CSPAN - Washington Journal

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 18, 2026 11:00-12:53 - CSPAN

01:52:52

Washington Journal

Source

Participants

Main

chet love

12:41

kimberly adams

cspan 20:07

lucy caldwell

16:34

roben farzad

23:43

Appearances

donald j trump

admin 02:14

ilhan omar

rep/d 02:16

rita dove

01:30

Clips

brian lamb

cspan 00:29

david rubenstein

00:14

janet phelan

00:11

Callers

mark-2 in tennessee

callers 00:10

matt in phoenix

callers 01:15

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
Why Trump Wants Greenland 00:15:40
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Face the tariff, Trump said in a social media post while at his golf club in West Palm Beach, Florida.
		The rate would climb to 25% on June 1st if no deal was in place for, quote, the complete and total purchase of Greenland by the United States, he said.
		The Republican president appeared to indicate that he was using tariffs as leverage to force talks with Denmark and other European countries over the status of Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of a NATO-allied Denmark, that he regards as critical to U.S. national security.
		Now, in response to this and all of the other rhetoric, European Council President Antonio Costa said yesterday that member states are coordinating a joint response to Trump's tariff threats over Greenland.
		Here's a portion of his statements through a translator.
unidentified		If we want prosperity, we must open markets, not close them.
		We must create zones of economic integration, not increase tariffs.
		What we can say is that the European Union will always be very firm in defending international law, wherever it may be.
		And of course, starting within the territory of the European Union's member states.
		For now, I'm coordinating a joint response from the European Union's member states on this issue.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Now, then, Lucy, I want to come back and start with you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Your response to this latest development in the story.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Well, this is unprecedented.
		This is a completely outrageous thing to have happened, and it is a very frightening thing to have happened because it really threatens to alter some of our key alliances and some of our most treasured relationships with members of the European Union, with the United Kingdom.
		This is very scary stuff.
		And one of the big problems when we look at what the response is domestically is that even though you do have a few Republican senators, people like Tom Tillis or Lisa Murkowski, speaking up and saying, This is not right.
		This is not how we interact with our allies.
		This is not an appropriate way to approach the Greenland situation.
		Those Republicans, whether they're more to the center or they're on the far right of the party, so the continuum of the Murkowski to Massey continuum, let's call it, they do not have enough power to be able to check the president.
		And the president is using his tariff power, which is a power that Congress gave over to presidents and really should take back, but in a way that is so abusive that unless Congress becomes totally different people and Mike Johnson has a new identity overnight, will not soon be limited.
		And that is a really frightening situation for us to be in as a country.
		The president using the power of tariffs, which arguably he should not even have, to threaten our allies in a way that not only threatens the sovereignty of another nation, in this case around Greenland, but also threatens to completely eviscerate NATO and other key diplomatic relationships that we count on as Americans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Chet, I want to get your response as well, but I want to read a bit of polling first.
		So there was a recent poll that found 86% of voters say they would oppose the U.S. trying to take Greenland by military force, and 55% would oppose trying to buy Greenland.
		Then there's further polling from Quinnipiek that say that under President Trump, 50% of voters say that the moral authority of the United States has become weaker under President Trump, only 34% saying it has gotten stronger, 12% saying it is about the same, 13%, excuse me, saying it's about the same.
		Why is President Trump persisting in this?
chet love ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think everyone needs to understand that the major issue that we have right now in the world is that we're giving up potentially for a World War III.
		And that has to be something that's top of mind for everyone to understand the context of all the things that we're doing.
		We're talking about Venezuela and the oil and resources.
		We're looking at AI and the energy issues that we're facing with China.
		And so with this particular issue with Greenland, I know most people confuse Greenland and Iceland all the time, but specifically with Greenland and where it's located, it is an essential location for us to be able to track Chinese and Russian subs that could potentially come off of our East Coast border and fire nuclear weapons at the United States.
		It's an absolute strategic asset for us to have, given the current state of affairs that we have going on in the world right now.
		And so I understand for most people, it's hard for them to understand or to put all that together, but I think fundamentally that is a very, very important piece that we need to be considering.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Just to follow up with you, Chet, you know, both Greenland, Denmark, several of the NATO allies have said they are open to more U.S. troops in Greenland, more of a U.S. military presence in that semi-autonomous territory.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Why is that not enough for what you just laid out?
chet love ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, well, essentially the challenge it becomes is that what we've seen is that the U.S. is the leader in the world in terms of military dominance.
		We're the ones who are the most vulnerable in terms of attacks.
		And so making sure that the U.S. has the strategic assets where we need to be able to have them, regardless of what any other country is doing, is essential.
		As Americans, it needs to be about America first.
		And our focus needs to be about protecting Americans above anything else.
		And so making sure that we have the appropriate locations for the United States to be able to have military installations, to be able to have our subs.
		Because currently right now, we do rely on some ports in Norway.
		We do rely on some ports in the United Kingdom.
		But to be able to have our own ports in that area, in the region of the world, would be an invaluable asset long term for the United States.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Lucy, I want to switch to the – oh, I see that you have a response, Lucy.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		I just, I was surprised to hear you use a phrase like World War III.
		I mean, that is a very bold statement.
		And I would suggest that to the degree that I think that we are in jeopardy, I would agree that we are.
		I would say that it is because of the moves of this presidential administration, of the Trump administration.
		But if we play out that narrative that we are headed for World War III, who are our allies in that situation, right?
		Do we not hope, if we are adversarial to Russia and China, that our allies would be our European friends?
		We already have a base in Greenland, and I've never heard anyone suggest that the key to our security is that we must erase the sovereignty of other nations.
		And importantly, I think not only do we have a base, but if we are going to play that out, then pretty soon we'll have to go take over many countries in a way that is completely unsustainable because every, I mean, the UK, that's a key point, right?
		You know, all kinds of countries.
		And so I would just exercise caution around going down that road because when Donald Trump was running, the thing that attracted Americans to his notion of America first was this idea,
		whether it was in the most recent election cycle or when he first came to office in 2016, was that he was going to help them get away from what they saw as the neoconservative wing of the party of war hawks who were leading us into Afghanistan or Iraq, that this was going to be a new day for the country because we would stop fighting endless wars.
		So to say that now in Trump 2.0, we're gearing up for World War III and we must go seize the countries of our allies, I don't see how that makes us any different than the countries that we know pose a grave threat to not only the American way of life, but the anti-autocratic way of life, countries like Russia and others.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So Chet, I want to follow up on Lucy's point about allies, because several folks have laid out that this really, if the U.S. makes moves on Greenlands against the opposition of our European allies, it could be a complete destruction of NATO or really undermine these relationships in this parameter that you lay out of more global conflict.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of Lucy's point there?
chet love ▲ ● ▼		Well, the reality that we're facing is that Trump has led always with peace through strength.
		And so the idea that Trump now is escalating things and causing problems is laughable.
		The reality is that when we left Trump during the first term, he had de-escalated things with North Korea.
		The world was a peaceful place.
		It was the Biden administration that made too many miscalculations around the globe, which left.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		But to the point of our allies moving forward.
chet love ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
		So I think in terms of our allies moving forward, our allies and our longtime allies in NATO are going to continue to be our allies.
		Yes, does Trump ruffle feathers?
		Of course he ruffles feathers.
		Are they going to be slightly upset that he's looking to take Greenland?
		Sure.
		But the reality is Greenland is a colony of Denmark.
		It's not its own standalone country on its own.
		It belongs currently to Denmark.
		And so simply working with Denmark to sell Greenland, which it's certainly within his purview to do, as the UK has sold other territories to the United States previously, is not outside the realm of possibility.
		This is not some Gestapo tactics or something like that.
		This is simply Donald Trump doing what's best for America and really making America much more safer.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I want to switch to a different topic, which is the news coming out of Minnesota, where protests are ongoing against the ICE enforcement action in the city, as well as protests against the shooting of Rene Goode.
		There has been so much political division over what actually happened in the many videos that we have all seen about this.
		I'm going to look at some polling from Quinnipiak about whether or not the shooting of Rene Goode was justified.
		And 53% of Americans overall say that it was not justified compared to 35% who say it was justified.
		12% say they don't know.
		But when you break that down by party, it looks very, very different.
		Again, 53% of all voters say that the shooting was not justified.
		But when it comes to Democrats, 92% say that the shooting was not justified.
		59% of Independents say it was not justified.
		But just 10% of Republicans say it wasn't justified.
		Chet, I'll stay with you.
		Why is there this division when the videos are there for all to see?
chet love ▲ ● ▼		And the crazy part about it, this wasn't even AI.
		We all saw the same video and so many people came to so many different conclusions.
		And I think that part of the reality of what we're dealing with here is that the shooting is a proxy for immigration enforcement.
		And so, yes, of course, most Democrats are going to say, we don't like what's going on in this country.
		We don't like the immigration enforcement.
		We don't like the videos we're seeing on TV in terms of ICE agents.
		And Republicans are saying, yes, we do agree that this should be happening.
		This is what we voted for.
		So I think the issue.
		Unfortunately, is this one death is becoming politicized in a larger context around immigration enforcement and not just specifically dealing with this particular individual and the interaction that she had with law enforcement.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Lucy, it does not appear that these protests are at all diminishing the activities of ICE in Minneapolis.
		The Trump administration has really doubled down and said they plan to continue and really criticize the anti-ICE protests.
		What do you think comes next here?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think it's important that we not just accept that concept of this being a proxy for immigration.
		I think that the reason that people see different things is because they have different perceptions around what the relationship should be in law enforcement and communities.
		It's not that people saw different versions of the video.
		It's that they have different ideas around what the role of masked, unidentified federal law enforcement agents should be in America's cities and towns.
		And so I just want to get that out there because I think that is very, very important in terms of answering that question of what comes next.
		I don't think that it is likely that these protests will soon dissipate.
		I think that as the weather warms, we will actually see context that are very likely to be more reminiscent of some previous eras of activism that we experienced in this country.
		I do hope, I think that what happened to Renee Good, what is happening in cities across the country is appalling.
		It's horrible.
		It is outrageous.
		We should be talking about what kind of standards ICE is held to about the complete lack of training of some of these folks.
		But I want to share one anecdote because I think it's really important to what comes next, which is I was with a European political activist last year who was a peace activist in the 90s in a country in Eastern Europe.
		And he had been part of organizing a youth movement.
		And in that movement, you know, there was at that time brutal beatings of anyone who was protesting this authoritarian regime.
		He and his colleagues in this youth movement decided that they would take a different approach with law enforcement when they were arrested.
		And they started saying to people as they were being arrested by these likewise, you know, masked, unidentified thugs, they would say, we know that you're just doing your job and we're going to be peaceful, you know, and arrest us.
		Okay, it is what it is.
		And they actually stopped being beaten.
		The arrests were reduced.
		And there was like ultimately like a case study written about this sort of scenario around the approach that these activists took.
		Now, what is going on is outrageous.
		People should continue to take part in these protests.
		They should continue to be active.
		They should continue to film.
		The court, the ruling that we got a few days ago around what ICE and is not allowed to do is important.
		They should read that.
		They should get exercise.
		But I do think that the optics of people, you know, filming Greg Bevito and saying, F you, and I hope you, you know, die, and just the aggression toward ICE agents and those optics, the kind of TikTok era, super unhelpful.
		And if we want to capitalize on this energy of this appalling thing that is happening, we should look to lessons of other people fighting autocrats in other places and really get serious about what a serious and peaceful movement would look like as we try to raise awareness and really put these people on notice that this cannot continue to happen.
Masked ICE Agents Controversy 00:15:47
unidentified		Real quick question.
chet love ▲ ● ▼		Did I hear Lucy call law enforcement thugs?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		I did.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		I did.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		This is a lot of people.
		Chet, I didn't call law enforcement thugs.
		I believe that people, the masked ICE agents with very little training who are going into scenarios where they are behaving in ways that are completely different from what we would expect from a member of the military, from a member of local law enforcement, into communities that are not their own.
		Yes, I do think that we have seen thuggish behavior on display.
		And what's disingenuous right now about where I think you're headed with this is that what I think maybe you didn't hear, Chet, is that I just went on at great lengths encouraging people who are anti-ICE protesters to cease with this kind of viral video FU stuff.
		And I'm characterizing ICE agents in some of these situations in videos as behaving as thugs.
		And I can already foresee that what you're about to do is extrapolate from that that I am calling, quote, all law enforcement thugs.
		So go ahead, but let's be clear about what I said and what I didn't say.
chet love ▲ ● ▼		No, listen, I let the American people make the decision in terms of what they heard.
		All I'm simply articulating is this type of rhetoric has been continually coming from the left in terms of calling law enforcement thugs.
		You have the mayor swearing at law enforcement.
		You have the governor simply undermining law enforcement.
		So yeah, I mean, I think the American people can just make a decision for themselves in terms of what makes sense here.
		I just think it's absolutely crazy that we're living in a world where law enforcement who are literally doing their jobs and following the law are now being called Gestapo, being called thugs.
		I mean, it's just, I mean, it's just ridiculous.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, let's hear from the American people.
		We're going to hear from the American people because I want to give our audience a chance to ask you all questions.
		We didn't quite get to the economic topics, but we might ping on that later.
		Let's start with Dee in Cincinnati, Ohio on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Dee.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, we can hear you.
unidentified		All right.
		Good morning.
		I hope you'll give me a minute to get my thoughts out.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Quickly, though, because we do want to make sure we give our guests a chance to respond to that.
unidentified		Yeah, okay.
		Kid should be ashamed of itself.
		Number one.
		Number one, Kid, Donald Trump is delusional and a coward.
		All right.
		And he don't have a clue about how to run a country.
		And for the Republicans who keep justifying all this foolishness.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Do you have a question for Chet Dean?
unidentified		Yeah.
		The question is, how come these so-called ICE agents, and they're nothing but the plowboys?
		But anyway, what is wrong with us knowing the name of the shooter of the woman in Minnesota and all the, how come we can't see the history of how they were hired, who they are, this stuff with mask on.
		As a woman, I'm scared to death that one of them will run up on me or my nieces.
		And with, because one of the so-called ICE agents was a rapist, and he wasn't an ICE.
		He had bought the suit online and he had ICE on his vehicle and he was, some man had to stop him from raping a woman.
		He was no more ICE than I am.
		And you sit up and you justify all this foolishness.
		America is under a dictatorship and doesn't.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So Dee, if I understand your question correctly, I want to make sure that we understand your question.
		So we do know the identity of the ICE agent who shot Renee Goode, but I believe your larger point is that we should know more about the identities of ICE agents and you're opposed to them wearing masks.
		Is that right?
		Okay, then I'm going to let Chet respond.
		I'm going to let Chet respond.
chet love ▲ ● ▼		I think at the end of the day, number one, these ICE agents are going out and doing a job where they have to, again, protect themselves.
		The reality of the situation is we just had a doxing by liberals of many ICE agents with their names, telephone numbers that threaten their families.
		And again, we have Democrats who are elected Democrats and other Democrats on media going out and calling these people thugs and encouraging people to engage in violence against these law enforcement agents.
		And so they do have to continue to protect them.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Democratic leaders have encouraged them to engage in violence.
chet love ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, we see, you know, multiple Ilhan Omar and others have gone out with the rhetoric, I think, that ultimately leads people to feel empowered to attack ICE agents.
		ICE agents' attacks have been up over like a thousand percent, we've seen in the past year.
		And again, a lot of that is coming from the rhetoric from the left.
		Instead of simply saying, we're going to allow for ICE agents to continue to do their job as they did under the Obama administration.
		In fact, most people don't realize this, but President Obama deported more people than Donald Trump has done.
		And Tom Holman, who's currently running ICE, was the same guy running ICE during the Obama administration.
		So the tactics and what ICE is doing is very similar and the same.
		It's just the rhetoric that's coming from the left, which has caused for most people to go out of their homes and engage in these type of interactions with law enforcement, which is completely unnecessary and ultimately resulted in the death of Renee Goode.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's listen to some of what Representative Ilhan Omar has said about this case in particular.
		She represents Minnesota.
		She's a Democrat.
		And she was talking last week about the shooting as well as the progressive caucus in the House announcing that they plan to use, to oppose any federal funding for ICE following that shooting.
		Let's listen to Representative Omar.
ilhan omar ▲ ● ▼		This did not happen in isolation.
		This was not an accident.
		And it was certainly not inevitable.
		This killing is the direct consequence of deliberate choices made by Donald Trump and his administration.
		Over the last few months, the president has repeatedly inflamed tensions, espoused hateful rhetoric, and intensified attacks on Minnesotans, especially the Somali community.
		ICE's increasingly violent actions have terrorized our state and culminated in this meatless loss of life.
		This is what happens when you give people with guns impunity.
		Dangerous things take place.
		To be clear, demanding accountability is not radical.
		Calling for systematic reforms are not extreme.
		This is the bare minimum required to restore safety and justice back to our communities.
		The American people deserve answers and accountability.
		They deserve to live without fear of federal agents acting as judge, jury, and executioner in our streets.
		And so today, I am glad to announce that the Congressional Progressive Caucus has adopted an official position to hold ICE accountable.
		Our caucus members will oppose all funding for immigration enforcement in any appropriation bills until meaningful reforms are enacted to end militarized policing practices.
		We cannot and we should not continue to fund agencies that operate with impunity, that escalate violence, and that undermine the very freedoms this country claims to uphold.
		ICE has no place in terrorizing Minneapolis or any American community.
		Together, we will stand united to ensure we put a check on the pattern of violence and lawlessness from this administration.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Lucy, the Democrats don't have a ton of power in Congress right now.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		How effective do you think this will be at actually changing anything that ICE is doing?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think moment to moment it won't be effective in changing what ICE is doing, but I do think that it will probably be effective in rallying voters in this year.
		We're in the year 2026.
		We're in a critical midterm year in going to the polls and getting actively engaged.
		And something that AOC said last week that actually reflects a message for Democrats that is very powerful is drawing the comparison between ICE funding, which is ever-growing, it feels, with cuts to services that Americans really, really want.
		There was a sound bite of AOC's where she described the experience that many Americans now are having of feeling like the rug has been pulled out from under them on health care.
		And she said, you know, when you are looking at what's happening in your cities and towns and the way that this ICE encroachment is harming your communities and making you feel unsafe and making you feel like there is no relief in sight, understand, this is in her soundbite, right, that we can draw a direct line between congressional Republicans making cuts, for example, to health insurance premiums to where we are now.
		This is what this party is prioritizing.
		And that is a soundbite that is very, very powerful and that Americans are very responsive to.
		So I do think that that kind of messaging and that kind of language from someone like Congresswoman Omar, that contrary to what was suggested a moment ago, there's nothing violent about that.
		That is very rule of law centric, that is very procedural.
		I think that that kind of messaging and that kind of approach, in contrast to what people think of as the violent images that they're seeing and rhetoric that is off-putting from powerful Republicans, that is a course that Democrats should certainly stay on.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So Chet, because Lucy brought up the midterms, I want to bring up some polling from a real clear polling about the sort of generic congressional outlook for the midterms and finding that about 46% of people would support Democrats in a sort of generic midterm ballot compared to 42% of Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What do you think this moment in Minnesota and the overall immigration enforcement means for the sort of narratives heading into the midterms, especially when layered on those sort of economic messages that Lucy was just talking about?
chet love ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, well, I mean, I think we've seen it.
		Again, Democrats have been rudderless all of last year after they lost the general, and they've continued to be rudderless still.
		And their only thing that they can do is do anti-Trump.
		And the only thing, again, they can do is continue to talk about and try to scare people into saying, you know, Trump's going to invoke the Insurrection Act.
		Trump's going to not allow people to vote, et cetera, et cetera.
		But the reality is, is that Trump and the Republican Party were elected by the majority of Americans to do the job that he's doing right now.
		And yes, typically in most midterms, we do see that the party in power typically loses in the midterm.
		So it's a very tight race.
		We have over 26 Republicans that are retiring.
		I think we have like 20 or so Democrats that are retiring in this midterm election.
		So it's going to be a very tight race.
		But we're going to see what happens in some of these states with some of the redistricting and some of the other changes that are going to happen.
		So we'll see how all of this is going to play out.
		But yeah, I think Minnesota and a lot of these situations that are happening around the country are trying to be capitalized on by Democrats.
		But I don't know that the American people are really going to truly be moved.
		I think a lot of people see what they want to see, as we talked about in the polling, right?
		And so the people who are going to vote for Republicans are going to continue to vote Republican.
		The people who are going to vote for Democrats are going to vote for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		We've got a bunch of callers.
		Let's start with Brian in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
		Good morning, Brian.
matt in phoenix ▲ ● ▼		Hey, good morning.
		You know, we've gotten into this political mess because for decades, both parties have been enforcing the law in many realms.
		Like we don't enforce Sherman Antitrust Law anymore.
unidentified		And then for decades, we haven't enforced immigration.
matt in phoenix ▲ ● ▼		And this problem is not going to go away in the post-Trump era.
		I think that climate change is very real.
		And the story of the next century is going to be millions of people moving around the planet.
		So the push factors for immigration is only going to go up.
		There's going to be more and more people trying to illegally enter the United States.
		So if the Democrats have any hope of ever regaining power, they better have a come to Jesus moment and realize that what's gone on for three decades is no longer acceptable.
		The permissive attitude where we just let people sneak in or overstay their visas and nobody cares and we just put up with it and let it go.
		That era is over.
		So I want to hear some real plans from both parties on how we're going to control it and how we're going to punish employers that exploit these immigrants.
		What's gone on is no longer acceptable.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So I think we've seen in recent weeks what the Republican and the GOP response is to immigration.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		But Lucy, what do you think of Brian's points and how the Democrats can have a message on this in this moment?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think that it's a very fair point.
		And Kimberly, you alluded to the fact at the beginning of the show that I actually am a former Republican.
		I came up on the Republican side.
		I have worked on the ground in more than 30 states at the time as a conservative policy advocate.
		So I have a little bit of a unique position in that I've seen the ins and outs of the political and public policy machinery on both sides.
		And part of why I ultimately decided to become a Democrat is that the Democratic Party, unlike the Republican Party, is in the midst of a reckoning where they are showing an openness to acknowledging just the kinds of things that you are asking them to acknowledge, that people want a different approach on immigration, that they want to get serious about a range of public policy issues that are facing them.
Democratic Party's Populist Shift 00:15:39
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		And so I think that that is a very fair ask from voters.
		And I hope that the Democratic Party, and I think that there are groups out there within the Democratic coalition that are doing a very good job on this, groups like Third Way and others.
		I hope that the Democratic Party and Democratic candidates in this election cycle will be very open to hearing from voters, just like the voter who just called, to say, yes, we do need to find a different way.
		I think that as a country, we are in a populist moment.
		I think that there is no doubt about that.
		That's not the political tradition that I come from, but that we are in a populist moment.
		And I think that what we are going to see going forward are populist figures, people like Graham Plattner in the state of Maine, for example, who's running against incumbent Democratic governor Janet Mills to replace Susan Collins, the Republican senator from Maine, who's also running.
		I think that if Democrats can accept that we are in a populist moment and figure out how to elevate leaders who will channel healthy populism to provide answers on things like immigration, reasonable limitations on immigration, you know, reasonable policies on health care, et cetera, then the Democrats can really be successful.
		I think that if they fail to accept that, they will be, and we as a country downstream, will be swept away by a tsunami of the toxic MAGA populism that is on offer from Republicans today.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's hear from Laura in Spokane, Washington on Online for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Laura.
unidentified		Good morning.
		The reason for my call is that I honestly feel that you have done this Democratic person, Lucy.
		Lucy, you have done, you have done no due diligence whatsoever on ICE.
		And you have spouted this stuff.
		They're not trained.
		They're J6ers.
		They're all this other stuff.
		You have not looked or gone to their site.
		ICE.gov.
		I invite the audience, you go there and you see what it is that they're deporting, what they're arresting.
		And so as far as these people that are out attacking ICE, they're terrorists.
		They're Democrats.
		Omar hates this country.
		She hates white people.
		She hates America.
		She hates everything about this country.
		And she's ripped us off to the tune of billions.
		And here's my other question: Why is it that you send these terrorists out there to attack ICE that are trained assassins?
		I'm talking about Antifa.
		And Hamas is well make terrorist.
		Taleb has her very own Hamas troop.
		You know, and these people are the ones that threw babies in ovens and turned the broiler on.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What are you talking about, Laura?
unidentified		Where is that coming from?
		What exactly?
		The people that are out attacking ICE on the streets that walls and the rest of them are.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So you said there were people putting babies in ovens and turning on the broiler.
unidentified		Yes, well, that's the history of Hamas.
unidentified		Okay.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Let's keep focused on.
		I believe your question to Lucy is about your saying that she's not doing due diligence on ICE.
		So let's let Lucy respond to that point specifically.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
		So one of the things that you opened with in that comment and question was that I'm suggesting that ICE agents are more participants in January 6th.
		Other callers have said that.
		I never said that.
		I have not uttered the word January 6th until now on this show.
		But I will tell you that I do believe that ICE is structurally problematic at this point.
		And I actually am quite familiar with the history of ICE.
		ICE, many people don't realize, is a relatively new agency.
		It was created during the Bush administration as part of the creation of the Department of Homeland Security.
		And it actually has been an agency that I would say arguably has been challenged from the start.
		One of the most controversial aspects of ICE is the 287G provision, which gives law enforcement agencies that are local the opportunity to partner with ICE, which means rolling sort of paramilitary equipment and troops into cities and towns to replace existing local law enforcement functions.
		And there was a time, and I know this because I was involved in it, when conservatives, many conservatives, were actually raising alarm about how problematic this was.
		And the sort of free market libertarian wing of the Republican Party was very activated on this when I was working at the Goldwater Institute, which is a state-based political conservative think tank.
		We actually were working to raise alarm about how these ICE programs were happening.
		My specific issue with ICE right now, which again, we used to have these functions before ICE was created 20-ish years ago.
		They were covered by INS and customs.
		So it's not that we weren't doing these functions.
		My central issue right now, among other things, including the fact that they are not required to wear uniforms, show their faces, they're not wearing body cameras, which I would hope all Americans would like because we all want transparency, right?
		Is that, among other things, in this drive to recruit other ICE agents and get them on the streets, we have done things like cut the training from 16 weeks to eight weeks, right?
		That is completely different from what we would expect for someone who's going to a police academy, someone who's going to deploy abroad.
		So those are among my problems with the ICE situation.
		And I have done my due diligence.
		And those are some of the central reasons that I think we need to really get this in check.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Ched, I want to follow up on the training point.
		There's an article in Politico that there's a push for greater ICE training grows on some Republicans.
		Criticism of ICE has grown among influential voices for the president's coalition in the wake of the Minneapolis shooting.
		A handful of GOP lawmakers are showing an openness to Democrats' demands that immigration officers should get more training in the wake of the shooting of 37-year-old Renee Good in Minneapolis.
		The lawmakers are not going so far as to criticize the Trump administration's approach to immigration enforcement outright.
		And Republicans on the Hill are mostly backing the Trump administration's ICE operation operations, but they're raising the possibility that additional training could make such shootings less likely.
		What do you think of these pushes, this overall push that ICE needs more training than they're getting right now?
chet love ▲ ● ▼		I think law enforcement officers should get as much support as they absolutely can get, right?
		And additional training to be able to handle all situations is important.
		And of course they need more help now, given the fact that you have many liberals who are going out, like Antifa and others, as the caller suggested, that are organizing these protests and attacking these law enforcement officers.
		Again, we have to, if we go back to the Obama administration, CNN was doing drive arounds with ICE agents when they were going through this enforcement.
		No one was complaining.
		People thought it was a good and normal thing, right?
		You only had extreme left wing of the party that was protesting Obama, deporting these people when Tom Holman, the same guy who's running ICE, is running ICE today.
		Today, you have a completely different political environment where the Democratic Party is trying to capitalize and create this angst.
		We talked about the midterms.
		The issue that we have today is that many Democrats are trying to use this as a platform to run on during the midterms.
		And it's unfortunate that immigration, law enforcement officers just trying to do their job has been so politicized, and it's endangering the lives of law enforcement officers and endangering the lives of average civilians.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Keith is in Boulder, Colorado on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Keith.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you both for taking questions.
		First of all, Chet, would you like to apologize for the attack, which was fat check, on Elhan Omar for citing that she's causing violence?
		We just got declared.
		Do you want to apologize for that?
		But I have another question.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So, Keith, he clarified that he believes her rhetoric allows conditions that might encourage people to take violent acts.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		He didn't say that that clip was a political statement.
unidentified		You played the clip.
		You played the clip, and what she was talking about was policy.
		So I would like him to either retract it or apologize.
chet love ▲ ● ▼		Well, if I can simply respond to it, I would like to be able to run all the clips that Ilhan Omar has said in all of her rhetoric.
		So that was one specific clip.
		I was not referring to that specific clip, sir.
		I was simply referring to her larger rhetoric.
		And in fact, she's received significant condemnation, I think, recently, saying the calling the U.S. the goddamn United States in reference, excuse me, to the in one of her hearings.
		So again, her lack of respect and reverence for this country and what we're simply trying to do is just completely reprehensible and is consistent with what we've seen from liberals across the country.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Keith, did you have another question?
unidentified		Yeah, please, Chet, because I have a lot of respect for conservatisms, for conservatism, and I'm a very liberal progressive, but just like the Democratic strategist there, who is a former conservative, I'm not respecting the inconsistency in your argument.
		Do you believe, sir, that might makes right?
		When it comes to Greenland, we have our allies, NATO allies, sending troops and reconnaissance teams to Greenland.
		Do you think that we had an issue with Greenland previous to this administration?
		And finally, yes, Obama did deport 3 million people quietly without masks and without drama.
		And no one was incensed because of the tactical application of it.
		I'll let you respond.
		And, Chet, you're not proving your conservatism.
		You're proving, I mean, showing your allegiance to Trump, and that is not respectable.
chet love ▲ ● ▼		I think ultimately in the day, it's not about allegiance to Trump.
		It's just looking at the facts.
		And the facts are that ICE agents have been wearing masks.
		They were wearing masks under Tom Holman.
		Again, under the Obama administration.
		So that policy ultimately did not change.
		And I forgot the last question.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, the other question was about Greenland.
chet love ▲ ● ▼		I mean, listen, as I've articulated before, with Greenland, and we talked about the allies, the question ultimately is, are we, as the United States, going to continue to be beholden to everyone else, or are we going to take care of America first?
		And that's just simply the question.
		And I think the American voters and the rest of the world can make their own decisions about that.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Lamar is in Maple Heights, Ohio on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Lamar.
unidentified		Good morning, everybody.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, we can hear you.
unidentified		Yes, I just have a few statements and very, very, very.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Please keep them brief.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		We're nearing the end of the segment.
unidentified		I understand, and I will.
		And just at the end, a question for Mr. Love.
		He seems to be a very intelligent gentleman, but there's been a few comments that actually has been factual.
		The man, young man from New Mexico, made the comment about the decisions of Congress that they are the ones that missed the ball on actually doing policy or forming policy for immigration.
		And they are responsible for a lot of the blame.
		I understand that.
		But young man, what I want to bring to your attention, you are a man of color.
		You have to understand this same shoe could be on your foot, okay?
		And because of all these countries that this president has banned are countries of color, okay?
		And what he tapped into getting elected was a simple thing about people having issues with color.
		Also, my question is, when Kimberly asks you the question, why is it not enough of the security under all of the bases that the United States have and a lot of the allied countries, why is it not enough?
		You never answered that.
		You've deflected.
		Okay?
		But what I need you to understand is that, hey, listen, all this could be on your side.
		When it hits home, you have a different feeling.
		Okay?
		And I can tell you're a very intelligent gentleman.
		But listen, you have to understand your political choices and what you're doing.
		Okay?
		The young lady here, Lucy.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So, Lamar, it seems like your question has to do with sort of immigration and foreign policy.
		Immigration and foreign policy.
		And I know that we are receiving several comments on social media, Chet, pointing out or arguing that most of these immigration enforcement actions do tend to target people of color and not necessarily immigrants from European countries or something like that.
		So do you want to respond to those points that Lamar made?
chet love ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
		So first, the first remark I always want to make is to understand people, you look at conservatives, especially conservatives of color, and they simply say, you know, shame on you, or you should know better, or et cetera.
		Look, the reality is my family, we're foundational black Americans.
		We've been in this country since the 1700s.
		So no one can question my Americanism.
		No one can question my heritage of being in this country.
		And so I think that when we talk about the shoe being on the other foot, there is no other foot.
		My family has been here and has participated in every single World War to fight for this country.
		And so there's a lot of history there that we could talk about offline.
		You can reach me online at ChetIsLove on X or on Instagram.
		But when it comes to the specific issues around international issues, again, I'll say this again and again.
		We have to focus on what's in the best interest for America.
		It's not about what's in the best interest for NATO, what's in the best interest for all these other issues.
Negotiating Greenland's Future 00:02:23
chet love ▲ ● ▼		When Donald Trump came into his first term, one of the things that he got done was to get more of these NATO allies to pay their fair share into NATO because the United States was getting ripped off and we were having to pay more to protect the entire world.
		And so with Donald Trump simply trying to negotiate a deal to purchase Greenland, he has not sent troops into Greenland.
		He's not taking over Greenland.
		He's negotiating a deal for Greenland, and there's nothing wrong with negotiating a deal to try to acquire Greenland for our own national security.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Lucy, we are just about out of time for this segment, but I wonder if you had any closing thoughts.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		I do want to just mention that a couple of things that Chet has said over the course of this show have been inaccurate.
		One is saying that Greenland is a colony.
		It's not.
		There is certainly a Greenland independence movement.
		Wouldn't dispute that at all, but it is part of Denmark, right?
		So we are talking about going in and we are threatening the sovereignty of a country that is supposed to be one of our key allies.
		And we are going to functionally eviscerate NATO, which helps the countries we should consider our adversaries, countries like Russia and China.
		Also, a few moments ago, Chet said that masking was a regular practice for ICE agents under the Obama administration.
		That is also inaccurate.
		A former acting ICE director under Obama made comments last year about the fact that that is not a practice that he ever saw.
		So I really appreciate this forum.
		But what I appreciate about it is just the very high degree of accuracy that you all hold yourselves to and that the callers do as well.
		So thank you so much for the time.
		I just wanted to plug those things.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Because she made that direct statement about things that you said very quickly.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Did you have any response?
unidentified		No.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right, then we're going to end it there.
		Thank you very much to Lucy Caldwell, Democratic strategist, and Chet Love, a Republican strategist, as well as all of the callers who shared their opinions and their questions.
		Later on Washington Journal, we're going to be joined by NPR's Robin Farzad to discuss the latest data on the U.S. economy and financial and economic stories to watch in 2026.
Ben Freeman Interview 00:02:58
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		But next, after the break, we'll have open forum.
		You can start coming in now, calling in now.
		Here are the lines.
		Democrats at 202-748-8000.
		Republicans at 202-748-8001.
		And Independents at 202-748-8002.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Watch America's Book Club, C-SPAN's bold original series.
unidentified		Today, with our guest Pulitzer Prize winner and former U.S. Poet Laureate, Rita Dove, who has authored several collections of poetry.
rita dove ▲ ● ▼		Don't think you can forget her.
		Don't even try.
		She's not going to budge.
		No choice but to grant her space, crown her with sky, for she is one of the many, and she is each of us.
unidentified		She joins our host, renowned author and civic leader David Rubenstein.
david rubenstein ▲ ● ▼		Did your teachers say, well, look, poetry is not a big career future.
		You should write prose.
		Did they people tell you that or not?
rita dove ▲ ● ▼		You see, I didn't even know that it was something that you could do and live with your life.
		I thought that, and I was writing poetry from the age of 10, I guess, but it was always a secret thing.
		It was a thing that I wrote and thought, okay, this is my secret.
		It was my thing that I enjoyed.
		I didn't realize that a little black girl could become a poet.
unidentified		Watch America's Book Club with Rita Dove today at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
unidentified		On this episode of Book Notes Plus with our host, Brian Lamb.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		The Trillion Dollar War Machine is the name of the book.
		The co-authors are William Hartung and Ben Freeman.
		They both do work for the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a think tank in Washington, D.C.
		It's a nonprofit research organization whose stated purpose is to oppose the military-industrial complex described by President Eisenhower in his farewell address.
		We will talk with co-author Ben Freeman, the Quincy Institute Director of Democratizing Foreign Policy.
unidentified		A new interview with co-author Ben Freeman about his book, The Trillion Dollar War Machine: How Runaway Military Spending Drives America into Foreign Wars and Bankrupts Us at Home.
Immigration Fears Exploited 00:13:41
unidentified		Book Notes Plus, with our host Brian Lamb, is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
unidentified		Washington Journal continues.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We're in an open forum ready to take your calls.
		Mike is in Houston, Texas on our line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Mike.
		Excuse me one moment.
unidentified		But I know time can go ahead, Mike.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Sorry about that.
unidentified		Thank you.
		Thank you.
		I was hoping to get on the last segment, but I understand time constraints.
		You know, I think the ultimate conversation about immigration all comes back.
		I knew there was a case and I Googled it.
		SB 1070 in Arizona around 2012.
		Arizona was not happy with how Obama was enforcing immigration.
		So they were wanting to do some things.
		And with SB 1070, it would enable them to enforce their border in a different way or whatever.
		Well, the Supreme Court ruled you can't do that.
		The Supreme Court ruled that immigration is responsibility of the federal government.
		And afterwards, Obama was happy.
		And the Republicans like me were in Arizona, of course.
		I'm not in Arizona, but we were not happy.
		We wanted better enforcement, and Arizona felt they could do that.
		Well, the Supreme Court ruled otherwise, that the federal government is responsible.
		And Obama said, we don't want a patchwork of enforcement of immigration from 50 states.
		Now, I mean, talk about falling out of your shirt.
		This is only 14 years ago, and nobody mentions this Supreme Court case.
		How could we do this where sanctuary cities and sanctuary states seem to have this omnipotent right to determine who, you know, who is going to be staying in their country and who isn't?
		They're not neighbors.
		If they're illegal immigrants, they are illegal immigrants.
		Look at what Bill Clinton said in the 1995, 1996 State of the Union message, maybe it was 95, about illegal immigration, going after employers, like some other caller had mentioned early on.
		And all that.
		So I'm just, I'm telling you, how about Memphis, Tennessee, New Orleans, Washington, D.C.?
		We had ICE in all those cities the past year, not any news, no fights, and they executed it flawlessly.
		And yet, and they're not even in the news.
		Now, I wonder what the Democrats would say about that.
		ICE worked effectively well where the local enforcement cooperates with them.
		And that the people who are illegal are handed over to ICE.
		That's the purpose.
		So it's not about training, per se.
		It's about the definition of free speech in Minneapolis.
		Look at how they're behaving in Minneapolis.
		That's not free speech when you're throwing firecrackers and impeding and intimidating ICE members with your 4,000-pound vehicle.
		That's not the way freedom of speech works.
		But immigration is controlled by the federal government according to the Supreme Court decision, not by states like sanctuary cities like California and Minnesota.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay, next up is Christine in Winston-Salem, North Carolina on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Christine.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I am very confused about this ICE.
		ICE is nothing but the KKK.
		They're supposed to be, I guess, the future KKK because Trump's family was involved with Ku Klux Kran.
		They should not cover.
		Where are you finding that information, Christine?
		No, that's what, who covers their face but the KKK?
		Don't nobody do that, but Trump people, because their family was in KKK with his daddy was living.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So, Christine, I haven't seen any information that Trump or his family were members of the KKK.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So I just was curious if you have any evidence of that.
unidentified		Well, I read it in the, I'm always Googling something, so it's in there.
		And another thing, the family that was in that car, the black family that was in that car, and those ICE, as y'all call them, sprayed that spray in there and almost killed that little boy.
		That little boy is still in the hospital.
		And that's not right.
		They shouldn't go around spraying in people because they knew that car wasn't no foreigners.
		They knew they was American, but they were black.
		And the reason they getting hit by these automobiles, look how they walking up on these people.
		We are scared.
		And if somebody walk up on your car with a mask, and see, they're making it now.
		We're people going to start doing that.
		And we ain't going to know if they're the ICE or the fake.
		And they're going to go around hurting and killing people, pulling them out their car, cutting their straps on their car.
		It's not right.
		They should be protecting the schools where these kids are getting shot at and killed in school.
		That's what they should be doing.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So, Christine, before I let you go, we did cover that story earlier about the family that was involved with ICE and their children ended up in the hospital.
		But to this point that you raised about Donald Trump and his family in the KKK, that's not entirely true.
		It's been fact-checked several times.
		The claim is generally that Donald Trump's father was arrested following a Ku Klux Klan-related altercation back in 1927.
		This is from Snopes.com.
		And a 1927 New York Times article did name Fred Trump among the individuals arrested after a near riot involving the KKK and New York City policemen at a memorial parade.
		But the article did not document that Fred Trump was a KKK member or supporter or that he was charged with a crime in connection with the KKK event.
		So I just wanted to give you some clarification on that information.
		Let's next hear from Debbie in Williamsburg, Ohio on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Debbie.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I've been Republican and I've been a Democrat and now I'm considered, I consider myself an independent.
		But I don't understand why these people get on there and call people that want the laws of the United States of America upheld by the President of the United States of America.
		They call us leftist radical vigilantes.
		I'm 72 years old.
		You know, I'm a peaceful Christian.
		I'm not out here writing.
		And I will protest against something that I consider that goes against God in the American way.
		Trump is sending these ICE agencies in.
		I remember when he made the statement on TV that they could do anything they had to do.
		Okay?
		And they are.
		They are not.
		And it bothers me because I have law enforcement in the family.
		When you all call them law enforcement, they are not trained to be police.
		They are trained more in a militant way.
		He's sending them in to states and cities that he has a grievance against.
		And that's clear back before he was elected.
		This is political.
		To me, he is trying to riot the people like he did on January 6th so that he can establish insurrection and martial law so that we cannot have an election.
janet phelan ▲ ● ▼		He's already talking about that.
unidentified		He always talks about things in advance, and then he's planning on doing it.
unidentified		And the reason that he wants Greenland is for their minerals.
janet phelan ▲ ● ▼		We need all this stuff to make our AI stuff and all this stuff in the future.
janet phelan ▲ ● ▼		He doesn't care about the American people, okay?
unidentified		He cares about the American people and the allies that he's already established, like in Saudi Arabia and Israel and all these places, because that benefits him and them.
		It doesn't benefit us.
		So it's time that Congress and I don't think he's mentally stable anymore because a lot of this stuff is delusional.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's hear from David in Eau Claire, Wisconsin on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, David.
unidentified		Good morning, C-SPAN.
		Good morning, America.
		Just a couple of things.
		I'll try to make it really quick here.
		As far as Greenland goes, their security, I think that that just makes our country safer and that makes Europe safer.
		And the globalists and the Dems ought to be happy about it because he's globalizing.
		And this is caught with as far as South America and stuff, the cheaper energy will help keep inflation down.
		And Epstein thing, what about the parents?
		I haven't heard anything about the parents.
		And as far as the stuff in Minneapolis, I'm 80 miles away from it.
		And not even that.
		And I just think that Dems have intentionally segregated.
		And that's caused problems.
		And that's about all I got to say.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Next up is Andy in Zanesville, Ohio on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Andy.
unidentified		Hi.
		Good morning.
		I just want to speak a lot, according to the lady before, just before the Independent Lady, she brought up a lot of wonderful points that I was going to bring up.
		I think that the ICE are out of control, but I think that is what he wants.
		He does want an insurrection so that we cannot have an election to change things.
		And as far as the other things he has done to take away all our organizations that were for the people and to help the people that they've destroyed and got rid of anybody that didn't agree with him, that's authoritarian move.
		And as far as other countries go, he is turning all the other countries against us and doing everything he can to cause us to be alone and to have China and Putin be his friends.
		We need to, everybody needs to look.
		And the ICE now out of control were the situation where the poor woman was shot.
		And she is a poor woman on either side, whichever side you're on.
		She should not have been shot, period.
		She was not a threat to him.
		Her vehicle was not a threat to him.
		He could have moved at any time, and he was not hit.
		Her wheels were going the other direction.
		They have plenty of films showing that.
		And they are out of control.
		There's no reason for the violence that they are doing.
		They're not going after violent criminals.
		They are going after anyone, peaceful people.
		Yes, we have immigrants here that are here illegally.
		They're supposed to be going after the illegal ones.
		And I really feel scared for this country and what he is doing.
		And I really feel that he is out of control.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Jack is in Tallahassee, Florida, on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jack.
unidentified		Good morning, Tim and good morning, C-SPAN.
		I'm second-generation Danish, and what's happening and how the president is going about trying to get that land, he wants it for the mineral rights and whatever.
		He doesn't want there's enough air bases and they can put enough military bases in Greenland to satisfy the, I don't can't think of the word, but anyway, to satisfy the United States being protected.
		And how can you trust a continuous liar all the time?
		And then the Speaker of the House gets up and he just broken record.
		They're afraid of him, and it's a shame because I don't think there's any hope for the America that I live in and enjoyed what little bit I do have.
Martin Luther King Jr. Day Honors 00:04:13
unidentified		And I assure you, something bad's going to happen to the people of the United States.
unidentified		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I want to promote some coverage that we'll have tomorrow on Martin Luther King Jr. Day.
		On Monday, Reverend Al Sharpton will recognize community leaders, politicians, and activists at the National Action Network's annual Martin Luther King Jr. Legislative Breakfast.
		Honorees will include Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott and former Attorney General Eric Holder.
		From Washington, D.C., it will be on live starting at 8:30 a.m. Eastern on C-SPAN 3, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app, and online at c-span.org.
		Also on Monday, there'll be a wreath-laying observance that will take place at the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial to honor the late civil rights leader, Maryland Senator Angela Alsobrooks, will be delivering the keynote address at the event hosted by the Memorial Foundation.
		That will be held on the National Mall here in Washington, D.C., and you can watch that live coverage starting at 9 a.m. Eastern on C-SPAN 2, C-SPAN Now, our mobile video app, and online at c-span.org.
		But joining us next on Washington Journal, we'll be joined by NPR's Robin Farzad to discuss the latest data on the U.S. economy, as well as some of the financial and economic stories to watch in 2026.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Middle and 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.
		In a divided media world, one place brings Americans together.
		According to a new MAGA research report, nearly 90 million Americans turn to C-SPAN, and they're almost perfectly balanced.
		28% conservative, 27% liberal or progressive, 41% moderate.
		Republicans watching Democrats, Democrats watching Republicans, moderates watching all sides.
		Because C-SPAN viewers want the facts straight from the source.
		No commentary, no agenda, just democracy.
		Unfiltered every day on the C-SPAN networks.
		Washington Journal continues.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		Now for a discussion of what's happening with the U.S. economy.
		We're joined by Robin Farzad, who's the host of Public Radio's Full Disclosure.
		Welcome back to Washington Journal.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you talk a bit about Full Disclosure, the kind of topics you explore and where people can find you?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		I'd say it's an omnivorous show on the business of culture broadly.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		I understand that at least my mother-in-law is a subscriber.
Fed Chair's Investigation Announcement 00:15:49
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		You can find it on YouTube, on the NPR app, on Spotify, Apple, podcasts, wherever you get your pods.
		Increasingly, it's a vodcast where we excerpt things to video, put them on Instagram and all the social media channels.
		And I've always loved doing public radio ever since I was a magazine reporter, going on all things considered and morning edition and tell me more and those other shows.
		And when I had the chance to launch my own show in 2014, I pounced and here I am floundering around 11, 12 years later.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What are some of the top economic stories you think we should be watching in the year ahead?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		It is really like sipping from a fire hydrant at this point.
		If you can just focus on oil geostrategically, what happened in Venezuela, the potential deluge of heavy crude that's going to hit Gulf Coast refiners.
		You have another mineral play potentially in the United States, you know, rattling its saber about Greenland and this fight with NATO and Denmark, potentially another rush at minerals.
		You have a president who's really troubled by persistently high prices that have remained from the Biden administration.
		Inflation is a really tough beast to kill.
		And you almost oftentimes have to throw an economy into a recession, a deep recession, to arrest the rise of prices.
		And yet prices for many are still going up.
		The misery index is still unusually high for an economy where you have a record stock market, record real estate, and other asset prices, but definitely a disconnect to this economy.
		They call it that K-shaped recovery that asset holders are experiencing on the upside and everybody else just is treading water.
		So I think what the president does in reaction to inflation, and there are only so many things he controls.
		He's even trying to browbeat and worse the Federal Reserve, which I imagine we'll talk about and pack the Fed, the central bank with his appointees.
		And so it's a perilous time, and you think that markets would be reflecting this more.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		But they're not.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Why is that?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		Everybody is so psyched over AI.
		This is, you know, think back to the internet when you first went on Netscape or Mosaic in the early 90s and the whimsy that followed.
		Everybody was rushing into these investments.
		Yahoo, Amazon, that all fomented this dot-com bubble that only burst, I think, at the turn of the century.
		And a lot of that was felt for several years and the market went on to do nothing for a decade.
		Now, this idea of AI fundamentally disrupting the economy, fundamentally disrupting the power grid, where you've seen your electricity bill go up every month because of the unbelievable demands on utilities to run these data centers.
		You're worried, there's fear and loathing if you have a college grad, a 20-something, if you're in the professional services world.
		Is my job going to be phased out by AI?
		There's on the flip side of that, tremendous excitement for companies like NVIDIA, for database services companies, for utilities, all of this capital spending, if you're sensing a sea change for the economy that's maybe even bigger than the internet at this point, then the reflex has been to buy first and ask questions later.
		And the market has had a spectacular 15-year run.
		The United States market has not been this richly valued since the turn of the century.
		We all know what happened after that, but there's clearly something disconnected from the rest of the economy.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		You mentioned stubbornly high prices earlier.
		In a speech at the Detroit Economic Club last week, President Trump said that inflation was down.
		And even though it is pretty steady, it's at 2.7%.
		What is the disconnect there?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		I think mom and pop, by and large, might remember a time stamp, a visual stamp, a print in their head.
		Say, I was at Kroger in 2019, and a thing of Starbucks Cold Brew cost $3.99.
		That same thing right now costs $6.99.
		For many people out there, I think the fallacy is that inflation will only be over when and if that $6.99 falls back to $3.99.
		It doesn't work that way.
		I mean, prices are still going up.
		Prices have typically gone up traditionally and every year.
		You don't want deflation, but I think there's this nostalgia almost, this sense that that was taken away from me.
		We saw the price of eggs rise because of avian flu.
		You see real estate prices.
		You see car prices, car insurance prices.
		There's inflation everywhere.
		And it's not like it just stops and prices fall overnight.
		Oftentimes, you'll see prices fall and discounts given in a deep recession or a deep pullback where companies have to compete again for market share.
		And that's not what's happening.
		And I think they're increasingly taking that out on the Trump administration, which after all promised to come in and kill inflation in its first hundred days.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		That's actually kind of reflected in a NPR, PBS, and Marist poll, which asked, is the economy working well for you personally?
		And 52% of Americans said that, 39% said that the economy was working well for them.
		But 61% of the people in this poll said that the economy is not working well for them.
		In that same poll, 52% of Americans said that the U.S. was in a recession, and 61% said the economy is not working well for them personally.
		At the same time, though, unemployment is pretty low.
		It's at 4.4%.
		The economy is expanding at 4.3%.
		And annual rate in the third quarter, it's pretty high growth, highest we've seen in two years.
		Why do people still sort of feel like things are bad?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		I think the unemployment rate doesn't reflect the learned helplessness in this economy.
		People have just given up.
		I mean, there are people out there that actually, you know, I don't know what was said during the 1980s, was it the 1980 presidential election or was it before that with Gerald Ford, a time of inflation?
		It's like when you are persistently and long-term unemployed, it certainly feels worse than a recession to you.
		It feels like a depression.
		Who cares if the headline number says four, four and a half percent?
		I mean, these are Bureau of Labor statistics numbers that don't reflect the difficulty of gig working, the difficulty of making ends meet, making your nut of rent and car payment every month.
		And certainly, anecdotally, there's no shortage of people out there right now who've given up and they're taken out of the calculation of the official unemployment rate.
		It just, you know, these numbers don't necessarily reflect the pain and the reality and the lived experience on the ground.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Earlier this week, there was a prominent group of previous Fed chairs as well as previous Treasury secretaries that issued a statement.
		These are secretaries and Fed chairs appointed by both Democrat and Republican presidents.
		They issued a statement in support of current Fed chair Jerome Powell in light of the Trump administration's investigation of him.
		I want to read a bit of this statement that came out.
		The Federal Reserve's independence and the public's perception of that independence are critical for economic performance, including achieving the goals Congress has set for the Federal Reserve of stable prices, maximum employment, and long-term interest rates.
		The reported criminal inquiry into Federal Reserve Chair Jay Powell is an unprecedented attempt to use the prosecutorial attacks to undermine that independence.
		This is how monetary policy is made in emerging markets with weak institutions with highly negative consequences for inflation and the functioning of their economies more broadly.
		It has no place in the United States whose greatest strength is the rule of law, which is at the foundation of our economic success.
		Among those who signed on to that were former Fed chairs Greenspan, Bernanke, former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, Geithner, Lou, Paulson, many members of the Council of Economic Advisors.
		How much damage do you think this investigation could do to the economy?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		You know, it's a first world problem to have, as I said, that you can play chicken or this kind of game with your own appointed Fed chair.
		I know he's fallen out of love with him.
		He said he waited too long to cut interest rates.
		Others said that he waited too long to hike interest rates, which didn't arrest the inflation of 2022 soon enough.
		So, you know, damned if you do, damned if you don't.
		But the unanimity around him, the backlash that you've seen from meme stock investors, it's created this kind of cult of Jerome Powell.
		And I say that it's such a dangerous game to play because if you're out there with Trump and having such a muscular foreign policy, if something, heaven forbid, were to go wrong.
		Suppose during this, China decides to invade Taiwan and then U.S. markets collapse, interest rates suddenly fluctuate everywhere, global markets collapse, you have runs on currencies and various other if-then scenarios happen.
		It forces Trump to have to step forward and say, I actually disregard that investigation of that of the Fed chair.
		I have full faith and confidence in him.
		That's the problem.
		We have such a time of stability and asset prices are so high that you can afford to play these games with your Fed chair.
		The reality is his term, I think, I believe, ends in May.
		You're going to have somebody else appointed there that there will be pushback from not just Democrats, but Republicans in the full politicization of the Federal Reserve.
		You don't want the United States turning into a Turkey or Thailand or another place that has had tremendous problems, IMF issues.
		This is supposed to be the redoubt of safety, the U.S. dollar, the U.S. interest rate, the U.S. Treasury.
		And that is not something that I think anybody wants to jeopardize in the interest of maybe getting a Fed chair to lower interest rates before his term ends.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		We saw the president announce on Truth Social a new round of tariffs potentially against NATO allies in response to what's happening in Greenland.
		President Trump has staunchly defended his tariffs more broadly, and we're expecting a Supreme Court ruling on those tariffs any day now.
		How important do you think that case is, and what are you expecting in terms of the outcome?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		I think it could all get thrown out, and maybe he's perceiving that he could have a little fun with it in the final few weeks of the policy.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		Certainly, I think if you go back to what it was, what was it, on Liberation Day, what was it called?
unidentified		April April 2nd or something like that.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		How many times has he come back and asterisked and pulled back and diluted and renegotiated these things?
		And over time, there becomes a kind of a cry wolf element, and the markets start yawning.
		They're like, oh, this is not as serious and as draconian as we'd first imagine.
		And when you start drawing it up and thumbnailing it with respect to the annexation of Greenland, it totally goes into Looney Toon's territory.
		And people start saying, yeah, you go ahead and have a full-throated, full-fledged trade war with our closest European allies and see how that's treated.
		Maybe he perceives that it's just for rhetorical sake at this point.
		And there are people that do expect that the Supreme Court could come down against this.
		I think it would be an interesting ⁇ you know, it would be a victory for him in that he could say, I did go to bat for the American manufacturing.
		I did go to bat for American jobs, but I was thwarted in this so he could get a symbolic victory out of it.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And you were right, it was April 2nd.
		I want to go back to that Detroit economic speech that the President gave last week.
		He also outlined several initiatives that he said would deal with the affordability crisis, as people are calling it, laying out initiatives to address housing, credit card debt, health care.
		Let's listen to some of what he said.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		At Davos, next week, I'm going to provide much more detail about our housing policies so that every American who wants to own a home will be able to afford one.
		We have some great things happening with housing, as you know.
		You saw the $200 billion buy-in on bonds and mortgages.
		This will include a ban on large institutional investors buying up single-family homes all over the country and making it impossible for people to buy a home.
		And I've also announced that the U.S. government is purchasing $200 billion of mortgage bonds to bring down mortgage rates, and it's had a huge impact.
		It's already started.
		And just last week, the average 30-year mortgage dropped below 6% for the first time in many years.
		It's coming down very rapidly, and that's not with the help of the Fed.
unidentified		If I had the help of the Fed, it would be easier.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		But that jerk will be gone soon.
		In addition, I proudly called for the credit card companies to cap interest rates at 10% for one year, because they're getting 28% and 30% and 32%.
		And it's unfair.
		The rates are way too high.
		To provide further relief to hardworking Americans, we'll also be confronting one of the biggest factors in driving up prices, the monstrosity known as the Unaffordable Care Act.
		You know what that is, right?
		It's Obamacare.
		It's a great name.
		Unaffordable Care Act.
unidentified		Nope.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Did anybody ever think of that one before?
unidentified		It's true.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		It's the Unaffordable Care Act.
		Obamacare was a gift to make health insurance companies rich at the expense of the American people.
		In particular, the so-called enhanced premium tax credits were a corrupt payoff to the insurers whose stock prices went up more than 1,000 percent after Obamacare was signed.
		I want the same money to go.
		I want it to go directly, very simple.
		I want the money, there's big amounts of money paid for by the government to go directly to the people so they can buy the health care that's right for them.
		They can negotiate their own deal, health care savings account, but they'll buy their own health care, and everybody loves it.
		That's why later this week, I'll announce our health care affordability framework that will reduce premiums for millions of lower drug prices, delivering price transparency and demand honesty and accountability from insurance companies all over the country, all over the world, actually.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Robin Farzad, I want to go back to some of that NPR PBS Maris polling related to several of those issues that the president raised in terms of the economic issues that concern Americans the most.
		45% say prices are what concern them the most, followed by housing costs at 18%, tariffs at 15%, job security at 10%, interest rates at 9%.
		The president touched on a lot of those topics in that clip there.
		How real are these proposals and do you think they'll make a difference?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		They're not realistic.
		I mean, you could go back and look at Hugo Chavez, who was Maduro's predecessor in Venezuela.
		He was the populist lightning rod who came to power in the late 90s and stayed there.
		He used to have a show, I believe, called Alo Comandante, where people would call and complain, like, you know, my daughter wants to have a wedding, but I cannot afford a meal for her.
		And Chavez would interrupt them and say, stop, send this man three goats and sacks of rice and some beans for them to do the wedding.
		Or he would send people cement.
		The president of the United States does not directly control the economy that way.
		There might be some palliative measures.
		There might be some browbeating, like when he has the credit card industry and its crosshairs.
		I mean, it's suddenly news to him that subprime credit card customers pay north of a 10% interest rate on their balances, that there are people that pay well into the 20s and others.
		Why do you think the credit card companies inundate people with credit card offers to begin with?
		Why do you think students in college see their mailboxes crammed with these things?
Wages And Trillionaire Companies 00:15:25
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		That's the pursuit.
		That's capitalism red in tooth and claw.
		You can't have it both ways.
		Why do you think private equity came after homes?
		There's rest of money that's looking for return.
		I think the bigger problem in housing is, you know, you could buy mortgage bonds left and right at these levels.
		You're not going to bring interest rates back down to two and a half, you know, mortgage rates down to 2.7% mortgage that some people availed themselves of in 2022, 2023, and are loath to sell the homes that are backstopped by those mortgages right now.
		What?
		If I sell them, I have to go out and take out a mortgage closer to 7%.
		So the president cannot control that and hence his frustration with Jerome Powell, hence his frustration that rates haven't been brought down.
		Certainly, the economy has a bigger problem in that it's gotten used to 0% interest rate policy for the better part of the last 25 years.
		We had so many different emergencies.
		And the problem is too much of that begets inflation.
		And on balance, we're still trying to mop up inflation in this economy.
		And you have a president who sees the numbers, who sees that there's a very likely chance that he loses the house in the midterms.
		And there's only so much he can do, whether it's respect to private equity in homes or credit card companies.
		And, you know, certainly I think that this play for Venezuela to stuff the market with so much heavy crude at a time when oil prices are low, maybe that's a backdoor way of attacking inflation in this economy, but that's not something that's typically been the province of the president.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right, we're going to be taking calls with questions for Robin Farzad, host of NPR's Full Disclosure.
		Let's start with Charles in Fort Collins, Colorado on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Charles.
unidentified		Hi, Robin.
		I heard that if you take the top seven companies out of the stock market, most of them are like dot-com companies and AI companies and are really driving the stock market.
		But when you take those seven of the, what, 450 out, the stock market really isn't doing that great.
		And I'd like you to really comment about your thoughts on the impact of these tariffs going forward that we're seeing and how that might affect everyday, every man's pocketbook.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, that's a great point.
		The stock market has not been this concentrated specifically in technology since the turn of the century.
		The Magnificent Seven, if you think about Amazon and NVIDIA and Google and Apple and a handful of other companies.
		If you look at the Standard Imports 500 Index, which is the most quoted and benchmarked U.S. stock market index, I know the Dow Jones Industrials gets quoted every night on the nightly news, but this is one that is that the better you do, the bigger you become, the more of the index you represent.
		And so right now, I believe it was last clock that close to a third of this index is represented by those companies.
		And that is true that if you take the 493 other companies, the performance has been solid, but not great shakes.
		And so it does beg that question.
		I mean, there are some, it's the haves and the have lots and the haves kind of, you know?
		And that is the situation right now.
		And the numbers, I mean, you have companies that are seeing unbelievable revenue growth, companies that are valued at $5, $6 trillion.
		We've never in history had that kind of growth happen with companies with such massive income and cash flow statements.
		So that's a concern.
		I think in terms of tariffs, if the Supreme Court does come and shut it down, imagine what the reaction would be in markets.
		Imagine, you know, there'd be some pushback and all, but I think on balance, it would be looked at as anti-inflationary.
		After all, a lot of these prices are being paid and borne by American consumers, right?
		So that could be a revenue hit for the government, but I think it would be looked at as a positive price thing and maybe still give Trump some rhetorical cover to say, hey, look, I tried.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And once again, our numbers, if you want to call in with questions for Robin Farzad, Democrats, 202-748-8,000.
		Republicans at 202-748-8001.
		And Independents at 202-748-8002.
		Mike is in Montgomery, Alabama, on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Mike.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		I have two questions for your guests to bound on, if you will.
		The first is President Trump's plan to provide a $2,000 check to those who qualify.
		And the second question is in regard to Social Security and their reduction in percentage for, I believe, retirees, if that's the case.
		So I'll hang up and listen to your guests' answer.
		And thank you so much.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		I mean, the $2,000 check thing, again, the fiscal stimulus that comes around, these things are great on election years.
		It's great.
		And you see Donald Trump's permanent marker or signature inevitably on the check massively.
		That's a very iconic signature saying, you know, remember who cut this out for you.
		That's really not going to put a dent into the significant expenses right now being born in this economy.
		It's help.
		It's palliative.
		Social Security indexing, I think all of these things go back to inflation.
		Inflation visited us in 22 and 23 in a way that it has not.
		It had not since, I think, Jimmy Carter left office in the early years of Ronald Reagan.
		And it's very, very difficult to put that in the rearview mirror for people.
		There's a tremendous amount of fresh PTSD.
		And they're saying, I only make this much, and I can only fill up a grocery cart with this much, or I can only have this much left over at the end of every month after car payments, after insurance payments.
		I mean, take your car to the shop recently, see how much more it costs now than it did before because of the various shortages that came out of COVID and semiconductors and the like.
		And so there has to be a real catch-up in terms of real wages versus inflation and a real feeling that you've caught up.
		Again, if you've been in the markets, if you've been in real estate and everything, your money has been protected quite well from inflation.
		It has outpaced inflation.
		The returns have been great.
		If you're living paycheck to paycheck, it's not even cold comfort.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Ken is in Ann Arbor, Michigan on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Ken.
unidentified		Hi.
		Good morning, Robin.
		Thank you for participating.
		This is a great talk.
		You're a good teacher.
		I turned out to agree with President Trump in this particular case of interest rate.
		You know, we are in a different situation than we were in the past.
		In the past, of course, with low inflation, we would probably also lower the interest rate because it would not be inflationary.
		But at this time, what I call affordability index is very low, meaning that a lot of people can't really afford buying things.
		And therefore, lowering the interest rate is not going to be inflationary as much as it's going to be helping building up resources, building up wealth, which would be good for the future.
		That's really my comment.
		Thanks, Alexbai.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
		That's a fair point.
		Look, if you're carrying massive credit card balances and you see a cut in the interest rate, that's tremendous relief right there.
		If you're waiting on the sidelines to buy a home, but every action has some sort of reaction.
		And if interest rates are brought down to levels that suddenly unleash the animal spirits of companies and private equity and home builders and others, you start to see a bidding up for raw materials, a bidding up for human capital, bidding up for labor.
		If you're saying that get it while the going's good, I want to take this cheap money.
		I want to take this closer to free money than I had when interest rates were high and spend it and get a return on that investment.
		That will drive up prices.
		There'll be a competition for that.
		That's why it's not, there's no free lunch in this.
		Whether you cut a gigantic check, whether Congress gets together with the Trump administration and gives everybody a massive rebate or you take it out of this and out of that, at some point, there is a reckoning with respect to prices.
		And that is difficult at a time when you have so much volatility with the Federal Reserve.
		We don't know who the next chair is going to be, if they're going to be beholden to this White House more politically than before.
		You're going to have the capital markets, which I would argue investors, Wall Street, that's a third rail, a third branch of government.
		If they don't like what they see and they go out and run up, you know, they start selling U.S. Treasuries.
		And you start to have a problem in the United States with respect to its creditworthiness.
		That is a whole other crisis that a single man, a single administration in the White House will not be able to arrest.
		So I'd be very cautious about believing that low interest rates, interest rate cuts are just a no-consequence, easy answer for this affordability problem.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Mark in St. Louis, Missouri has a question via text saying, can you quantify or touch on the impacts of sanctuary cities on budgets, wages, housing, food, and utilities?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		I can't.
		I do know that there is a frustration with immigration that in that we did not get a streamlined immigration policy, a bipartisan immigration policy, and that businesses, hospitality industry, the others who would reliably count on immigrant labor in the past have not been able to do that.
		And there isn't anything that's filling that.
		And there's a frustration with small, medium businesses and with Fortune 500 companies that that's not a given anymore and that labor prices have gone up and you're not getting the consistency of the labor input.
		So I wonder if they were to isolate that in sanctuary cities and see where people might feel on balance more safe to come out for jobs, how that affects local economic numbers.
		But certainly right now, there's just a broad sense of fear overall, you know, regarding ICE.
		ICE can have its way.
		And a liberal city like Minneapolis, it can come in, it can butt heads with local law enforcement in Manhattan and other cities.
		And if you are, you know, the idea that people have to produce their papers, even if you're a seasonal worker and the like, you're probably going to hang low just out of self-preservation.
		And that will have a chilling effect on the labor market.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Keith is in Palm Bay, Florida, on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Keith.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		I have a couple of questions.
		You were just talking about wages and stuff in the sanctuary cities, and you were talking about wages earlier.
		You were talking about wages going up for people.
		You said the more that the immigrants can't get the jobs, the more the wages go up.
		That sounds like a good correlation to me when legal people get legal jobs.
		But you said something about all the monies going to these trillionaire companies.
		Can you name some of these trillionaire companies?
		And I know a few.
		There's 10 only, really, that's publicly traded.
		And they're all to entertainment like the internet.
		You know, a mascot for a basketball team professional makes $625,000, one of them, a year, and a teacher and a fireman and police make $100,000.
		As long as society is willing to keep paying for all this entertainment on the top of their budget and not doing real budgeting that was taught to us when we were younger.
		I'm a boomer, proud boomer last year.
		I don't understand why you guys are so interested in the entertainment part and not what real people do.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Keith, I'm not sure that I clearly understand your question.
unidentified		We're willing to support a basketball mascot.
		What is he giving back to society?
		At $625,000 a year, but our teachers and our fire and police make around $100,000 a year.
		What does that say about our society?
		We're more interested into the Romans and the Coliseum and the games and stuff.
		That's on the top of our budget.
		You know, our partying for the month.
		And at the bottom of our budget is our mortgage and insurance and stuff.
		Until that flips like the food pyramid back to where it should be, we're going to be upside down in society.
		You said as the illegals were leaving the Saints World City, the wages were going up.
		That's a good thing to me.
		I don't understand why it's not a good thing to you.
		And he said that all this money was going to these trillionaire companies.
		Could he name some of them?
		The name of his program on the radio is full disclosure.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay, well, let's let Robin respond.
		So this is on the trillionaire companies that you're referencing, whether or not it's, you know, Keith believes that the immigrants being, you know, leaving and therefore wages potentially going up as a result of that is a good thing.
		And I think the final point was about, what was it, Keith?
		Okay, well, Robin, I'll let you respond.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		Well, trillionaire companies, I was saying trillion-dollar market caps are a common thing these days.
		The Magnificent Seven, the biggest, the top seven companies in the U.S. stock market, they've amassed these gigantic market values on really outsized growth over the past decade.
		NVIDIA, the microchip company, which has become a, you know, the semiconductor company, has become a national champion.
		Apple, I don't have to tell you about Apple's reinvention over the last 30 years and how that iPod morphed into something that's become ubiquitous as part of your life in the iPhone and Apple TV and iCloud and everything else.
		Amazon, Amazon, if we were just ordering a CV or a book in the mid-90s and it was a curiosity that was coming in the mail, think about it now.
		They own Whole Foods.
		You see significant part of infrastructure in this country, trucking and delivery and logistics controlled by Amazon.
		And I would say to answer that question, Amazon has these warehouses where people are paid a minimum of $15 an hour and there's a voracious demand for labor.
		A lot of that is going into automation increasingly and artificial intelligence might tamp down the demand for fresh bodies to work these gigantic places.
		And I would say that these data centers that are getting enormous amounts of investment right now in the United States, unbelievable, just go up the 95 on the eastern seaboard.
		These are not labor-intensive places, but they're capital intensive and they're also energy intensive.
		They are driving up power bills for everybody else.
		And you see a tremendous number of ads on TV for the data center industrial complex arguing that it's good for the economy.
Shift From Labor To Capital 00:00:48
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		So I don't think that it's one thing where kind of the exploitation of labor is immediately making companies trillion-dollar market caps.
		I think it's more over time that you see this shift from labor to capital.
		Capital has definitely been in the catbird seat over the past 10, 15, 20 years.
		And with stock market valuations the way they are now, question is for these companies, if they have money sitting around, would they use it to buy back stock or would they use it to go and hire people?
Executive Order on Offshore Drilling 00:09:27
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		That is ultimately where the rubber meets the road.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		And right now, I think that they're waiting and seeing with respect to hiring.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Bill is in Albany, New York on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Bill.
unidentified		Oh, good morning.
		As far as the economy is concerned, I just had a question, Mr. Shasad, on is there still an President Biden put an economic pause on drilling oil, I guess.
		I don't know if it's on home property or on federal property.
		Now, has that, did President Trump reverse that executive order?
		Or is that still on the books?
		Because when I researched it, it still looks like it's on the books, whether there's still a pause to for drilling.
		Because I was one, because that's what happened was ever since that happened, the prices went up because of the trucks that had to transport the food to the grocery stores.
		And the prices are still up.
		And the gas really hasn't come down that much.
		And I know we're supposed to be patient with it, but I was wondering that that was supposed to be one of the first things for being elected was the economy.
		And we don't hear too much about that, really.
		So I was wondering if you had any information, first of all, on the executive boards.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		I'm not familiar.
unidentified		I'll have to check on the executive order.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		Kimberly, maybe somebody I'm going to say.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I'm just looking it up now.
		So I believe what Bill is referencing is Biden's offshore drilling ban, which was an executive order just as the former president was leaving office.
		This is a story in the Pensacola News Journal.
		I'll just read a little bit of it.
		This is from February 3rd, 2025, so the beginning of last year.
		When former President Joe Biden acted on January 6th to ban offshore drilling across 625 million acres of American coastal waters, he drew immediate criticism from the man slated to succeed him.
		Donald Trump called Biden's move ridiculous, and one of the many executive orders he issued in the first days after being inaugurated to serve a second term in office sought to gut the decision.
		Whether he succeeds remains to be seen.
		Biden used his powers under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to ban offshore drilling not only in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, but also along the entire Atlantic coast and Pacific coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington.
		The protections even extended to part of Alaska's Bering Sea.
		So that was in the initial executive orders that President Trump signed to rescind Biden's executive order.
		And I'm checking to see if I can find any updates since then.
		But in the meantime, if you'd like to kind of generally respond, Robin?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I think it's one thing to do that by fiat or executive order, but oil prices are depressed right now.
		If anything, the problem is too much oil.
		There's a glut of oil on global markets.
		And whether you look at WTI or Brent crude, if you are a wildcat or if you are a domestic driller, and that's been a miraculous story in the United States, is the development of U.S. oil over the past 15, 20 years and how that's almost eclipsed many players in OPEC.
		But it's not very economic for you when oil is close to $60 a barrel to kind of hire the roughnecks, bring out the infrastructure, bring out the architecture.
		You'd rather see oil sustainably, $80, $90, maybe closer to $100, sustainably at that level so you can plan, you can drill.
		When there's $60, then moreover, a threat of bringing this difficult crude from Venezuela to Gulf refineries and cramming it like so much food that you feed geese to make a pate.
		There may be a play for him to bring prices down even more so it trickles down at the gas pump level and becomes deflationary in this economy.
		And that might be the idea, but actually bringing all of these rigs online is tremendously difficult to pull off.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So I did find a little bit more information about what the president and the administration have done regarding offshore drilling since February.
		This is an article from News of the United States notice.
		The Department of the Interior in November proposed opening up 34 new leases off the coasts of California, Alaska, and the Gulf states from 2026 to 2031, including in areas previously withdrawn from offshore drilling due to state regulations or policies set by former Democratic presidents or by President Donald Trump himself during his first term.
		The plan is a draft, and the department will release multiple other iterations before approving a new leasing schedule.
		But early opposition points to the administration's quest falling flat.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		And more of think about the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe in 2010.
		That is a difficult incremental barrel to drill.
		Is it economic for a BP or one of its many drilling partners or development partners to go out and seek that incremental barrel, even if the president opened up these offshore fields when oil is where oil is right now?
		I think that is the big question asked.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Jimbo in Bakersfield, California asks via text, can Mr. Farzad explain why the economic statistics show the economy just moving along, but the economy I live in is unaffordable.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Why is there such a discrepancy between the factual numbers and the reality of unaffordability that I'm living?
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		It's a question I've grappled with my entire career.
		I mean, why is it that these numbers seem to be so sanitized and oftentimes so detached?
		I mean, man, on the street right now, there are no shortage of people that will say we are in a deep recession, that the economy is pulled back.
		If you ask them how much, if you, you know, trick question, what did the economy contract by last quarter?
		The economy didn't contract.
		This is not, if you're feeling it again on a micro level, if you're feeling long-term unemployed, if you're feeling not gainfully employed, if you have no pricing power, if you have an inability to make ends meet, it's worse than a recession for you.
		And I don't quite understand, you know, on a macroeconomic level, maybe the Bureau of Labor Statistics has to have a more fully loaded number, that a headline unemployment rate doesn't do these things justice.
		Maybe we have to have a pay more attention to a discouraged or quitting worker, you know, numerator.
		There have to be other aspects out there that pay more than lip service to this.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Henry is in Alabama on our line for Democrats.
		Hello, Henry.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I do believe that we should use the oil for Venezuela, but return the profits to Venezuela, and that will help us and the Venezuelans get back on their feet.
		I don't think we should just take over Venezuela and their oils, but I do think the profits should go back into Venezuela.
		That's all I have to say.
		Thank you.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		I think it's important when Donald Trump says we're going to take that oil and use it for us and the Venezuelans, it's paying, it's tipping his hat to the fact that American companies, American multinationals, they had assets seized.
		They had expropriation done under the Chavez and Maduro regimes in Venezuela.
		And unless they're made whole, unless that you give them a good, clear return on investment, they're in no rush to go back and take a chance again in a very volatile situation.
		You know, especially with oil prices where they are right now.
		Maybe they would be if oil was sustainably 50% higher and where it is, it's like, you know what?
		I'm going to take on that geostrategic risk, the funkiness and everything to exploit that incremental barrel.
		But at these levels, you saw in the meeting at the White House, there was tremendous pushback.
		And Trump has no love now for ExxonMobil because they didn't immediately bow down and say, yes, Mr. President, we're going to race to Venezuela.
		Thank you for opening it up for us.
		It's so much easier said than done.
		Even if we have a kind of a hand-in-glove relationship with our refineries along the Gulf Coast and the specific peculiar type of difficult crude that comes from Venezuela, there'd be much more of an appetite to get all of that infrastructure up and running, which is not easy to do.
		You're talking about tens of billions of dollars of investment over several years to do that, to get the throughput that we need to bring gas prices down.
		So there's a hesitation.
		They're also thinking, well, he might be weakened in the midterms.
		You know, what's going to happen with the next administration?
		Is there going to be continuity?
		These companies have to decide, do I spend the money on investments in the United States?
		Do I invest it in dividends and share buybacks?
		Or on a kind of a more of a flyer on making Venezuela a sustainable partner well after this administration ends.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, thank you so much, Robin Farzad, who is the host of the public radio program.
Unbiased Voices Matter 00:03:00
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Full disclosure.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Thank you so much for joining us again on Washington Journal.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		My pleasure.
roben farzad ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And thanks to everyone who called in today with their comments and their questions.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		We'll be back with another edition of Washington Journal starting at 7 a.m. Eastern tomorrow.
unidentified		Watch America's Book Club, C-SPAN's bold original series.
unidentified		Today, with our guest Pulitzer Prize winner and former U.S. poet laureate, Rita Dove, who has authored several collections of poetry.
rita dove ▲ ● ▼		Don't think you can forget her.
		Don't even try.
		She's not going to budge.
		No choice but to grant her space, crown her with sky, for she is one of the many, and she is each of us.
unidentified		She joins our host, renowned author and civic leader David Rubinstein.
david rubenstein ▲ ● ▼		Did your teachers say, well, look, poetry's not a big career future.
		You should write prose.
		Did they people tell you that or not?
rita dove ▲ ● ▼		You see, I didn't even know that it was something that you could do and live with your life.
		I thought that, and I was writing poetry from the age of 10, I guess, but it was always a secret thing.
		It was a thing that I wrote and thought, okay, this is my secret.
		It was my thing that I enjoyed.
		I didn't realize that a little black girl could become a poet.
unidentified		Watch America's Book Club with Rita Dove today at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
		On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case examining whether states can prohibit licensed gun owners from bringing guns onto private property open to the public.
		The case stems from a challenge to a 2023 Hawaii gun law.
		The oral argument, Wolford v. Lopez, is live at 10 a.m. Eastern on C-SPAN 2, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, and online at c-span.org.
		C-SPAN is as unbiased as you can get.
rita dove ▲ ● ▼		You are so fair.
unidentified		I don't know how anybody can say otherwise.
		You guys do the most important work for everyone in this country.
		I love C-SPAN because I get to hear all the voices.
		You bring these divergent viewpoints and you present both sides of an issue and you allow people to make up their own minds.
		I absolutely love C-SPAN.
		I love to hear both sides.
mark-2 in tennessee ▲ ● ▼		I've watched C-SPAN every morning and it is unbiased.
mark-2 in tennessee ▲ ● ▼		And you bring in factual information for the callers to understand where they are in their comments.
unidentified		This is probably the only place that we can hear honest opinion of Americans across the country.
Security Council Addresses Iranian Protests 00:00:57
unidentified		You guys at C-SPAN are doing such a wonderful job of allowing free exchange of ideas without a lot of interruptions.
		Thank you, C-SPAN, for being a light in the dark.
		The United Nations Security Council held an emergency meeting at its headquarters in New York City to address the ongoing protests in Iran and repression from the government.
		In this portion of the hearing, Iranian activists opposing the nation's government delivered remarks alongside national representatives.
		The 10,091st meeting of the Security Council is called to order.

Chapters

00:00:00 Why Trump Wants Greenland
00:15:25 Masked ICE Agents Controversy
00:30:57 Democratic Party's Populist Shift
00:46:22 Negotiating Greenland's Future
00:48:30 Ben Freeman Interview
00:51:13 Immigration Fears Exploited
01:04:39 Martin Luther King Jr. Day Honors
01:08:37 Fed Chair's Investigation Announcement
01:24:12 Wages And Trillionaire Companies
01:39:22 Shift From Labor To Capital
01:39:55 Executive Order on Offshore Drilling
01:49:08 Unbiased Voices Matter
01:51:54 Security Council Addresses Iranian Protests