if you will, and the substance of getting some agreements across the line.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What's more important to Keir Starmer right now, those trade agreements, or the bigger picture, foreign policy, Ukraine, Israel and Gaza?
unidentified		That's a great question.
		The Prime Minister right now, I think it's fair to say, is going through a difficult moment in his premiership.
		He's been in power for a little over a year and his poll numbers have been suffering and the challenges on the right in British politics are seemingly ascendant.
		And he's had to deal with a couple of issues recently.
		He's had to lose his Deputy Prime Minister and the Ambassador to the United States.
		Just in the last few weeks, those have both happened.
		So really, success for him is about getting his premiership back onto an even keel, is about getting the public narrative around him as Prime Minister and around how this government is performing on a positive trajectory.
		I think there is a lot of a general sense that he has handled the relationship with the United States well so far, that he has shown great leadership on issues like Ukraine.
		So delivering on the domestic political agenda is really first and foremost.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And it might be helpful to remind people why he lost his US ambassador.
unidentified		Yes.
unidentified		So there were some, he had links with Jeffrey Epstein and recently emails came out that showed that he was encouraging Jeffrey Epstein to fight the legal charges when he was first prosecuted for child sex crimes in 2008.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Phil Dickinson is our guest of the Atlantic Council, a deputy director of the Transatlantic Security Initiative.
		They're taking your questions and calls ahead of this very big state visit taking place over the course of the next couple of days in the United Kingdom.
		President Trump is expected, at least scheduled, to leave the White House in about 20 minutes to head to Andrews Air Force Base to head off for that visit.
		We'll see if it's on time.
		But for your questions and comments and what it all means for the special relationship, now would be a good time to call in.
		Democrats 202-748-8000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		Independents 202-748-8002.
		Phil Dickinson, as folks are calling in, go to the pomp and circumstance side of this.
		This is happening at Windsor Castle.
unidentified		That's right.
		Why?
		Logistically, practically, Buckingham Palace is undergoing renovations at the moment.
		And also, Parliament is in recess.
		Perhaps you could say that that's not necessarily accidental.
		There will be a lot of protesters in central London, and the government knows that the President doesn't want to have to be, you know, to scan and see protesters in earshot and in his eye-line.
		So I think this is a useful way for the government to kind of manage that dynamic without shutting down people's right to protest, of course.
		And Windsor Castle is a favourite of the King.
		It was a favourite of the late Queen and is a glorious venue in its own right.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Well, for Americans who might think one castle is kind of like the next, what is the history of Windsor Castle versus Buckingham Palace?
unidentified		So Windsor Castle is just outside of London.
		It's near Heathrow Airport.
		It is an ancient castle.
		It sits on the top of the hill in the town of Windsor.
		And the most recent news around it was in 1992 when there was a major fire there that destroyed a lot of historical artefacts and treasures, which was one of the reasons why the Queen described that year as an annus horribilis for her.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		For President Trump, what is the relationship to King Charles?
		How far does that go back?
		And what's sort of the role of the royal family, sort of the soft power side of this whole visit?
unidentified		Yeah, well, King Charles was very present and active in the last state visit in 2019.
		I know that he had extensive conversations with the President back then.
		And the King is known to be a sort of a strong advocate for his personal issues and core beliefs, one of which is around environmental protection and stewardship of the natural world.
		So I know that he will want to make some points there around sustainability and some of his initiatives there.
		He's also a very strong advocate for Ukraine.
		And again, in February, after that Oval Office meeting, he very publicly and overtly welcomed President Zelensky, you know, in President Zelensky's combat fatigues, et cetera, to the UK to the palace.
		And so having a head of state who is devoid of politics, but can help sort of subtly nudge things along on some of those issues is something of a secret weapon of the British state.
		And it's one that the government needs to deploy somewhat sparingly to obviously protect the constitutional role of the monarch.
		But at specific times and moments, it can be very effective.
		And I think given President Trump's known affinity for the king and for the royal family, et cetera, this is one instance where the government thinks, okay, let's deploy the royals.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Phil Dickinson is our guest of the Atlantic Council taking your calls and your questions.
		Carl is out of Louisville, Kentucky, line for Democrats.
		Carl, go ahead.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		Yeah, this is an interesting timing for this visit.
		I was listening to the BBC last night, and they had a story, which is my go-to, and I can't sleep.
		But they had a story about France and the troubles the government's having there, and that there might be a possible something like what Britain did with the Brexit.
		Is this kind of a rallying of the troops, you think?
patrick s j carmack ▲ ● ▼		What's your sense of that, you know, with our allies?
unidentified		But that story just kind of made me think, I wonder what this has to do with, if this has anything to do with his visit.
		Thank you.
		Thanks, Carl.
		Well, thank you very much for the call.
		President Macron was the last head of state to make a state visit to the UK, and that was earlier this year.
		And I think that there is something that what you've hit upon is a unifying theme of some of the big political leaders in Europe right now, which is that domestically they are struggling a lot.
		Their polling is very bad.
		President Macron, in particular, obviously there has been a vote of no confidence in the prime minister in France, so he's just lost his prime minister.
		There's a lot of domestic political turbulence.
		So projecting confidence and statesmanship is really important for the French president, for the German Chancellor, for the British Prime Minister right now when they are dealing with difficult domestic political issues.
		As far as President Trump is concerned, I think he's a lot less concerned with the domestic political struggles of his French, British, German counterparts, etc.
		And here it's really about him displaying his kind of statesman-like leadership on the world stage and demonstrating that he is having results that reflect the agenda on which he was elected.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And we should note that President Trump won't be alone on this visit.
		Obviously, the First Lady will be joining him.
		As the Washington Times points out, the U.S. delegation also set to include the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, the Secretary of Treasury, Scott Bassent, the British Ambassador, Warren Stevens, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles expected to be part of this trip as well.
		MLB on X writes in, keep in mind that the current occupant of the Oval Office operates a business in Britain, so he can't afford to offend them too much.
		The Trump organization's holdings and businesses, how does it relate to this trip and what's happening right now?
unidentified		It's pretty unrelated.
		He has golf courses in Scotland, which is where he was in the summer, and he signed various deals with the European Union, for instance, whilst he was at his Turnbury golf course in Scotland.
		But no, his own personal political, his own personal business interests and dealings aren't really part of the bilateral agenda on this trip.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		James Madison, Mississippi Republican, you are next.
unidentified		Hello.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, James.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You're on with Phil Dickinson.
unidentified		Hello.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		I tell you what, James, why don't you give us a call back?
		Sounds like you're not hearing us.
		The Wall Street Journal today, their story on this trip, The King Rolls Out The Red Carpet is the headline.
		You can see the police officer setting up outside of Windsor Castle.
		And they focus on the soft power aspect of this, the role of the monarchy here, that first part of this trip.
		What is the Donald Trump's relationship?
		Not just what you talked about King Charles already, but the rest of the royal family.
		How do they view Donald Trump?
unidentified		The royal family will be very tight-lipped about how they view anybody in world politics.
unidentified		So I'm not going to pretend that I have any inside line on how they feel personally about Donald Trump.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Are they allowed to have an opinion?
unidentified		Privately, they will have an opinion, but constitutionally, no.
		They're there as kind of representatives of the British state.
		They're there as partners of the Prime Minister and the British government.
		So on a personal level, you know, they may well privately behind closed doors.
		I'm sure people have seen the Crown, etc.
		And, you know, people have tried to sort of read the tea leaves as to who was the Queen's favourite Prime Minister and all of that kind of thing.
		But constitutionally, no, they're not.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		How much say does the royal family get if Keir Starmer says, listen, this state visit is very important right now.
		There's a lot of big domestic and foreign issues that we need to get settled and it would be very helpful for us to roll out the red carpet.
		Can they say no?
unidentified		They can say no, but it would be, you know, unusual for them to say no on such a key big ticket priority ask of the Prime Minister.
		If he goes around and says, I want to have 20 state visits a year and let's tick off every country that we have tricky bilateral issues to negotiate with, they will push back.
		I think both sides know where the lines are.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Phil Dickinson, our guest for the next few minutes, taking your phone calls.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		If you want to keep calling in on phone lines for Democrats, Republicans and Independents, what did you do before you went to the Atlantic Council?
unidentified		So I was a career diplomat with the British Foreign Commonwealth Office.
		I was here in Washington for five years in our UK-US bilateral political team.
		And prior to that, you know, I'd served postings around the world.
		I was in Sri Lanka immediately prior to coming to the United States, UK mission to the UN, Beijing, and of course some jobs in London in government there.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Did you ever get to go to a state dinner at the White House?
unidentified		I did not.
		I went to a lot of White House functions and parties, but not a state dinner.
		No, I couldn't quite get that high.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Is it fair to call them equivalent, a state visit to the United Kingdom and a state dinner at the White House, or is one bigger than the other?
unidentified		Well, I'm going to say that the UK one is bigger, obviously.
		The history, the scale, the sort of the royal pageantry of it, I think people in the UK take good pride in that.
		And you can't sort of magic up a thousand years of history and tradition out of thin air.
		It's something that is built for a long, long time.
		But the White House events are certainly very grand and spectacular, so I'm told, because obviously I've never been to one myself, but I've been involved in a lot of prime ministerial visits to the White House, that's for certain.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Which prime ministers did you work with?
unidentified		Most recently, Rishi Sunak, when he was here in 2023.
		Yes, when he was here to see President Biden again, Ukraine, really key issue for him.
		But I think it's fair to say that we've had quite a few prime ministers in recent years, so I think Keir Starmer should be in office for some time.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Which prime minister, US-President Pering, in your mind, had the best working relationship?
unidentified		In my lifetime and sort of personal memory, I would probably say Tony Blair had great relationships both with President Clinton and President Bush in very different contexts.
		Tony Blair and Bill Clinton were very sort of ideologically aligned and simpatico.
		But with when President Bush came to power, obviously 9-11 happened shortly after, and Tony Blair was really his strongest and staunchest supporter on the world stage.
		And they both kind of went through the experience of the Iraq war together.
		Tony Blair was really sort of wedded to President Bush from that point on.
		And then historically, I think people would also point out to President Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, who had a particularly closely aligned worldview and close working relationship together, you know, as both as cold warriors.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		This is Chris in Sykesville, Maryland, Republican line.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hey, how's it going, guys?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Doing well.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What's your question or comment for Phil Dickinson?
unidentified		Well, my comment, I guess, now is that I completely agree with, well, him talking about Tony Blair and Bush.
		I'm only 33, but I remember those days, and that's what stuck out to me as soon as you guys were talking about it.
		But I kind of jumped in at the wrong time in the conversation, so I apologize.
		I don't think that I'm going to be equipped to make an intelligent comment.
		So I'll get out of here, but my last name's Roberts, and I'm British.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Chris, who is British.
		This is today's Politico, a different issue talking about the United Kingdom, though.
		And it relates to our previous conversation and the topic of most of our conversations in recent days.
		The headline, Turning Point failed in the United Kingdom, but Charlie Kirk didn't.
		The late conservative activist has amassed a surprising following across the Atlantic.
		Can you comment on that, Charlie Kirk's influence in your home country?
unidentified		I don't know about his personal influence, but certainly the kind of the brand of politics that he represented has a growing following in the UK.
		And I think that there is, you know, there are similarities in a lot of the political trends that we see across the Western world.
		The last time the UK and US had sort of very kind of mirrored political moments like that was in 2016 with the Brexit referendum shortly followed by President Trump's election.
		And a lot of the similar sort of trends and themes that you have here in the United States find kind of similar, they're rhyming to a certain degree with politics in the UK.
		Obviously, it plays out quite differently, but there is a growing kind of sense that particularly young men feel alienated from the political process in the UK.
		And the Reform Party, which is, you know, for a political system that has two very stable and historic main parties, Reform is a new party that much more closely sort of reflects the political sort of themes and style that you see in Donald Trump's Republican Party.
		And that is, you know, they are come from nowhere, really, but the political leader there, Nigel Farage, is doing well in the polls.
		And I think that is a lot of the domestic political pressure that Kia Stama is sensitive to.
		And so, again, coming back to the state visit, that's a big part of the dynamic for why making this relationship with Donald Trump work is really important for him, both in the substance but also in kind of effectively responding to criticisms he's got domestically from the right.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Aubrey on X wants us to come back to the Epstein files.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Mr. Dickinson, isn't it true that even people in the United Kingdom want to know where the Epstein files are?
unidentified		It's a story that is, you know, for obvious reasons, really shocks and appalls people in the United Kingdom as well as in the United States.
		And the history of Prince Andrew's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is something that people are very aware of.
		It's very controversial and sensitive in the UK.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Might be helpful to remind people about that story, Prince Andrew.
unidentified		Yeah, so he was a longtime associate and friend of Jeffrey Epstein.
unidentified		And the Queen, she removed him from his royal duties in response to the allegations and scandal and controversy around his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Time for just maybe one or two more calls.
		This is Racine, Wisconsin.
		Chester, Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		How are you?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Doing well.
unidentified		What's your question or comment?
		Since I had a question on the Kurt question that you just asked about Charlie Kirk, and he said there's a slight following.
		Does that mean that the young white students and people in his country kind of have the look the view on people of color and the disenfranchise that Charlie Kirk did?
		Very good question, very difficult question.
		You know, the history of racial relations in the UK is indeed very sort of sensitive and difficult one.
		The Black Lives Matter protests when they took off in the United States in 2020, they really resonated in the UK as well.
		And so where you see a lot of the polemic in US politics, US politics and culture and dialogue has a real strength in the UK.
		And so where you see one phenomenon emerge in the US, it tends to be not long until you see similar phenomenons appearing in the UK as well.
		And so I certainly wouldn't kind of portray all young people in the UK as having this view or that view, but I think you see a lot of similar kind of political dynamics amongst different demographics in the UK.
		A very complex and difficult subject, but something certainly to keep watching.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So here's another complex and difficult subject for our final two minutes.
		Fantastic.
		We spent the first hour of our program today talking about social media and has people's opinions changed on social media in the wake of what we've seen over the course of the last week.
		In general, how does the United Kingdom treat social media differently than the United States?
		Are there different safeguards in place?
		And do you run into these freedom of speech issues that we run into here?
unidentified		The freedom of speech issues have been very sort of front and center.
		A lot of people in the American right have criticized the UK and argued that freedom of speech is under attack in the UK.
		I personally would disagree with that.
		We don't have the same, we don't have a constitution in the UK, so we don't have specific articles that protect freedom of speech in that kind of way.
		So the government takes a slightly more nuanced view, I think, in the UK on freedom of speech and how people can be held account for hate speech and hate crimes and things like that.
		The government has more that it can do in that respect.
		But the government is putting forward new online harms, online safety and security legislation to try and protect young people in particular from being exposed to graphic content online.
		And that has kind of been folded into some of the debate about where the lines are on freedom of speech in the UK.
		So whilst we don't have the constitutional definitions, the political debate around the issues is certainly very live in the UK.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Certainly a topic that we should follow up on down the road and talk about those comparisons.
		For now, Phil Dickinson with the Atlantic Council, AtlanticCouncil.org is where you can go to see his work.
		We appreciate your time.
		We'll let you get to your day.
unidentified		Thank you very much.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		After the break, a conversation with two lawmakers on both sides of the aisle about the upcoming government funding deadline.
		First, it's Congressman Mark Pocan of Wisconsin, a Democrat member of the Appropriations Committee.
		And later at 9:30 a.m. Eastern, we'll be joined by Republican Pat Fallon of Texas.
		Stick around.
		We'll be right back.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Congressman Cohen, welcome to the program.
unidentified		Thank you.
barack obama ▲ ● ▼		It's good C-SPAN still funded by the government.
barack obama ▲ ● ▼		It is not funded by the government.
unidentified		What do you mean?
		Well, I thought you didn't get any money from the government at all.
		No, not at all.
		And we never have.
barack obama ▲ ● ▼		What a disappointment to Elon Musk.
unidentified		I'm sure he liked to doge to you.
barack obama ▲ ● ▼		Thanks for having me.
barack obama ▲ ● ▼		Love C-SPAN.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Appreciate the opportunity to come out.
glenn ivey ▲ ● ▼		You know, I wish we could have a thousand C-SPANs across the media spectrum.
glenn ivey ▲ ● ▼		Unfortunately, we don't.
unidentified		I think C-SPAN is a huge, huge asset to America.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Not just the coverage that we get of both chambers on one and two, but programs like Washington Journal that allow policymakers, lawmakers, personalities to come on and have this question time during Washington Journal.
unidentified		So it's a huge benefit.
		I hope that all these streaming services carry C-SPAN as well because it's an important service to the American people.
		I'm actually thrilled that this time in Washington Journal, I'm getting a lot of really substantive questions from across the political aisle.
		Our country would be a better place if every American just watched one hour a week.
		They could pick one, two, or three, just one hour a week, and we'd all be a much better country.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So thank you for your service.
unidentified		Get C-SPAN wherever you are with C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app that puts you at the center of democracy, live and on demand.
		Keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the U.S. Congress, White House events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips.
		Catch the latest episodes of Washington Journal.
		Find scheduling information for C-SPAN's TV and radio networks, plus a variety of compelling podcasts.
		The C-SPAN Now app is available at the Apple Store and Google Play.
		Download it for free today.
		C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
		Washington Journal continues.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Wisconsin Democrat Congressman Mark Pocan joins us now from Capitol Hill.
		He's the chair emeritus of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
		And Congressman, I want to start in the wake of last week's shooting of Charlie Kirk.
		How would you describe the political moment we find ourselves in as a country right now?
unidentified		Scary, bluntly.
		I think, you know, the idea that political speech or political actions that somehow can be find violence in response to it is really scary.
		And the fact that someone would be assassinated, like a state representative or a political commentator, whether they're on the right or the left, just isn't what this country is about.
		So that is what people should talk about.
		I think a lot of people are a little misguided on what the issue is right now, but no one should be afraid of expressing their political views and putting their life at risk for doing so.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So what is a congressman to do right now?
		Is there legislative action?
		How do you feel personally when it comes to your safety?
unidentified		Yeah, I think there's a lot of talk about security right now.
		I mean, some of the security is probably more lax than it should be.
		And that's true for the Supreme Court.
		That's true for the executive branch and true for the legislative branch.
		So I think you will see something coming out of Congress to try to make it just so that there's a little more security when you look at the Paul Pelosi incident or you look at the various incidents we've had.
		Unfortunately, all too often lately, it just shows that we need to at least protect people who are serving us in government.
		And I think at all levels, there's a recognition we need to do that.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Would you agree with Utah Governor Spencer Cox that social media is a cancer on this country right now?
unidentified		Yeah, I usually use sewer, but I'll accept cancer.
		I think either way, social media just allows people often too anonymously to say really idiotic, hateful things.
		Yeah, I can also watch a dog jump over a couch and I can see things like that and that's good.
		But where it's taken, especially with political speech, is just way too far.
		I don't know if I have a quick and easy solution other than social media platforms.
		Probably have to look at their overall guidance policies a little bit.
		But it seems like, especially recently, some of the people who are most radicalized are radicalized by online platforms and online communities.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Should the federal government force those social media platforms to have, to take that hard look and to do something about it?
unidentified		Well, we should actually have oversight over these platforms in some way, period.
		I mean, there's a lot of things from what they do with our personal data.
		We should have more oversight over those folks have become billionaires and we're really risking people's personal data to probably what they're doing when it comes to some areas.
		But we have to remember free speech is a foundation of the United States.
		And just because you don't like something that someone says doesn't mean you can either act violently or that you can cancel them.
		And right now we're seeing a lot of canceling of people in their positions for saying stupid things.
		Unfortunately, or fortunately, you have a right to say stupid things, right?
		I mean, that's what the law is.
		And if we're going to change that, then we have to change a little bit about who we are as a nation.
		But I do worry there's a slippery slope right now to, you know, there's a member of Congress from a neighboring district of mine, Derek Van Dorden, who wants to stop funding for the entire city of Eau Claire, Wisconsin that has 67,000 people because he misunderstood what an elder said and another elder said something he didn't like.
		That's scary.
		That's going beyond the normal response we should have.
		And we're going to have to kind of be smarter and more adult-like in how we're dealing with this.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Some headlines from the papers today about the events from yesterday in the wake of Charlie Kirk's death.
		This is the New York Times.
		The White House threatens a crackdown on the far left.
		A few of the other headlines.
		JD Vance blaming left-wing extremism when it comes to Charlie Kirk's death.
		Stephen Miller talking about a vast domestic terror network and vowing to crack down on that.
		What's your response?
unidentified		I'd say look at Paul Pelosi, look at the state rep and her husband in Minnesota.
		Those were Democrats.
		Look, politicizing this is the only thing maybe worse right now, watching some of these people take advantage of a terrible situation where someone was assassinated for their views.
		And if you do it intentionally, I think there's a special place for you maybe down the road.
		But I think that is really efforts to try to change who we are as Americans and change what this country is.
		And that's a dangerous, slippery slope.
		And I think we're going to have to be very careful about that.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Congressman Mark Pocan with us until the top of the hour, 9 a.m. Eastern.
		If you want to join the conversation, as always, here's our phone numbers: 202-748-8000 for Democrats.
		Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Independents, 2027-8002.
		As folks are calling in, let me come to your appropriations committee work.
		Where do you see us going over the course of the next 14 days on government funding?
unidentified		Yeah, so this is an incredibly disorganized maybe Congress is the best way to describe it.
		The appropriations process normally is done by about June, so we can get it on the floor and vote on it before the August break.
		We have only got a couple bills actually make it to the floor.
		So there's a lot of work that has to happen, and we're not even close to having that where it needs to be.
		Having said that, that probably means there'll be some kind of a continuing resolution.
		But the Republicans are in charge, and if they're not coming and getting our votes, and essentially they really haven't been, they're not doing anything serious to try to do that.
		Look, they're in charge of the House, the Senate, and the White House.
		They've got to figure this out.
		But the problem is when we see the White House do rescissions of funding that Congress has in a bipartisan way approved, and Congress doesn't stand up for our Article I responsibilities in the Constitution, it's our job to do that funding.
		It's hard to have a deal with these folks.
		So I think they're going to have to get their members.
		You know, a lot of members on the Republican side like to say they're going to vote no, and then it just takes a little bit of time and then they roll over and their bellies get rubbed.
		But we're waiting for that to happen.
		But I think that's what you're watching for between now and I think really the end of the week, much less the end of the month.
		I think something's going to happen this week.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		For a continuing resolution, we mentioned member security.
		Do you foresee new member security funding being attached to that continuing resolution?
		Does that hold up that process?
unidentified		Potentially, but we're in a very different era.
		I mean, the entire appropriations process I refer to as fantasy Congress, like fantasy football.
		We go through the motions, but none of it's real.
		So I don't know what they're ultimately going to do or what they're able to do.
		But a short-term CR is just saying we're going to keep government open and operating until we figure out what we should have figured out by September 30th, which was the deadline.
		And to be fair, this happens with a lot of Congresses that we go beyond the deadline.
		But, you know, I think there will be some additional things like that probably added because we're not having a really great record of passing legislation right now, other than the big, ugly law that is now a law.
		You know, they can only get a couple things to move.
		And after that, you know, all we do are pass CRAs, which are essentially disapproval of things Joe Biden did.
		Last time I looked, we're September into a new administration.
		It's probably time to do other legislation, but this Congress, with the tight margin this Republican majority has, has been unable to really take on major things, even the farm bill that we just keep kicking the can on.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		One other thing that has been mentioned as one of those things that could be added to the CR, new sanctions on Russia.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Do you think that is likely or no?
unidentified		Who knows with this majority?
		Seriously, they are.
		I've been in, you know, doing local, state, and federal government for over 30 years.
		I've never seen anything like the time period we're in right now.
		So whether it be how we respond to political assassinations, whether it be how we respond to having budget bills, how we fund essential services for our constituents, this is a time that anything, we're anything but normal when you completely acquiesce to one branch of government, which is what we're doing, the executive branch.
		I've never seen it like this.
		So I don't know if people can make prognostications with any certainty.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Plenty of calls lined up for you, Congressman, and we will start on the line for Democrats.
		This is Alex out of Ohio.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Morning.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		I have been listening to your man and talking about social media and all that sort of thing before.
		And I was wondering, with all the different platforms that are out there, I have been retired for a number of years, and I've been watching C-SPAN for probably about six years now.
		And like I say, I've been doing a lot of listening, but I've never heard of this Charlie Cook, Grick, before he got shot, and suddenly he's a good guy, and suddenly he's a bad guy.
		And, you know, I'm wondering why some of his posts haven't been out there that the public can hear what he's saying to our young people of this country.
		Is that all private?
		That nobody can hear it except who he's talking to.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Alex, no, there's plenty out there.
		And you can go to his websites and his social media pages, all still out there.
		I wonder, have you asked younger people if they knew who Charlie Kirk was, just because he very much had a following among a younger audience?
unidentified		Well, I'm going to be 90 my next birthday.
		So, you know, my kids are in their 60s, and they both have heard, you know, my daughters have both heard about this guy, but, you know, they have their own opinions.
		But, you know, there again, they don't, it wasn't like a discussion topic that we would ever bring up, you know.
		So, but I'm wondering why, you know, some of the news shows don't, you know, say something about that.
		I have to get on the internet to find out what he's saying.
		I mean, you know, anyway, he had quite an influence on people, I'm sure, you know, younger people.
		So that's all I got to say.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Turning Point USA, his network.
		Mark Pocan, do you want to talk about his influence?
		Certainly, there was that prayer vigil up on Capitol Hill last night.
		Did you attend?
unidentified		No, I got in actually after that.
		So, and I wouldn't have attended, to be honest.
		You know, this is something where people are kind of rewriting history.
		And I think we have to be very careful of this.
		First of all, you can get very much targeted messages through social media and through the internet right now.
		And certainly that's how it is across the spectrum.
		But Charlie Kirk said a lot of things that people consider very awful towards other people because he had, I would say, an extremist viewpoint.
		But among that group of extremists, he was extremely popular.
		And right now, you're seeing a bit of a rewriting of history.
		But if they really put down some of the things he said about different groups of people, you may not have the same perspective that people are trying to put out there right now.
		Having said that, there's no reason whatsoever for any political violence for his thoughts.
		And that is the issue we should be focusing on.
		But there will be people who try to take advantage of a situation like this to change how much free speech we have and who can have a job and not have a job and say things.
		And that's the real danger.
		So it's not so much that Charlie Kirk said anything unique, because honestly, I've seen and heard a lot of the things he said from other people from more fringe political perspectives.
		It's what happened in response to him having that right to say those things.
		And that's what we need to address.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		This is Mike out of Maryland, Republican.
		Good morning.
		You're on with Congressman Pocam.
unidentified		Congressman, nice to speak to you.
		I think the internet is the war that's being sanctioned and filtered.
		Not really social media.
		Actually, social media is doing the service to the citizens and the people because they get to speak unfiltered in most cases.
		We saw during COVID a lot of filtering.
		And so really it's the internet, and that's being controlled at the country and actually a post-national level.
		So really, we're trying to keep our internet open.
		And right now, social media is being attacked as the problem, but really, it's a solution.
		Last thing, you said political violence is not the solution.
		And I agree, generally speaking, but violence is sanctioned at the war level.
		It's really a problem when the people who create war are being statistically targeted.
		That's when they want to stop the violence.
		But when it's to send the soldiers off to fight for their agendas, then it's a problem.
		So when a person has an agenda, it's not okay.
		But when the politicians have an agenda, it is okay.
		You got any comments on that?
		Yeah, I mean, I'll take your second point.
		I think there is something to violence in society in general.
		If we make it less so that people think it's okay to attack someone or kill someone for their speech, it's a good point.
		I'll take that, Mike.
		On the first point, though, the internet I look at is just a platform, an electronic platform where many things happen.
		It's social media.
		It's some of the larger places where people get their media.
		The problem is they only get what they want to see by the algorithms.
		And that just intensifies some people, especially if they have more extreme viewpoints.
		They think it's normalized.
		And I think that's a part of the social media thing.
		So it's not, to me, the internet's really just the delivery system, but social media is really with those algorithms.
		If all you see is the same thing you already believe, and if it's already maybe a little bit bordering on hateful, that may just intensify those feelings and make people do things.
		They think it's more normalized.
		And that's the problem.
		Right now, all we should do is say, let's take the temperature down, everyone.
		You know, it doesn't matter who you are, if you're a progressive, a conservative, a moderate, you should not have to worry about being attacked or killed for your viewpoints.
		And we need to protect free speech, but we also have to protect people from any kind of violence for expressing their thoughts.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		On the algorithms, there was a software developer who called in in our first hour of our program today.
		His recommendation was some sort of federal requirement that these social media companies have to disclose their algorithms, saying if they did that, we'd know which ones are driving the content meant to trigger us, that we'll know which ones are driving the worst content to us.
		And then we can let sort of the market of social media bloom by letting people choose: do you want an algorithm that's trying to trigger you, or do you want an algorithm that's less focused on getting you to stay online?
		What do you think about that suggestion?
unidentified		Yeah, I think that's one of the more significant suggestions that's out there because it is those algorithms that kind of lead us to get the information that we get.
		But look, right now there's something broken.
		We have to deal with it.
		The problem is Congress years ago got rid of a nonpartisan technology bureau that gave us advice.
		And if you've ever watched a congressional hearing talking about technology, to call it cringeworthy is an insult to cringe worthy.
		Look, you know, we got a lot of members who still had beepers in the time I've been in Congress, right?
		We need to have the best expertise.
		And I'm not sure if the average member of Congress is the best expert when it comes to this technology, but we should talk to those experts like your caller.
		And one of those suggestions is looking at those algorithms.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Rhonda, Jersey Shore, good morning.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You're next with Congressman Mark Pocan.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		I have a question for you.
		This shooting really devastated me.
		I'm not a Charlie Kirk supporter.
		However, he's an American and he was loved by a whole lot of people.
		And what I can't understand with our Congress, why can't we put an amendment on the floor of the House where we are allowed to vote the American people on banning high-capacity magazines and assault rifles?
		Why can't we make that decision?
		Why are we allowing the National Rifle Association to kill our families?
		This is disgusting.
		He didn't just get killed this week.
		They had another school shooting this week.
		You got gang members in certain districts buying illegal guns.
		Nobody knows where they're coming from.
		We have to do something.
		It's just gone too far.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Rhonda, got your point.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Congressman.
unidentified		Yeah, I appreciate the passion, you know, and I think a lot of us have it.
		You know, we have a school shooting.
		We had one the day that Charlie Kirk was killed.
		And then we'll have a moment of silence if there have been killings on the floor.
		And that's it.
		We never have a moment of action.
		And trust me, for someone who's been here for almost 13 years, it's infuriating to see no action come out of Congress all too often.
		And you're right.
		The NRA has a lot of money and a lot of power politically.
		And, you know, just so we know, the NRA is not gun owners.
		The NRA is gun manufacturers who benefit from selling guns.
		And so that's why that big money, again, just manipulates too many members of Congress.
		And that's why if the people lead, eventually the leaders will follow.
		We need more grassroots action from people like your caller to make us do the right thing.
		Because we are the only nation that has this sort of number of killings by gun deaths.
		And there's got to be a reason that we can address that clearly.
		And there is.
		It's some of our gun laws and it's some of what we see, the violence in culture being just allowed too loosely.
		So continue that passion and force your elected officials to do the right thing.
		Keep reaching out to them.
		Call them and make sure that you're heard.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		To Bill in the Buckeye State Independent, good morning.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Thanks for waiting.
unidentified		Yes.
		Hello.
		This is Bill.
		And I've been thinking about the names that come different ways.
		And one of the names that was thrown around, I think, that tripped this trigger on, so to speak, a trip to trick, Nazis.
		If people knew their history and understood that Hitler found his way to power by killing people in front of him, the ones that he didn't agree with and may not allow him to get to power.
		That was at the beginning in the 30s, 1930s, was able to kill the people that were in his way to power.
		I think, and as far as guns, it's a simple situation.
		A gun is a tool used for different things.
		Hunting is one of them.
		But the other thing is you don't want to give a three-year-old a circular saw either.
		It's the same thing as guns.
		People need to have grow to a point where they at least have common sense to know what they have in their hand.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Congressman Pocan.
unidentified		Yeah, a couple thoughts there.
		One, again, I do think we have to get a better control over guns, especially certain types of guns, the large size of magazines, the automatic and semi-automatic weapons that can cause so much damage, but you don't actually use hunting.
		That's one part of it.
		But the first part that the caller said, you know, my fear is then there are some people who will take advantage of a horrible situation like just happened.
		And there already, I'm seeing it.
		There's a database of, I think it's 50,000 people who've said something bad about Charlie Kirk since his death and they want all of them fired.
		Or a member of Congress introducing legislation to say they could take away funding from a city of 67,000 people because of one or two people's comments who work for that city.
		That is going too far.
		That is something we've seen in history and we have to make sure isn't replicated.
		So I think this is an important time for us to have calm and perspective, to respect each other as much as we humanly can when it comes to political discourse.
		But I don't want this to be something that's taken advantage of that takes away more freedoms because I think already we've probably had a slippery slope of a loss of freedoms in the last year.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		From what you just described of the database of people who've said something, I've heard the term cancel culture thrown around in the past couple days.
		Would you use that term?
		And what do you think about the history of that term being used against members of both sides of the aisle?
unidentified		Well, first of all, it shows how, I think, ignorant sometimes people try to think that we all are when we're doing this.
		It's cancel culture if one political group so-called does it but not the other.
		Look, cancel culture is cancel culture.
		If you're going to make a database, I've never really heard of this before, of 50,000 people and growing who've said something and now you want to go after not just them and make them lose their job, which I think is extreme already, but then to go the extra step and take away funding from the city of Eau Claire, Wisconsin, because one alder said something you don't like.
		That's beyond normal, right?
		And that's part of we can't let that reaction to what happened be an overreaction.
		And I think right now there are a number of people either for self-serving reasons or for emotional reasons that are having an overreaction.
		We need some calm.
		We need to get together and say political violence is wrong, period, period.
		And I think that's the important part.
		And then figure out how to make sure that we're finding ways to lower that temperature and also protect those who are in the political sphere.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Just one more follow-up question.
		The caller started by talking about the history of Adolf Hitler.
		Do you think we throw around Nazi too often?
unidentified		Probably, but also I think it's really important people know their history because if you know the history of what happened, you'll know there were certain events that sparked overreactions.
		And what we don't want to happen is that ever to happen again.
		And right now, you could see an overreaction to an incident like this that could not be good for the country, just like it wasn't good for Germany and the people in Germany.
		So I think, you know, this is important that we study our history, we know our history, and that we learn from the lessons of history.
		And one lesson we have to know right now is that any overreaction to any issue could be manipulated by some with fault with bad intents, and we can't let that happen.
		We have to, we are the greatest nation on the planet for many reasons, and we have to continue to be that.
		And I think significant changes could really harm us.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Just a couple minutes left with Congressman Mark Pocan.
		This is Joe in New Jersey, Republican.
		Thanks for waiting.
unidentified		Hi, just quickly on cancel culture.
		I just want to remind everybody that in Trump's first term, we couldn't talk, anyone that voted for him couldn't talk about voting for him without having a threat to their social life or employment.
		After that, after January 6th, actually, we had groups of people online searching through all the footage, dedicating hours of their time to report people to the FBI and have them locked up.
		And just about two months ago, you couldn't walk around with a Tesla without having your windows broken.
		So I think it's really indicative this cancel culture stuff is more about a sick society.
		Off of that, I don't think that the government should be doing anything about it.
		I think if a representative wants to do, any kind of leader in any form wants to do anything about this problem, we need civility back.
		And I have yet to hear anybody on either side say, this happened, not this specific thing, but any tragedy.
		If you know your language may contribute to that, just say, I apologize if my language has contributed to this.
		You never hear an apology.
		It's always just a disavowal of violence.
roy in north dakota ▲ ● ▼		I think we need leadership to set the tone where when something happens, even if it was not anyone's intent, it never is.
unidentified		I never assume it is anybody's intent to have something terrible happen, but I think that it would do a lot of good for the country when one side has an issue.
		If anyone, just an apology anywhere for the language.
		That's all I got to say.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Congressman, give you the final 90 seconds.
unidentified		Sure.
		I have heard some of that.
		And, you know, I think from what the caller brought up, I think he may be one of those folks that gets a very certain line of information from his social media because January 6th were people attacking the Capitol, attacking members of Congress and wanting to hang the vice president.
		And this is people saying something about Charlie Kirk after he's passed away that they didn't like him.
		There is a significant difference.
		And I don't, you know, want to try to equate the two, but some people may get that information through their social media feeds.
		But he is right that, you know, we got to lower the temperature in general.
		You know, I've said things that I regret later, and so have other folks.
		And I've heard that from both Democrats and Republicans.
		The problem is it's the people that often the cameras go to are some of our more vitriolic folks that, you know, there's a joke around in Washington that you don't get between so-and-so and a camera because you're going to get run over and hurt because, you know, that's what they're looking for.
		That's a part of the problem.
		So maybe it's a little self-policing, but as the community, we got to realize there are other viewpoints out there.
		And maybe we have to actively seek those viewpoints so we get a more rounded perspective than maybe our social media feeds give us.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Congressman, we'll end it there and let you get to your day.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Congressman Mark Pocan, Democrat of Wisconsin, we do always appreciate your time.
unidentified		Thank you.
unidentified		Appreciate it.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Coming up after the break, more of your phone calls in our open forum.
		So you can go ahead and start dialing in now on phone lines for Democrats, Republicans, and Independents.
		And later at about 9:30 a.m. Eastern, we'll speak with Republican Pat Fallon of Texas.
		Stick around.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Have been watching C-SPAN Washington Journal for over 10 years now.
		This is a great format that C-SPAN offers.
		You're doing a great job.
		I enjoy hearing everybody's opinion.
		I'm a huge C-SPAN fan.
		I listen every morning on the way to work.
		I think C-SPAN should be required viewing for all three branches of government.
		First of all, if you say hello to C-SPAN and how you all covered these hearings.
		Thank you everyone at C-SPAN for allowing this interaction with everyday citizens.
		It's an amazing show to get real opinions from real people.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Appreciate you guys' non-biased coverage.
unidentified		I love politics and I love C-SPAN because I get to hear all the voices.
		You and C-SPAN show the truth.
		Back to the universe for C-SPAN.
		It's the one essential news network.
		America marks 250 years, and C-SPAN is there to commemorate every moment.
		From the signing of the Declaration of Independence to the voices shaping our nation's future, we bring you unprecedented all-platform coverage, exploring the stories, sights, and spirit that make up America.
		Join us for remarkable coast-to-coast coverage, celebrating our nation's journey like no other network can.
		America 250.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Over a year of historic moments.
unidentified		Only on the C-SPAN networks.
		C-SPAN shop.org is C-SPAN's online store.
		Browse through our latest collection of C-SPAN products, apparel, books, home decor, and accessories.
		There's something for every C-SPAN fan, and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations.
		Shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org.
		If you ever miss any of C-SPAN's coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org.
		Videos of key hearings, debates, and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights.
		These points of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos.
		This timeline tool makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in Washington.
		Scroll through and spend a few minutes on C-SPAN's points of interest.
		Washington Journal continues.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Here's where we are on Capitol Hill at 10 a.m. Eastern.
		In about an hour, the House meets and the Senate meets as well.
		We'll be showing that on C-SPAN 2 and C-SPAN 1, respectively, the House on C-SPAN 1, of course, and the Senate on C-SPAN 2.
		On C-SPAN 3 right now, a hearing that's getting a lot of attention.
		FBI Director Kash Patel testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
		The chairman, Chuck Grassley, is offering his opening remarks right now when Kash Patel begins his opening statement.
		We'll show you a little bit of that, but you can also watch in its entirety again on C-SPAN 3.
		Also streaming at c-span.org and on the free C-SPAN Now video app.
		Also today at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, President Trump is leaving for his state visit to the United Kingdom.
		The pomp and circumstance expected to happen mostly tomorrow.
		The president is set to arrive.
		Today it's taking place at Windsor Castle.
		There's Air Force One.
		The president is supposed to leave from the White House in just a few minutes.
		And we'll see if he takes comments from reporters when he does.
		So a lot happening today on Capitol Hill and here in DC.
		And we are in open forum.
		Any public policy issue, any political issue that you want to talk about, now is your time to call in phone lines for Democrats and Republicans and Independents as usual.
		Bonnie's up first in our open forum out of Iowa Republican.
		Bonnie, go ahead.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I would like to challenge the previous speaker's comments when he described Charlie Kirk as extreme.
		That's one quote.
		And on the fringe, I'll just pick two issues briefly.
		The first is abortion.
		Charlie was criticized for saying that he would want his daughter, who will now never see her father, and he will not be a grandfather.
		But he had said, Yes, if my daughter were raped, I would want her to bear that child, and he was lambasted for it.
		What is extreme about a grandfather, which is what he would have been saying, I don't want my daughter to kill my grandchild.
		That's not extreme.
		That's not fringe.
		And that's the correct framing of that response.
		Not criticizing him for being cruel to his daughter.
		The second issue where he was criticized was saying that biological males do not belong in women's sports or in female bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, or prisons.
		Now, that is an issue that is 80% agreed upon by everybody in the United States.
		Obviously, that is not fringe.
		That is not extreme.
		I call out your guest for describing Charlie Kirk as those things because those were the two positions for which he was most criticized.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Bonnie in Iowa.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		This is Bill in Maryland, Independent Line.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Yeah, good morning.
		And I cannot agree more with the lady from Iowa.
		She hit it right on the nail on the head.
		What caught my attention with the congressman, and I listen on the radio, so I can't see the graphics.
		So I didn't know, I thought he was a reporter or a pundit when I first heard him.
		But when he cited the Paul Pelosi incident as an example, I knew immediately where he was coming from.
		The reality is, Paul Pelosi incident is not an example.
		My understanding is Paul Pelosi knew his, the person that assaulted him.
		So that wasn't political violence.
		But what I wanted to bring to the attention of the audience and to the congressman, if he was still on, is political violence is initiated when people like Maxine Waters say, push back.
		Don't allow them in.
		Tell them you're not welcome.
		When Chuck Schumer stands, I think, in front of the steps of the Supreme Court and says, you're going to unleash the whirlwind, you know, and names the justices by name.
		And then all of a sudden, you've got somebody showing up at Kavanaugh's house prepared to murder him and kidnap.
		He had kidnapping stuff.
		And then you look at these mass murderers who are obviously motivated by the LGBTQ concerns.
		And what I would like to see is the Democrats scale back their rhetoric and start debating the issues rather than attacking us, those of us who are conservatives, for the views and beliefs that we hold and that we have a right as Americans to espouse in the First Amendment and also a right to organize and assemble, which is what Charlie Kirk was doing.
		So thanks for letting me share that.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Bill in Maryland.
		Johnny's in Daytona Beach, Florida, line for Democrats.
		Good morning.
unidentified		How are you doing, John?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Doing well.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What's on your mind?
unidentified		I'll just call it on behalf.
		Yeah, I'll just call it on behalf of Congress being separated.
		Even Charlie Kirk, God bless him.
		He didn't need to die that way, but at the same time, he was speaking separative.
		You know, we're keeping people, you do this and we do this, and you need to be in that place.
		That's not good for our country.
		It's getting worse.
		Guns, certain kind of guns should not be on the streets.
		That's why we got the problem we have.
		We all want to think that one is better than the other.
		We got to come better than that.
		We can't just keep doing the same thing, expecting a different result.
		It's not going to happen.
		You want to say what you want to say?
		Don't be foolish and be delusional, thinking that, hey, one side is better than the other.
		It's not.
		We all live in America.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Johnny in Florida.
		This is Michael, New Jersey Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		How are you?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Doing well.
unidentified		First, two things.
		Check the video, everybody from Kamala Harris to all the extreme liberals, fascists, Nazis.
		What do you think is going to happen?
		And if anybody remembers, what did he write on the bullet when he shot Mr. Kirk?
		It said fascists catch.
		This is all coming from the left, and this is the problem.
		When you tell people that the MAGA people and everybody else are an extreme threat to the United States, what do you think is going to happen?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So, Michael, what is your solution in terms of political speech?
unidentified		Well, political speech.
		In other words, hate speech, political speech.
		There's certain speech that should not be allowed.
		Like, for example, you can't be in the movie theater and yell fire when there's no fire.
		In other words, if you're going to, if the liberal and the left, and check the videos, Kamala Harris to everybody else, Trump's a fascist.
		Kirk.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Michael, how do you define hate speech and who gets to define hate speech?
unidentified		Well, I mean, how about just common sense?
		Look at this.
		Every time there's a shooting, liberals are guns, guns.
		Guns don't kill people.
		People kill people.
		Unless you get those people off the street, look at prohibition when liquor was illegal.
		If you wanted it, you could get it.
		So you could put a ban on this and put a ban on this kind of gun.
		If these crazy psychotic people want to get the guns, they're going to get them.
		So in other words, pretty much everything today is common sense.
		If you label people a fascist, which the left does, and say they're a threat to the United States or our way of living, what do you think these brainwashed 22-year-old kids that are on the internet are going to do?
		And again, fascist, fascist, fascist, and that's what he writes on the bullet.
		I mean, come on, wake up and smell the coffee.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		It's Michael in New Jersey.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		John in Wisconsin, Independent.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Good morning, John.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		I'm sorry I missed Representative Polkand.
		One of the callers that called in said something to the effect of Charlie Kirk's assassination of high-powered rifles with large capacity magazines.
boris epshteyn ▲ ● ▼		Well, one of my main points is concerning the Second Amendment and firearms in general and the far left in general who typically grow up in what I call a concrete jungle and they don't understand or have any knowledge or even do the basic research of the types of firearms, the magazines they hold and the capacity of the magazines.
unidentified		The firearm that was used to assassinate Charlie Kirk was a 30-odd 6 bolt action rifle.
		Yes, it is a high-powered rifle.
		I have one for deer hunting, and that's all I use it for.
		Its capacity is four rounds, one in the chamber, three in the magazine.
		So this is not a high-capacity weapon.
		And my other comment is on social media, and I think that's the scourge of the entire world was the invention of social media and, frankly, the internet.
		I use the internet to watch YouTube videos on how to fix my washing machine or my lawnmower.
		And there's the majority of the people that are out there now that deal with the internet are just they're watching this ridiculous Instagram, TikTok, everything, just watching people do showy stuff.
		And I just don't agree with that at all.
		So thanks a lot for taking my call.
		And I wish I could have got a comment from the congressman.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's John in the Badger State.
		This is Jay in Long Beach, California, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		So I've been listening to your comments about and everyone's comments about freedom of speech.
		Will you buy the constitutional right?
		I can't figure out why everybody is so worried.
		I'm afraid to say this.
		I'm afraid to say that.
		This is the United States.
		This is not no third world country.
		And just because somebody says something doesn't make it true.
		I can sign a piece of paper and say I'm the president.
		Doesn't make it true.
		You need to be following the Constitution and this unconstitutional Supreme Court ruling.
		I'm very questionable.
		That's very questionable as well.
		Why will we be following rulings that are not constitutional?
		So that's just my thoughts for today.
		Thank you for taking my call.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Sheila, Ohio, Republican.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Good morning.
		I'm an 85-year-old widow, mom, grandma, great-grandma, and great-grandma.
		And I would like to say Charlie Kirk represented the main thing he wanted people to remember him for, his stand on faith in God.
		And the problem in this country is not constitutional.
		It's anti-God.
		It is evil.
		And, you know, if Jesus Christ was here on earth today, they would still kill him and put him on the cross because he told people sin is what's going to get everybody.
		And, you know, what everybody doesn't understand, God is not contingent upon you believing or me.
		He is God Almighty.
		And everyone will stand before him one of these days and give an account for everything.
		And Charlie Kirk was known, and he stated himself, he was a saved, born again Christian.
		And when we put God back on the elevated highest point in this country, things will change.
		It is evil against good.
		May God bless all of you.
		And I say to everyone out there that believes in abortion, male or female, have you ever gotten on your knees and thank God your mom didn't agree with you?
		Thank you.
		God bless you.
		Thank you.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Sheila in Ohio.
		Jay is in California, Independent.
		Jay, go ahead.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		I just have an idea as far as the Internet and how it's set up.
		It's really an entertainment-based Internet.
penned patriot in vegas ▲ ● ▼		I believe if we, by utilizing the United States Post Office, that is adding a digital P.O. box to all households and making a non-propaganda internet and nearing digitally the purpose of the post office,
unidentified		A platform for communication and a secure, propaganda-free communication highway that all people could communicate with their representatives and the representatives could communicate with their constituents free of the.
		You know what it's become.
		You know just the all the money wasted Jay, who was very little communication.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Who gets to decide what propaganda is and is not in that circumstance, in that scenario well it, he could present both sides and, like C-span, people decide for themselves.
unidentified		But if you know, if it was uh, an open forum similar to C-span, the people could decide for themselves.
penned patriot in vegas ▲ ● ▼		But it would be more of a platform where people, instead of getting ads on tv and and all that, you would just communicate directly with your uh representatives.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Jay, in California to Indiana.
		Uh, this is David.
		As we wait for Kash Patel to begin his opening statement at that Senate Judiciary Committee uh, go ahead David, go ahead, we have time.
unidentified		Well I, sorry I don't want to take mr Patel's time.
		I'll make this very short.
		I um, I think there are very simple answers.
		What i've been asking people lately and I have actually um sent this message to all my congressmen and senators is, take the word they out of your vocabulary.
		Let's all do that for like six or eight months and see if that doesn't cool things down.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Have you tried that, David?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Has it worked for you?
unidentified		Uh, I actually what i'm trying to do is smile a lot more.
unidentified		I think that works.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's David in Indiana.
		This is Nancy, Florida Republican.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Good morning, John.
		I was following up.
		I'd like to respond to um, a guest that that Kimberly had on on sunday.
		I don't remember his name.
		I did write it down but can't find it right now.
		He was a long-time critic of Charlie Kirk, which is fine.
		But I think my problem with it is since he was a long-time critic and having civil debates, why wasn't this presented when Charlie was alive and could answer this?
		And I just think it's wrong to be piling on to somebody who lost his life.
julie kelly ▲ ● ▼		such a tragic way, especially with that sunday show and, and this gentleman being a longtime critic um, we all have our opinions of who Charlie is or isn't, which is fine, but I just think, I just think the program could have been a little bit more balanced, or really not at all.
unidentified		I think it was too soon.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Thank you, that's Nancy in Florida, to Parsons, West Virginia.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		This is Jim Democrat.
unidentified		Good morning morning, Right, I listen to many of these Republicans describing themselves or describing, God rest his soul, Charlie Kirk.
		He's gone now.
		Don't like to speak ill of the dead.
		He had some good points about him.
		He was a good Christian person, stood for Christianity, which is a good thing.
		But how you stand for things and how you phrase things is very important.
		A couple callers back, they were some woman or some, someone was speaking about if Charlie Kirk, that he'd that he'd been asked by a reporter, what if your daughter got, well, I read that quote somewhere, I was reading some articles and so forth about all this, that he was asked, what if your 10-year-old daughter got pregnant?
		You know, would a person want the right for abortion to be available in like extreme cases?
		And that person that called in earlier didn't say that, just simply said his daughter.
		But I had heard a reporter had asked him, what if it happened to your 10-year-old daughter?
		But at any rate, all these different things.
		It's as if Republicans do not hear what they say, what Trump says, what Charlie Kirk would say about Democrats.
		And they forget about all the good things that Democrats have done for America down through history.
tax slave in pennsylvania ▲ ● ▼		And still today, instead of Trump or Charlie Kirk calling Democrats liberals and evil and entitlement, lazy entitlement bums and socialists and cultural Marxists, how is that speaking with any kind of respect as human beings about Democrats?
unidentified		A lot of these things are agitating.
		It's agitating and taunting, being sarcastic and ridiculing.
		You know, how is that fair or decent?
		And yet then when people speak out against Republicans, oh my gracious, you know, you're trying to tear apart the foundation of America.
		I think Republicans have an over-exaggerated view of their own ideas and self-worth at times.
		And they are too denigrating and disrespectful to Democrats.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Jim, you talk about the good things that Democrats have done for America down through history.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Do you think there are good things that Republicans have done for America down throughout history?
unidentified		Sure.
		I mean, the old version of the former version I sort of grew up with and understood about, you know, as my understanding, you know, coming, say, through the 70s, 80s, or 90s, you know, about good conservative viewpoints, like it is good to, say, stand up for Christianity, but there are different people throughout the billions of people in the world that have different views on religion.
		You know, we can't dictate what everybody else's view is going to be.
		They have an emphasis, for example, Republicans tend to have an emphasis on maybe being more frugal, not wasting money.
		There are decent things that Republicans stand for, used to stand for.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Got your point, Jim.
		Let me head to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
		FBI Director Kash Patel is getting ready to testify.
		We'll listen for a little bit.
kash patel ▲ ● ▼		I want to provide by providing a briefing into the tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk.
		It's important that this FBI is transparent as possible without jeopardizing investigations.
		Charlie Kirk was shot at 1223 a.m., excuse me, p.m. on September 10th.
		I think this timeline is critically important.
		Less than a day later, the FBI, at my direction, released the first set of images of the suspect that we captured based on our analysis on the ground.
		Later that evening, while conducting extensive interviews and cell phone analysis and also flying out evidence response teams and hostage rescue teams and evidence tacticians who were collecting evidence in live time and flying them back to Washington, D.C. in our laboratories for immediate analyses, we were able to extract video from the campus feed.
		And at my direction at 8 p.m., in partnership and promise to working with the public to bring this fugitive to justice, we released a newly never before seen video of the suspect.
		We also released new enhanced photos of the suspect.
		A few hours later, that suspect was in custody pursuant to the interrogation of the suspect's own father, who stated, When I saw that video that you released, I recognized it was my son, and I confronted him, and he was handed over to lawful law enforcement authorities.
		That is the FBI working with the public, as I promised, being transparent, and providing critical information along the way in the manhunt for the suspect and suspects involved in Charlie's assassination.
		We received over 11,000 tips in the first 24 hours alone.
		We received 16,000 submissions to our digital media enterprise and tip lines.
		That is a large number of material to go through.
		I want to thank President Trump and the Attorney General, Pam Bondi, for their unwavering support and commitment resources to this and all investigations.
		I also want to especially thank our colleagues in Utah, the governor's office, DPS, and the sheriffs out there.
		State and local law enforcement partnership has been a cornerstone since I took over at the FBI, and it was no different here.
		And our teams in Salt Lake City, our SACs out there across the country, our lab techniques in Quantico who raced to complete the evidence analysis so the public could have the answers they need.
		These people worked through the night without sleep for days on end.
		They are to be commended.
		They are not to be attacked.
		And many, many, many more people I don't have time to thank here today.
		But I do want to thank the American people especially.
		The mission of the FBI is for them and with them and by with and through them.
		And it's that mission and that ethos that I brought to this investigation and so many others, and that's why that suspect is.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		FBI Director Kash Patel testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
		You can continue watching and watch in its entirety on C-SPAN 3.
		That's where we're airing that here on C-SPAN.
		We will continue taking your calls.
		And the House is set to come in at 10 a.m. Eastern and will, of course, go there for gabble-to-gavel coverage.
		When they do, a reminder, the Senate is also in at 10 a.m. Eastern, and you can watch that gabble-to-gavel on C-SPAN 2.
		Back to your phone calls in this open forum.
		This is Joe in Charlotte, North Carolina, Independent.
		Joe, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
		Thank you very much to C-SPAN for all the excellent work that they do.
		And Charlotte, we recently had a very, very difficult murder.
		And when Charlie Kirk was assassinated, it is truly unfortunate that we as Americans do not understand the difficulty that his family and his friends and myself are going through.
		I did not know Charlie Kirk.
		I knew he was on TV, but after his assassination, I took the effort to learn who Charlie Kirk was.
		And I did that by going on YouTube and watching his debates on campus, watching his debate in the British at Oxford at Cambridge.
		And this is an intellectual, brilliant man who probably could rival Martin Luther King or Kennedy family.
		He stood there and talked to many, many students, all of diverse background, all of diverse opinions.
		And he always invited those to come forward that disagreed with him.
		And he just sat there or stood there in Oxford and in Cambridge and gave facts back to what their comments were.
		He also, at Oxford and Cambridge, had PhDs and professors that also were debating him.
		And the debates were in a forum which were very civil and very informative.
		Recently, before his death, he also went on Gavin Newton's podcast and for an hour sat there and talked to Gavin Newton.
		And what surprised me was the governor in that forum, which was his podcast, was much more intellectual factual than he is when he's on TV.
		He actually agreed with Charlie Kirk in terms of no men in women's sports.
		He also agreed with Charlie Kirk that they should work with the immigration to bring out bad people from his state.
		However, when Charlie Kirk challenged him to say these things on TV, he acquiesced and sort of disregarded what his comment was.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Joe in North Carolina, Kansas.
		Mike is next.
		Independent, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		And I've been listening.
		I listen to you guys a lot.
		I really like C-SPAN.
		But I think people are making this entirely too difficult.
		You notice how in the last week or so, the cities have been burning.
		Hello?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		I'm listening to you, Mike.
unidentified		You notice how in the last week or so, all these cities have been burning and there's riots going on everywhere and businesses being devastated and people are being hurt in the streets.
		Oh, wait a minute.
		That actually hasn't happened.
		The difference is that's the difference between good and evil.
		Do we understand?
		That's the difference between good and evil.
		And Charlie Kirk's not leading the evil.
		The boys never leading the evil.
		That's been done by Democrats.
		They've lit this fire.
		They've been lighting the fire for the last, I don't know, 30 years.
		It's unreal.
		They're just, no matter what, if you're a good Christian going that's worried about their own family, worried about the world around them, worried about their kids, worried about the United States of America.
		But then you got people out there that they can say 50%, more than 50% of the Democrats that they do a poll on will tell you, yeah, the violence is fine.
		It's okay if you need to use violence like this.
		And that's just wrong.
		They knew it's wrong.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You've seen a poll with that number?
unidentified		Yeah, I watch it on TV every day.
		You know?
		Yeah, 50%.
		All right.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Mike in Kansas at 9.30 on the East Coast.
		And we're taking your phone calls in open forum.
		I did want to let you know the latest news, the death of Robert Redford.
		The director, the actor, activist died at age 89.
		And the actor Robert Redford had nine videos in the C-SPAN video library over the years, including back in 2016.
		President Obama was speaking about Robert Redford's contributions during his Medal of Freedom ceremony.
		Here's a little bit from those remarks.
barack obama ▲ ● ▼		When the candidate wins his race in the iconic 1972 film of the same name, which continues, by the way, for those of you who haven't seen it, and many of you are too young to be perhaps the best movie about what politics is actually like ever, he famously asks his campaign manager the reflective and revealing question, what do we do now?
		And like the man he played in that movie, Robert Redford has figured it out and applied his talent and charm to achieve success.
		We admire Bob not just for his remarkable acting, but for having figured out what to do next.
		He created a platform for independent filmmakers with the Sundance Institute.
		He has supported our national parks and our national resources as one of the foremost conservationists of our generation.
		He's given his unmatched charisma to unforgettable characters like Roy Hobbes, Nathan Muir, and of course the Sundance kid, entertaining us for more than half a century.
		As an actor, director, producer, and as an advocate, he has not stopped.
		And apparently drives so fast that he had breakfast in Napa and dinner in Salt Lake.
		At 80 years young, Robert Redford has no plans to slow down.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		President Obama on Robert Redford back in 2016, this is the lead of the obituary from the New York Times.
		Robert Redford, a big screen charmer, turned Oscar winning director whose hit movies often helped America make sense of itself and who, off-screen, evangelized for the environmental causes and fostered the Sundance-centered independent film movement, died early Tuesday morning in his home in Utah.
		He was 89 years old.
		Back to your phone calls.
		This is Peggy in Warren, Michigan, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Okay.
		I like to say my name is I go to church.
		I go to a good Bible believing church.
		And what President Prump and JD Vance say about me, that I am evil.
		And sometimes I go to sleep that I should be killed because I am a Democrat.
		Why should I be killed?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		All right, that's Peggy.
		This is Anita in Illinois, Independent.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, what good is religion doing us anyway?
		There is no life after death.
		This Jesus Christ crap is exactly that.
		The whole country is Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ.
		And the man is a lie.
		And the whole story about him is a lie.
		The churches and everything that worship him is a lie.
		Same thing is true of Muslimism and all their.
		The boys have to have their gods.
		They're godly lodlis.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Anita, how long have you been an atheist?
unidentified		What?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		How long have you been?
		Did you ever believe?
		How long have you been an atheist?
unidentified		I think I've, ever since I was three years old and my mother and father to soothe me from the death of all my dogs that were constantly getting run over, told me that don't worry, I'd see them.
		I'm in heaven with Jesus.
		I knew then they were lying.
		There is no heaven and there is no hell.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Anita in Illinois.
		It's just after 9.35 this morning and want to take viewers back up to Capitol Hill.
		We're joined by Texas Republican Congressman Pat Fallon for a couple minutes ahead of the House going into session this morning.
		Congressman, I want to start with you on the question we asked Congressman Mark Pocan, the Democrat who joined us about an hour ago.
		It was, how do you describe the political moment that we are in in this country right now in the wake of the shooting of Charlie Kirk last week and what we've seen since then?
unidentified		I would say that it's unfortunate.
		I would call it dangerous and call it pivotal.
		We have, you know, there's nothing wrong with having a spirited exchange of ideas in the public square.
		That's what our republic was founded on.
		To then take it up to, you know, violence where you're going to take a life simply because someone disagrees with you.
		And Charlie Kirk was a mainstream political figure.
		He was clearly right of center, but he was right of center.
		He wasn't on the fringes by any stretch.
		And so it's very unfortunate.
		But what I'm praying for, to be very candid with you, is that nothing further happens.
		Because if someone else were to be harmed, this could spiral into a very dark place.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		So I'm really praying that we all, all Americans, use the guaranteed protections we have within the Constitution.
unidentified		We have right to redress and we have freedom of speech and the press and what have you.
		And that's the way to channel any anger that people have or any disappointments.
		They can become active and they can become really masters of their own fate.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Is there anything we need to do about social media in this country, both on the front end of getting people to a point that they might take an action like this and what we see on social media after incidents like this and how often we see it on our feeds?
unidentified		With a country of 340 million people, you're going to have some folks that just have dark souls and you can't let, say, one out of a thousand blind you to the other 999, really.
		And also, are these some of the comments that we're seeing on social media, are they coming even from human beings?
		Clearly, many of them are, but there are some, it would suit Russia, China, North Korea, and our other enemies very well to sit there and sow this kind of and foment this discord and division in our country.
		So we can't be, we can't fall into that trap.
		And I'm not going to let, and nor should anyone let some very dark soul that's just filled with hate, you know, darken who you are.
		We have to really look to the better angels of our nature.
		And, you know, and I think that serves the country well also.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		If state actors are sowing discord in this country, does it require a state action response by the U.S. government?
unidentified		That's a very interesting question.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		You want to, it's really going to be up to, or maybe even a partnership, because you want to be careful here.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		You're treading on thin ice as opposed to we want First Amendment rights for Americans and folks that are here in the country legally, but to allow a foreign actor to sow discord via social media.
unidentified		I mean, it's something that's just, it's new territory because it's really the last couple of decades that we've seen social media explode onto the scene.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		So I think in partnership, working, and if there is a solution, it should certainly be bipartisan.
unidentified		And we should work with some of the social media providers to, and they took measures.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		I can recall them taking measures years ago to ensure that the folks that are commenting on their platforms are indeed American citizens.
unidentified		So that's something that we certainly should look at.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What will be Charlie Kirk's legacy?
unidentified		Unfortunately, he's a martyr, a 31-year-old kid.
		I mean, 31-year-old.
		I mean, I say that now because I'm in my 50s, but 31-year-old kid, but a 31-year-old man that was, I think, a genius in so many ways.
		I mean, he's a very good debater, and I think he did have a very kind heart, and he showed that time and again with a beautiful wife and two little children.
		So I think the legacy is going to be that he was a legend of free speech, and certainly really all Americans should celebrate his life.
		Those that tend to agree with him more on the political, in the political spectrum will remember him fondly, but we all should because he did it the right way.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Congressman, I know you only have a few minutes.
		Let me change gears to the funding debate on Capitol Hill.
		Where will we be two weeks from now?
		Do you think we're going to avoid a government shutdown?
unidentified		I do hope, and yeah, I do not only hope that we're going to avoid a government shutdown, I think we will.
		There are plans in place.
		I met with some of the members of leadership yesterday, and there is certainly a path.
		There's many different paths to get to a good place.
		And, you know, I also sit on the Armed Services Committee.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		So every time there's a CR, which stands for Continuing Resolution, but if you're on the Armed Services Committee, we call it the China Resolution because we can't start new weapons programs and defense programs on CR money.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		So we do want to see a budget to get passed.
unidentified		We do want to see these appropriations bills going through.
unidentified		And we're certainly going to do everything we can to get us there.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Do you think if we operate under a continuing resolution, there's going to be money in that continuing resolution for member security and this issue that has popped up in the wake of Charlie Kirk?
unidentified		I think there may be, yes.
		And not only for the legislative branch, but also for the Supreme Court, the judicial branch, and more executive as well.
		We really have to take it far more seriously than we have in the past.
		Not to say that we've been flippant, but we've been, I think, a bit on the laxadaisical side, inso much as there's a lot of folks that have an interest in doing us harm, not just nuts domestically in this country, but some foreign actors and certainly terrorists.
		I remember in 9-11, I mean, September of 2021, and we forgot some of those lessons.
		So we just have to, you know, prepare, you know, hope for the best, prepare for the worst, and really make ourselves, you're never going to be completely safe.
		I mean, even John Kennedy said if somebody wants to get you, they'll probably get you.
		But you don't have to make it easy.
		And so you want to be maybe not necessarily safe, but safer.
		And that's what we're looking at for all the members because the last thing we want to see, God forbid, if some member, some prominent political figure, whether they're elected or not, is harmed in the coming weeks and months, it's not going to be a healthy thing for our republic.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Another issue that's being talked about as a possible addition to a continuing resolution, additional sanctions on Russia.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Where do you stand on that?
unidentified		I'm all for it.
		I mean, I've been very clear since 2022 that the aggressor was Putin.
		We want Ukraine to expel the invader.
		They're our ally.
		They're the ones.
		You know, look, is Ukraine a functioning Jeffersonian democracy in the classic form?
		Not yet.
		But if you look historically at nations like South Korea and Taiwan, it took them about 50 years to get there.
		And Ukraine was 30 years along in that journey, so they had some time to go.
		So just because Ukraine is imperfect doesn't mean that we don't want to help them.
		And, you know, we don't want to give them a blank check at the same time.
		We don't want to do, we have to do something.
		We don't want to just do nothing and then have Russia run them over.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		So doing sanctions, secondary sanctions is a tool in President Trump's toolbox.
unidentified		I would like to see our Indian friends and Modi understand the implications of cozying up to China and Russia.
		They are the world's largest democracy.
		We're the world's oldest, and we are natural allies.
		And I would like to see some more constructive actions on their part.
		So these sanctions might help our friends on the subcontinent and others see maybe more of the light in the day.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What would you like to see come out of the state visit to the United Kingdom that the president is headed to this coming just days after the continent of Europe very concerned about the drone, the Russian drone incursion into NATO ally Poland?
unidentified		It reminds me of, I was speaking with the Estonian general a couple years ago, and he said, no one unites NATO quite like Vladimir Putin.
unidentified		And then we get two new members with Finland and Sweden.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		So I'm very glad the president's going to, you know, the special relationship is very important, the transatlantic relationship we have with Great Britain, one of our oldest friends and allies.
unidentified		And we have to show a united front with NATO.
unidentified		And we've been doing that increasingly.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		And I'd like to see, I mean, nobody would have thought 10 years ago we couldn't get many of our NATO allies to spend and commit 2% of their GDP to defense.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		Now there is an agreement on 5% because there is a threat.
unidentified		And it's unfortunate, but it is the reality.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		So starting with the strong, the major players within NATO as far as GDP and the military, of course, would be us and the Brits, the Germans, the French, and many of our other partners.
unidentified		The polls have come on very strong of late as well.
		So we need to show that united front and hopefully can deter him.
		But, you know, President Trump was talking to Putin in good faith.
		Clearly, Putin was not.
		And at the end of the day, you've got to remember he's a trained KGB officer.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Congressman, I know you've got to run to get to your day.
		One last question.
		Where are you on the Massey Cana, the discharge petition for a floor vote on releasing the Epstein files?
unidentified		I'm all for releasing them.
unidentified		That was really sloppily done with the Massey effort.
pat fallon ▲ ● ▼		And we have an alternative that we already have supported that will release hundreds of thousands of pages on this.
unidentified		Because it's not like I think a lot of folks think that there's literally some file in a filing cabinet somewhere.
		It's not.
		There's an extensive, it's extensive information.
		I fully believe in transparency.
		You just have to do it responsibly.
		And the leadership effort from our party is the responsible way to do that.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		We'll let you get to your day, Congressman Pat Fallon, Republican of Texas, Armed Services Committee Intelligence Committee as well.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Always appreciate your time.
unidentified		Thank you.
unidentified		Take care.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Just about 15 minutes left this morning in the Washington Journal.
		And it was just minutes ago that President Trump left the White House on his way to the United Kingdom for that state visit.
		And he spoke briefly with reporters along the way as he was exiting the White House.
		Here's the president.
unidentified		Mr. President.
		Stephen Myron.
		Stephen Myron was confirmed.
		Mr. President.
		He signed Stephen Myron's permission.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		He is now on the Fed.
		I'm going to call him in a few minutes from the helicopter.
		And he's a good man.
		Most of you know him.
		He's very talented.
		He'll have a big influence on this.
		But too late, getting his rates down, I guess.
		Who knows?
		You never know with too late, but he's done a lousy job.
		The rate should be much lower, much, much lower.
		But I've just signed his document and all of the papers, and Steve Myron is now on.
unidentified		The first round offensive is now underway in Gaza City.
unidentified		Your reaction is to.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		We're going to see what happens because I hear Hamas is trying to use the old human shield deal.
		And if they do that, they're going to be in big trouble.
		They're going to be in big trouble.
		They put it out two days ago that they're going to use the hostages as human shields.
		And that's something that hasn't been done for a long time, you know?
unidentified		You're going to have that deal on the Federal Reserve Congress.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Let me tell you, if they do that, they're in big trouble.
unidentified		Do you believe the Federal Reserve is an independent body?
unidentified		What do you think about the independent business?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Oh, it should be.
		It should be.
		But I think they should listen to smart people like me.
		I think I have a better instinct than him.
		If you look, all the economists got it wrong.
		I got it right along with one other people out of a hundred.
		So they should listen to people that are smart.
		Nothing wrong with that.
		But they have to make their own choice.
		But they should listen.
unidentified		Again, did you speak to a five-minute professional?
		No, I don't.
		What about the idea of Israel beginning this ground offensive in Gaza City?
		Do you support that?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, I have to see.
		I mean, I don't know too much about it.
		I can tell you that if they put the hostages in front of them, Hamas, as protection, as they call them bodyguards, Hamas is going to have hell to pay.
unidentified		Your trip to the UK, your trip to the UK today, what do you hope to achieve?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, my relationship is very good with the UK.
		And Charles, as you know, who's now king, is my friend.
		And it's the first time this has ever happened where somebody was honored twice.
		So it's a great honor.
		And this one's at Windsor.
		They've never used Windsor Castle for this before.
		They use Buccaneer Palace.
		I don't want to say one's better than the other, but they say Windsor Castle is the ultimate, right?
		So it's going to be nice.
		But basically, I'm there also on trade.
		They want to see if they can refine the trade deal a little bit.
		We made a deal, and it's a great deal.
		And I'm into helping them.
		Our country is doing very well.
		We've never done this well.
		We're having trillions of dollars coming because of the tariffs.
		They'd like to see if they could get a little bit better deal.
		So we'll talk to them.
		But primarily it's to be with Prince Charles and Camilla.
		They're friends of mine for a long time, long before he was king.
		And it's an honor to have him as King.
		And, you know, I think he represents the country so well.
		I've watched.
		He's such an elegant gentleman, and he represents the country so well.
unidentified		After Robert Redford passed away today, did you hear about that?
		Wow.
		He was barely in his sleep at his home.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's a good way to go, I guess.
		But I'll tell you, Robert Redford was great.
		He had a series of years that there was nobody better.
		This just happened, I guess.
		Wow.
unidentified		And Dad is calling you calling him in sleep.
unidentified		What movie would you say you like invested?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, you have a lot of them.
		Honestly, he made, I'd say he made seven or eight great movies.
		They were really great.
		There was a period of time when he was the hottest.
		I thought he was great.
unidentified		Well, TikTok's dark.
unidentified		Are you going to delay the TikTok ban?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, we have a deal on TikTok.
		I've reached a deal with China.
		I'm going to speak to President Xi on Friday to confirm everything up.
		We made a very good trade deal, and I hope good for both countries, but a very different deal than they've made in the past.
		We'll be announcing that.
		We have a group of very big companies that want to buy it.
		And, you know, the kids wanted it so badly.
		I had parents calling me up.
		They don't want it for themselves.
		They want it for their kids.
		They say, if I don't get it done, they're in big trouble with their kids.
		And I think it's great.
		I hate to see value like that thrown out the window.
unidentified		So on auto basketball, some auto executives.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		You know, you're talking about tens of billions of dollars.
unidentified		Some auto executives are concerned that compromising the 15% for auto tariffs coming in.
		First, American automakers.
		What do you say, Jim?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, I haven't compromised anything.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Where did I compromise?
unidentified		Going down to 15% from 20%.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Going down to 15%.
		We charge that.
		Well, and where did the 25% come from?
		It came from there.
		Can you tell me?
		Just so you know.
		They paid nothing for years.
		Now they're paying 15%.
		And some things can pay more, like chips could pay more.
		Pharmaceuticals could pay more.
		You know, there's a bigger margin.
		With a car, you have to make 15% before you make a profit.
		It's pretty tough.
unidentified		So, we had a big deal.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Don't forget, European Union is paying our country because of tariffs $950 billion.
		Think of that.
		We're talking about a year.
		$950 billion.
		Japan is paying us $650 billion.
		These are companies, these are countries that paid us nothing until I came along.
		And China is paying us a tremendous tariff.
		You know what the tariff is, right?
		You know what the tariff they're paying is?
		What?
unidentified		So it's 30% for the fentanyl as well as whatever for the 301.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		20% for the fentanyl.
		But the overall is about 55%.
		That's as opposed to nothing.
		Would you say that's a difference?
		We have a big decision coming up.
		And if the Supreme Court rules the way, hopefully they will, because, I mean, every legal expert said we win that case, but you still have to watch.
		And the Supreme Court's been terrific.
		I think they're very fair.
		All I want is fairness that we win.
		But if we win the Supreme Court case, which is the finalization of tariffs, we will be by far the richest country anywhere in the world.
		And we'll be able to help our people more.
		And we'll be able to help other countries when we want to.
		But I will say, if we win that case, our country, you see what we've taken in just on a temporary basis, we've taken in trillions of dollars, trillions, with a T.
		And we will be by far the richest country in the world.
		There'll be nothing broken.
		You know, one other thing?
		We'll have tremendous power to negotiate.
		The use of tariffs.
		I settled seven wars.
		Four of them was because I was able to use tariffs.
unidentified		Paul Leo the other day in the interview criticized the fact that some CEOs make hundreds of times more in salary than average workers.
		He's worried about polarization.
		Do you share that concern?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, I do say there's a big gap.
unidentified		I do say that.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Don't forget, I'm a popularist.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		There is a big gap.
unidentified		Mr. President, it's been a month since you started the last.
unidentified		A month on, you think that meeting accomplished what you will do?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, accomplished a lot, but it takes two to tango also.
		You know, those are two people, Zelensky and Putin, that hate each other.
		And it looks like I have to sit in the room with them because they can't sit in the room together.
		There's great hatred there.
		But no, that meeting accomplished a lot.
unidentified		Mr. President, you don't have a complete confidence in Cascade.
unidentified		What are you hoping comes from his testimony on the road today?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, first of all, I think that Pam Bondi has done an unbelievable job, and everybody agrees with that.
		And cash, you know, if you look at, take a look at what he did with respect to this horrible person that he just captured.
		He did it in two days.
		It took other similar cases, four days, five days, four years, if you look at certain shooters.
		Now, I have confidence that everybody in the administration.
		My administration, and a lot of people are saying it, not just me, it's so far the best administration ever formed.
		You look at our financial people.
		Our country is making a fortune.
		We have to keep tariffs because our country has become successful because of tariffs.
		We have the case in the Supreme Court.
		That's a very vital case for the success of our country.
		It's very vital to negotiate with other countries.
		And remember, other countries charge us tariffs.
		That's a very, very big case.
		And if we win that case, our country will be by far the richest country anywhere in the world.
		And then we can help our people.
		We'll get rid of debt.
		We'll get rid of everything.
		We can help our people.
		And we can even help other countries where they need it.
unidentified		Narcotics in Venezuela.
		Narcotics in Venezuela.
		President Maduro in Venezuela says that you're getting ready to invade his country.
		What is his message to him?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, I would say this right away.
		Stop sending Trend in Aragua into the United States.
		Stop sending drugs into the United States.
		We knocked off actually three boats, not two, but you saw two.
		And the problem is there are very few boats out in the water.
		There are not a lot of boats out on the water.
		I can't imagine why.
		Not even fishing boats.
		There's nobody.
		Nobody wants to go take a fish.
		So it's one of those things.
		But I would say to him very strongly, stop sending people from your prisons into our country.
		They're sending their prisoners.
		They've done that already.
		So the numbers just came out.
		Another month with zero people getting into our country.
		And these are figures, John, with people like you that would like me to do badly.
		Nobody has ever done on the border like I've done.
unidentified		What will you tell Prince Zelensky if you meet with him in New York?
unidentified		What do you think?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, he's going to have to get going and make a deal.
		He's going to have to make a deal.
		Zelensky's going to have to make a deal.
		And Europe has to stop buying oil from Russia.
unidentified		Okay?
unidentified		You know, they talk.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		They have to stop buying oil from Russia.
unidentified		Mr. President, let us on first.
		I'm particularly regarded to be the wealthiest man who's ever occupied the White House.
		How much wealthier are you now than when you returned to the White House?
		Well, I don't know.
		The deals I made for the most part, other than what my kids are doing.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		You know, they're running my business.
		But most of the deals that I've made were made before.
		And that's what I've done for a life.
		I've built buildings like I'm building a building here.
		You know where I built?
		You know what?
		Do you see that area?
		That is going to be the greatest ballroom anywhere in the world.
		And for 150 million.
		So it gives me pleasure to do it for the country.
		And I'm paying for it.
		I'm paying for it.
		And that's an expensive ballroom.
		I think it'll cost $250 million.
		And it will be, I think, the finest ballroom.
		So for 150 years, John, do you know this?
		They've wanted a ballroom.
		And now they're going to finally have it.
		And it's going to knock your socks off.
unidentified		It is an appropriate President Trump that a president in office should be engaged in so much business activity.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm really not.
		My kids are running the business.
		I'm here.
		You know what?
		The activity, where are you from?
unidentified		I'm from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Four Corners Project.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Oh, the Australians.
		You're hurting Australia.
		In my opinion, you are hurting Australia very much right now.
		And they want to get along with me.
		You know, your leader is coming over to see me very soon.
		I'm going to tell him about you.
		You set a very bad tone.
		Go ahead, John.
		Maybe you're going to be able to do it.
		You can set a nice.
unidentified		Quiet.
		Mr. President, what are you hearing about the operation in Gaza, the Israeli operation?
		Are you concerned?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm hearing that they want to go in, and I'm also hearing that Hamas wants to take our 20 hostages plus dead bodies.
		You know, they have about 32 of them.
		And they want to put them in the way of any attack.
		And nobody's happy about that situation.
		It came out yesterday.
		I'm sure you saw that.
		Supposedly, they've taken the hostage out of deep caves and tunnels, and they're bringing them, putting them on the front line.
		Nobody's heard of that one for a few centuries.
unidentified		You saw that the UN said that Israel is guilty of genocide and has committed acts of genocide in Gaza.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		They voted on that?
jd vance ▲ ● ▼		They have a new report out saying multiple acts of genocide.
unidentified		When it comes to a vote, we'll see what happens.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		That'll come to a vote, but we'll see what happens.
unidentified		And what do you think Cam Bondi's saying she's going to go after hate speech?
unidentified		Is that, I mean, a lot of people, a lot of your allies say hate speech is free speech.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		She'll probably go after people like you because you treat me so unfairly.
		It's, hey, you have a lot of hate in your heart.
		Maybe that'll come after ABC.
		Well, ABC paid me $16 million recently for a form of hate speech, right?

▲