President Trump's March 23, 2026 ultimatum to Iran expired without a deal, sparking debates over $200 billion war costs and the legality of bypassing Congress. While ICE agents deploy to airports and oil prices surge, callers clash over regime change versus domestic priorities. Simultaneously, U.S. pressure on Cuba intensifies with an oil blockade causing fuel shortages, prompting proposals for "mercy ships" or statehood despite UN charter violations. The episode concludes by questioning whether these aggressive foreign policies address security threats or merely exacerbate humanitarian crises and global instability. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
Source
Participants
Main
m
mimi geerges
cspan30:25
n
niall stanage
hill19:51
Appearances
b
brian lamb
cspan00:54
c
chris murphy
sen/d00:52
c
chuck schumer
sen/d01:51
d
dana bash
cnn00:32
d
donald j trump
admin02:16
h
hakeem jeffries
rep/d01:17
l
lindsey graham
sen/r00:39
m
michael walz
un00:44
s
scott bessent
admin00:51
t
thom tillis
sen/r01:06
t
tom homan
admin01:15
Clips
b
barack obama
d00:02
b
bill clinton
d00:02
d
don bacon
rep/r00:06
g
george h w bush
r00:05
g
george w bush
r00:04
j
james lankford
sen/r00:03
j
jimmy carter
d00:03
j
jonathan karl
abc00:09
k
kristen welker
nbc00:19
m
margaret brennan
cbs00:13
r
ro khanna
rep/d00:02
r
ronald reagan
r00:01
s
shannon bream
fox00:24
|
Speaker
Time
Text
Quick News Update00:02:18
unidentified
And then USA Today congressional reporter Zach Shermile will talk about the week ahead in Congress, including the latest on DHS funding efforts.
And later, American University's William Leo Grand discusses the future of the Cuban government as the Trump administration ramps up pressure on Cuba's president to step down.
Our question for you this morning is: Should the U.S. continue military operations against Iran?
A new CBS news poll out yesterday shows 60% of respondents now oppose the war.
While over 90% want this to end as quickly as possible, more than half of those surveyed say it would be unacceptable to leave the current Iranian regime in power.
This comes as a major deadline looms.
On Saturday, President Trump issued a 48-hour ultimatum for Iran to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
If not, the president has threatened to, quote, obliterate Iran's power plants, starting with the largest first.
That deadline expires tonight at 7:44 p.m. Eastern.
We're taking your calls, texts, and posts.
Democrats, call us on 202-748-8000.
Republicans, 202-748-8001.
Independents, 202-748-8002.
If you're current or former military, you can call us on 202-748-8003.
You can use that same number to text us.
If you do, include your first name in your city-state.
And you can reach us on social media, facebook.com/slash C-SPAN and X at C-SPANWJ.
Welcome to today's Washington Journal.
Quick news update before we get to your calls.
And Axios here reporting Trump to deploy ICE agents to airports Monday.
That's starting today.
It says that the Trump administration has not said which airports, how many agents, or exactly what roles they would fill.
But the borders are Tom Homan was on CNN yesterday.
So we are seeing our allies come around as they should, but at the same time, the president is not going to stand for this regime as it's threatened and tried for five decades to hold the world's energy supplies hostage under its genocidal intent.
So some allies like the United Kingdom have talked about things like surveillance, anti-mining, anti-drone support for the United States, but in that appeal from the United States, I should say, in the Strait of Hormuz, but not until active combat ends.
He's going to continue to pound Iran's capabilities, its missile, its naval, and its drone capability.
Margaret, we have to take a step back.
We've seen what it's doing now in terms of attacking ports, airports, civilian infrastructure, hotels, resorts, and what it's trying to do to global energy supplies.
One can only imagine if it had a nuclear umbrella.
We still have $175 billion, which needs to be returned as a result of the Supreme Court decision that tariffs are illegal.
But Americans don't seem to see any reimbursement or where is that money to pay for their health insurance.
So again, when people talk about their children and grandchildren's funeral, we have Marjorie Taylor Greene blaming the baby boomers for wanting this illegal war and that Social Security and Medicare won't be there for her generation.
Well, let's take a good look at how much money the baby boomers paid into the system because they paid into that system dearly.
What are your metrics for being done with the war?
unidentified
Well, he got to go on and drop one of them big ones over there because those people are not going to just let the United States hit schools and stuff over there and not retaliate.
So either he got to go on and drop the big bomb over there or I don't know what he's going to do.
I hope he does something smart.
But we're dependent on him to do something that's going to protect us.
So because we don't have any military or anything to protect ourselves from the consequences of the decisions he's making, those people are going to want some revenge.
Deborah, South Bend, Indiana, Republican, good morning.
unidentified
Good morning.
You know, I see it from here.
You know, we have a human right problem around the globe.
Now, if we can get some strong human rights problem that everybody can go along with, I'm not interested in seeing nobody hanging from the town square.
I think we need to get everybody together and put our foot down and say, we're not going to allow any nation to treat someone, humans, under the like the treatment, you know, the women getting their faces by, those things should not be done to human beings.
Again, as President Trump said during the press break yesterday when he was going out to Marine One, he's not going to give away what we're going to do.
As President Trump always does, he's leaving all options on the table.
We had a very successful bombing campaign against the military installations at Karg Island, the nexus for all the Iranian oil supply.
What could happen with Karg Island?
We'll see.
And again, just to be clear, the command and control system of the Iranian regime is in chaos.
This is Hitler's bunker.
Hitler is dead.
Himmler is dead.
Göring is dead.
Most of what you're seeing are lone wolf activities.
The mid-range ICBM that was shot off, these two missiles yesterday, that's out of desperation, Christian.
This administration has totally lost touch with reality.
This war is spinning out of control.
Prices are spiking for millions of Americans.
There's a new war breaking out between Israel and Lebanon.
Oil assets of our allies are continuing to be hit in the region.
There's no end in sight.
The Secretary of Treasury just said we're going to escalate in order to de-escalate.
It's like they've never read a history book.
That's exactly what our war leaders said in the middle of Vietnam and the 20 years of mismanagement in Afghanistan.
We need to end this war.
The only way you are going to get prices down here in the United States, the only way that you are going to bring peace to the region is by ending this war.
And it may be that the quickest way we can do that is by denying them the funding that they need to perpetuate this war, which is increasingly out of control.
So, Mary, I don't know, you're in Fort Washington.
You might have seen the front page of today's Washington Post.
It has a picture.
And the caption reads, David Azaron, 54 sits barefoot in his family's home on Sunday after it was damaged in an Iranian missile attack.
Israel's air defenses failed to intercept two barrages, resulting in direct hits in the southern towns of Demona and Erad, and leaving more than 100 people wounded.
That's in Israel.
And it's at the Washington Post if you'd like to read the article.
Bobby in Miami, Independent, you're on the air.
unidentified
Yes, I agree with a previous caller and Senator Murphy.
Senator Murphy is one of our more brilliant strategists.
We need to surrender.
Just call it quits back out and apologize to the world for screwing everything up.
This is just unbelievable.
CNN reporters know more about this than our chief of staff.
It is just incredible.
This thing is out of control, and we need to stop it and stop it now.
Yeah, I was listening to what that fellow just said.
I agree with the other fellows said.
You got to get in there, end it.
And I don't understand how when we're going to war with this country, they could blow up anybody with nuclear weapons.
I don't understand how those Democrat politicians don't get behind our president, get the job done, get it over with fast as you can, and agree, and everybody get on the same page and get a positive outcome.
I don't understand it.
They just keep disagreeing.
But I bet you if it was a different president, maybe Obama or somebody else, when he was bombing, doing all the things Obama was doing in the Middle East, I didn't hear no Democrats rallying in saying he better stop and he's killing people.
I hear nothing.
I think it's just because they don't like Trump at all from all the years that's gone by from when he was first president.
So anything he comes up with, they disagree with, and they just make conflict.
So, Sal, let me ask you that CBS news poll that came out yesterday.
It asked about regime change in Iran, and it says that it would be, so here's the question.
It would be acceptable or unacceptable to leave Iran's current leadership in power.
How would you answer that?
Would you say that that would be acceptable to end the conflict if that current regime is still in power or not acceptable?
What do you think?
unidentified
I would like to change the regime permanently if we could do that.
I don't know if it's possible, like you're saying, because all these, they teach these poor kids when they're real little to think this way, their ideology.
But I think if we could change the regime, get in there, start fresh with new ideas and positive outcome, we might have a real peaceful Middle East for the rest of our, you know, the lifespan or less the world will be at peace and maybe that'll be the end of it.
And this is Newsmax that says this, Iran's threat fully closed Hormuz after Trump's ultimatum.
It says that Iran said the strait crucial to oil and other exports would be, quote, completely closed immediately if the U.S. follows up on President Donald Trump's threat to attack its power plants.
Iran has practically closed the Strait of Hormuz that connects the Persian Gulf to the rest of the world.
Trump late Saturday set a 48-hour deadline to open the strait.
It says Iran says it is winning the war and keeps control of the strait.
We got this from Don in Floyd, Virginia, who says he should have never started this.
I would end the excursion ASAP.
And on X, doesn't C-SPAN do breaking news?
President Trump has postponed strikes due to positive talks with Iran.
I trust President Trump.
Yes, let's get that up for you.
This is the BBC that says, Trump says U.S. and Iran have held talks on ending the war, and he has postponed power plant strikes.
It says, Donald Trump says the U.S. and Iran have held talks on the complete and total resolution of hostilities in the Middle East.
We will continue to follow that for you and bring you anything else that comes up.
And my theory is that he isn't going to stop what he's doing because he wants to take over Gaza.
And he wants to develop that strip and put his hotels and everything else he wants to do there.
And he won't be able to do that unless he gets rid of the regime in Iran.
And Israel is taking care of Hezbollah in Lebanon.
So they're working together.
Because if you can remember, he has said he would love to build up Gaza with his hotels, him and his son-in-law.
And I'm surprised I haven't heard anyone say this about him because he doesn't do anything, anything in his life without getting something in return.
So this, if he freezes up Iran with the conflict, he will be able to build the Gaza Strip and have a wonderful, I don't know, like an Atlantic City or Las Vegas.
I just think that everything that happens when it comes to Trump is going to be negative anyhow.
From my standpoint, Afghanistan, when we were in Afghanistan, Obama had every opportunity to do the right thing in Afghanistan and not continue that event for as long as it went on.
We've got a candidate that was a presidential candidate that destroyed Russia and Libya by trying to make a change state there, which was Hillary Clinton.
And then we have Joe Biden who said don't to the Russians.
And what did that mean?
A minor incursion is okay.
If it's a major incursion, it's not okay, I guess, because he never said that.
So whatever Trump does, it doesn't really matter what he says or what he does.
He's wrong about everything.
And the reason is, is because the Democrats don't like him, never have liked him, don't believe he's truthful, doesn't believe that he's patriotic.
Then I think they're wrong.
And my feelings are, as a Vietnam vet, the same Democrats that were in San Francisco when I got off the plane and spit at me are the same people that are talking today.
The Department of Defense, Donald Trump, and Republicans haven't even made the case for why we are in this reckless war of choice right now to the American people.
They've got no vision, no plan, no exit strategy.
They clearly didn't anticipate some of the things that have happened, including the closure of the Strait of Hormos.
What you're seeing right now are gas prices are through the roof, and that's adding to an environment in America right now where life has already become too expensive for the American people because of failed policies by Donald Trump, including but not limited to, the Trump tariffs, which have increased costs on everyday Americans by thousands of dollars per year.
We should not be spending billions of dollars per day at this point in time to drop bombs in the Middle East when Republicans are unwilling to spend a dime to actually extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits and make sure that Americans can go see a doctor when they need it.
If it comes up before the House, you will whip, meaning will you urge your fellow Democrats to vote no on any funding or will you allow them to vote their conscience?
Well, we'll have that leadership conversation when we actually have a piece of legislation that is in front of us.
But I can tell you, there is strong opposition right now to the notion that this war of choice that is reckless, that's costing the American people now more than $30 billion, should continue.
We need to move, which we plan on doing in short order, a war powers resolution so we can bring this situation to a close.
I do want to show everybody the truth social that just came out seven minutes ago from President Trump.
I am, quote, I am pleased to report that the United States of America and the country of Iran have had, over the last two days, very good and productive conversations regarding a complete and total resolution of our hostilities in the Middle East.
Based on the tenor and tone of these in-depth, detailed, and constructive conversations, which will continue throughout the week, I have instructed the Department of War to postpone any and all military strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for a five-day period, subject to the success of the ongoing meetings and discussions.
That is on a truth social that President Trump just put out this morning.
So we'll get your reaction to that as well.
Pat, National City, Michigan Republican, you're on the air.
unidentified
Yes, I can't.
I thank you for taking my call.
I can't help but think of the similarities between Iran and Afghanistan before the 9-11 attacks.
They both had regimes that sponsored terrorists and leaders that orchestrated terrorist attacks all over the world.
Afghanistan was not considered an imminent threat at the time.
But then the 9-11 attacks happened and almost 3,000 people were killed and the twin towers and four planes were destroyed and the Pentagon building was hit at a cost of $55 billion.
Then Congress voted almost unanimously to go to war except for one vote.
It took over a month to get the approval and the planning to start the war.
By then, Afghanistan was prepared and bin Laden was in hiding.
The war and getting bin Laden cost us $3.3 trillion and 2,461 soldiers.
If we would have had secretly attacked Afghanistan before the 9-11 attacks, would we have lost almost 3,000 people?
And would the Twin Towers still be standing?
And would it have taken 10 years to get bin Laden?
But we didn't do it because they were not considered an imminent threat, just like Iran.
Is it possible that we just stopped another 9-11 attack or worse by attacking Iran first?
Since 1979, these people have been terrorizing the world.
They've got American blood on their hands, and here's what we accomplished in 20 days, their missile program has been obliterated and they're running out of money.
So here that, here's what I tell president Trump.
Keep it up for a few more weeks.
Take Carg Island, where all of the resources they have to produce oil control that island.
Let me, let me just read you something from THE Atlantic.
Does an assessment on that?
They say U.s troops may well take Carg island.
We believe their ability to do so, but only to endure ballistic missile strikes, drone attacks, petrochemical smoke, all without a reliable means of obtaining logistical support.
The result could be a grinding war of attrition.
They talk about how far away they would be from resupply.
No I, we should absolutely not be doing this at all.
We should stop it immediately.
It's unconstitutional.
I mean, first off, it's really ill-advised.
It's um, they're a difficult, formidable enemy.
And the one caller just said um oh, did we stop another potential terrorist attack in 9-11 or something?
I and I, I see it.
No, I think we're more at risk of that than ever, and not from Iran, probably from a false flag of Israel's doing.
That's what uh, i'd be more afraid of than anything.
I mean, look at that event, 9-11, two planes, three towers the, the Third World Trade Center, that fell.
I mean, come on guys, we got to get a little smarter than that.
And so uh, it's a real.
It's like a partnership with Israel.
And you know, I had a town hall with my congressman yesterday and I he he put on some tv commercials, he bought ad spots oh, we got to stop the Iran war, okay.
Well, what are you doing about it?
I went to the town hall and I asked him, you know it's a partnership with Israel, so do you think we should stop sending Israel weapons?
All they could stop any piece of legislation on any matter whatsoever and hold protests, rally the troops, unions, everyone on the steps of the Capitol every day until this war is over, but they don't want to do it.
I recently watched C-SPAN, and there was an economist on that said that all of this affordability and inflation is a direct result of government deficit spending.
They explained it in detail.
And I just think it's bizarre that there's so many people demanding affordability and at the same time condoning $200 billion on this expense for the war.
You know, I have a small apartment.
My heating bill last month was $450 for gas.
And it seems like there's just so many other priorities that should be higher.
You know, when I voted, my issues were I want to retire soon and leave my kids a better place that's more affordable than I had.
And we're at a point where the average American can't afford a home until they're 40 years old.
The American dream is going away slowly.
We're going to reach a point where a dollar is worth what a penny's worth.
And unless you're a millionaire, you're not going to be able to afford a home.
You know, there's so many things that we could be working on, prioritizing clean air, clean water, cancer research, trying to figure out how to sup all these school shootings.
There's a lot of things going on that I think that are going on the back burner right now that are just so much more important than a foreign entanglement, which, you know, people that voted for this president were voting.
They thought they were voting for no more of these $200 billion line items for foreign wars, America first.
And it's bizarre that so many people somehow claim that that's what they voted for.
Now they're not a sellout.
They're not sincere.
I don't understand how there's just so many opposite things people are believing at the same time.
Here, you know, I thought the initial bombing raid a while back was very successful.
I could see why we needed to finish some of the work and go back in and maybe have a week or two back in there really degrading their capabilities.
Now, it's very, it's ambiguous.
I don't know what our long-term strategic goals are, but we're going to need to know that.
I generally support what the president's doing in Iran, but if we're going to get anything close to the $200 billion supplemental request, we've got to get 60 votes, and we're going to have to figure out how to accomplish that.
I mean, if you do the math, my guess is right now, there were estimates of a billion to a billion and a half a day spent.
So let's assume at this point that about $30 billion has been spent sustaining the operation, paying personnel, supporting the kinetic strikes.
We need to know how that money is going to be spent.
And if it's going beyond a 60-day horizon, then we really do need to talk about the authorization for the use of military force and longer-term funding trails.
So we'll look at the request here and see what's baked into it.
And then we've got to work on getting Democratic support.
All right, Angela, let's talk to Kenny's former military in Wilson, North Carolina.
Good morning.
unidentified
Good morning.
I want to tell you what happened to us.
We are being controlled by a foreign entity, and they are controlling you, both Democrats and the Republicans.
Look at Netanyahu.
He has played both of us.
Before you couldn't even call in on C-SPAN, and you mentioned the word Netanyahu or anything about Israel or the word Jew, they'll right away cut you off.
And they still do now.
But other stations are worse than that.
So I'm not putting you down with all C-STAN.
It looked like they control all of it.
But this is the fruits of it.
This is what happens.
Now we're forced to listen to the truth when it should have been put out there before, but the media was hiding it.
She's also former military in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Good morning, Janice.
unidentified
I, yeah, I'm former military during Vietnam.
The first thing that I did after going to the schooling, the basic training, and then the schooling afterwards, first thing that I did as a clinician was send hundreds of Marines over to Vietnam.
Ground Troops Debate00:14:24
unidentified
As soon as they got out of my clinic, they were put on a freight, a freighter, to be sent to Vietnam.
I have no idea how many actually returned.
And I don't want to see that.
I mean, you don't see Trump sending any of his children over to Vietnam.
You don't see the richer people having to contend with the thought of possibly being drafted.
Yep, Janice, one of the questions on that CBS News poll was: will the U.S. need to send ground troops to Iran?
What do you say?
Do you think the U.S. will need to do that or will not need to?
unidentified
I think that what they're probably going to do is take over Karg Island, but then I don't want them to leave any troops there because that just makes it a target.
And everyone that they would leave there would be targeted.
And they're still making a lot of drones over in Iran.
I think that what we should do is take President Zelensky for his offer to help us develop cost-effective missiles and drones, along with his IPad technology that he has,
in order to just send one drone after their drone and take it out.
All right, Janice, in the answer to that poll question about will the U.S. need to send ground troops to Iran, 53% said will not need to send.
47% said will need to send ground troops to Iran.
Let's hear from Barry in Hampton, Connecticut, Republican.
Hi, Barry.
unidentified
Hi, how are you today?
I feel like we're kind of losing.
We're bombing all over the place, which, you know, whatever.
And they're still lobbing all over the place.
And they got the straight hormoose.
And I think we should go back to the table and have some negotiations.
But I want to respond to the Israel, if you don't mind, real quick, the Israel slash Jew bashing.
And I say this: when you're enslaved, when you are inquisitioned, crusaded, holocausting, when you believe that you can't go to Harvard and you can't join clubs, et cetera, et cetera, they believe that land is theirs biblically, okay?
Whether that's right or wrong or whatever, they believe that.
And they're going to do whatever it takes to keep that land.
Nellie in Toledo, Ohio, Democrat, you're on the air.
unidentified
Oh, hi.
Thank you for taking my call.
I wanted to say where it says, should the United States continue to do military against Iran?
You know what?
I believe that we shouldn't have been there in the first place.
Trump has been, I mean, first it was, what, Greenland?
He went from Greenland.
Then next thing I know, I mean, he's like a bully from Greenland.
Then he went to who?
Venezuela.
I believe it was Venezuela.
And now he's over there.
Everybody should have known just because, you know, he was sending more ships over there that he was going to do something.
I believe that he's just trying to be, you know, live up to how Putin is taking over things and he wants to spread his wings and show what he can do too, which is absolutely crazy.
First, what?
Blowing up the people for narcotics.
I can understand that.
But then you got the, he had oil tankers that he kept.
I haven't heard anything else would happen to those.
And so now we're over here trying to, you know, get more.
So since Greenland, you know, put up a fight, he jumps to the next person.
Let's talk to David, Independent, Crab Orchard, West Virginia.
Good morning.
unidentified
Good morning.
Yes, I'm also retired military, 25 years, active duty, had a son and a daughter serve in the military.
And I retired in 2000.
And I think they need to complete this mission.
Iran's been attacking the United States for, what, like 40 years?
And, you know, I get a laugh listening to these people calling in every day, politicians, and with their confused conspiracy theories and calling the administration liars.
But they can't see their own party, Pelosi, Jeffrey, Schumer, and all the lies that they tell every time and the rest of their party.
But all they see is a conspiracy.
They're confused.
Fantasy conspiracy.
But yeah, they need to continue this.
And I get a laugh.
And I'll keep y'all composure.
So, David.
Because I watch.
Yeah.
When you hear these people talking about something they don't really know nothing about.
And Cheryl, let me ask you what A previous caller said about Iran getting a nuclear weapon, saying that if they got a nuclear weapon, there would be deterrence because they know they could never use it, or obviously there would be some reaction from the United States.
So, what do you think of that?
Saying it's no big deal if they did get a nuclear weapon.
unidentified
I believe there are too many radicals in that country, if that's the right term to use.
And I just don't trust the government.
They wouldn't even let us come in and do inspections and have free reign, and they could move everything around before we got there to do our inspections.
Well, let's look at the objective that they said they wanted to stop.
And your last caller, nuclear weapons.
A military guy this weekend and a committee said we did take nuclear weapons out of a country in the Middle East, I don't know, 10 years ago or something.
It took a month and a half of a train, two trained teams, bulldozers, et cetera, to dig it out.
Now, I cannot foresee Iran at any time in the near future allowing us to march in with bulldozers and dig up.
And also, they've been dispersed.
Since that June attack, any canisters that hadn't been in that spot, most experts have said have been dispersed around the country.
So, how are we going to find them?
That's 98 million people that you're going to go through that are in little nooks and crannies.
They've separated out their power so they have little bands.
So, the nuclear weapons thing is off out of it.
You know, we're not going to get that.
What we need now is a way to let Trump say that he's won.
He blew up their Navy.
You know, he's done damage to their infrastructure.
I've won.
Let him taco and get out of this like his celebration day for tariffs, because otherwise, we're going to be down a terrible rabbit hole, and it's going to go on and on.
And so, that's my fear.
And the other thing, too, is even this threat he did Saturday night, he was trying to bully, and he was going to get them to back down.
They didn't.
And so, suddenly, we get the tweet this morning.
I'm not even sure he's talked with them, but he's got to have an out.
Please, world, Iran, if you're listening, give him an out so he can taco and we can get out of this.
This is the Times of Israel about what Sharon was just talking about.
It says in the war's fourth week, the hunt for Iran's enriched uranium takes center stage.
With the Revolutionary Guards now calling the shots into Iran, the U.S. and Israel know ending the conflict without removing Iran's near-weapons-grade stockpile invites disaster.
That's the Times of Israel.
And this is Josie calling us from New York, Independent Line.
Good morning.
unidentified
Good morning.
I think we should get out of it.
I don't even think it should have been started.
These people over there in that other country, they built, they're like crazy kamikazes.
They kill themselves.
All right?
They'll absolutely kill themselves for what they believe in.
They're putting all young men online.
I was crying the other day.
Mothers are getting a flick.
I love my country.
I love America.
I have family in the military.
My father was in the military.
My uncles were in the military.
My son was.
My nephew is in the military.
Big hand mothers, a flag.
I don't want a flag.
If I want a flag, I go down to the store.
I buy a flag, okay?
He's sending us over there.
He don't know what he's doing.
All right?
Sending Us Over There00:06:24
unidentified
He never has known what he's doing.
And then he's giving praising football players or hockey play, things that have nothing to do with none.
And what about the crime that's right here in the United States of America?
We got criminals here, too.
He's going over people, people that are coming in here illegally, which they shouldn't.
Do you believe that we're going to be able to achieve that objective, to remove the Iranian regime?
unidentified
Absolutely.
We have the power, and we have a president that's got brains, that has guts to go in there and do what the last three or four presidents was afraid to do.
They knew it needed to be done, but they wouldn't go do it.
So now, thank God in heaven, we have a president who's there.
He's doing a good job, and by the grace of God, we're going to be rid of that regime and never have to worry about them again.
Yes, Sergeant First Class David Spoyer from Arcade, New York.
I fully support the war against Iran.
I support going in and killing all members of the Iranian government, either through military action or through execution.
I fully support killing these people because they're Islamic fundamentalists who want to kill white Americans, who want to kill all the Jews, that are going to get nuclear weapons, and they believe by killing us, it's okay because they're going to die for their Allah and go to heaven.
Very little because no one really knows what he means by that.
I mean, obviously, there is a suggestion that there is some sort of engagement going on here.
We haven't heard as of right now from the Iranian side about all of this.
But obviously, the central news here is President Trump backing off this idea that the United States was about to attack Iranian power plants if the Strait of Hormuz was not fully opened.
Well, I mean, it depends, of course, what exactly you attack.
But for example, Iran gets about 75 or 80% of its power, domestic power, from natural gas.
Now, did he mean attacking those kind of supply routes or those kind of centers, processing plants?
If that were the case, you could cast a large part of Iran into darkness.
We're already hearing from Israeli strikes that there were power cuts in Tehran, pretty significant power cuts in Tehran in the last 24 hours.
But I do think that the bigger point here, Mimi, is that the president didn't really have the leverage that he was claiming to have.
Because if you attack those power plants, then what happens next?
You have potentially a kind of anarchy in Iran itself.
A opposition has not really emerged over these past three weeks.
And Iran has no motivation to open the Straits of Hormuz or the Strait of Hormuz because that's its main negotiating card, its main pressure point on Trump and the West.
Well, it was rising until about half an hour ago when the stock market futures and so on turned around abruptly on this suggestion that hostilities would be de-escalated.
The central reason why political danger was rising for the president was the economic effect of this attack on Iran.
As of this morning, according to AAA, the average gas price nationally in the United States was more than a dollar more expensive than it was a month ago.
Oil prices obviously had been rising, although as I say, they've fallen precipitously in the past 30 minutes or so.
Those twin dangers, rising oil prices and rising gas prices, were causing real political turbulence and real political danger for the president.
Now, there was a strike on that gas field, and President Trump said on Thursday that he had spoken with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu about its strike on Iran's gas field after the fact and suggested he disapproved.
So that whole debate, I think, goes to, in some ways, an underappreciated element of this conflict, which is the fact that Iran obviously attacked several other Gulf nations, sometimes attacking American installations, sometimes attacking energy plants.
In doing that, they complicated the whole dynamic of the region, because many of those Gulf nations were and are allies of the United States.
And their essential bargain is we will be hospitable to the U.S. in return for its protection.
That bargain breaks down when the United States attacks Iran and Iran attacks those nations in response.
I think that is one of the reasons why there was such perplexity about that attack on the gas field.
I'm not sure that there is a massive split in the sense of an actual divide.
Now, there is reporting that contradicts what the president says there.
There's been reporting from a number of reputable news organizations saying that the United States was, in fact, informed about the Israeli intention to attack that South Powers gas field.
But I think the bigger question or the bigger point is President Trump and the people close to him are extremely sensitive or defensive about the idea that Israel in some way maneuvered or manipulated him into this attack.
So I think that's why, Mimi, you see him making those arguments saying that we're independent of each other.
Now, if we have a de-escalation of the conflict now, I think you will see some of the peak prices reducing.
But what the Energy Department there is talking about is broader disruption, which keeps prices elevated for a longer period of time.
This is getting to issues like, for example, when you close down oil facilities, as has happened in some of those Gulf nations that I was mentioning, it's not just turning the faucet on and off.
That is a significant engineering task to get pressure back into wells and all of that kind of thing.
In addition to which, while we know what the President has said this morning, we don't know really anything about the fate of the Strait of Formuze, which, as everyone now knows, is under normal circumstances typically the transit point for about one-fifth of the world's oil.
Is that going to go back to normal?
Are the Iranians going to keep a de facto chokehold on it?
We don't know the answer to that, and that's pivotal for the crisis.
Well, the congressional back and forth is getting very complicated about this.
And I think the key development from the White House's perspective is actually this new linkage that we're just seeing within the past 24 hours by President Trump of his push for this so-called Save America legislation, which is, depending how you define it, election integrity or citizenship tests and all of that, proof of citizenship.
He is now saying that those two issues are linked.
Yeah, I mean, I think that Thuron's view there is a fairly commonplace one.
I mean, this conflict, according to opinion polling, is unpopular, has been unpopular since it began.
That's a break with tradition, where previously, even very conflicts that became very controversial, the war in Iraq or a generation before the war in Vietnam, were initially popular and became less so over time.
I think one reason for the unpopularity of this is the cost for the start when so many people are indeed struggling in the United States.
And to Thuron's point, the idea that there was not a clear explanation of why there was an imminent threat that required this kind of drastic action.
All right, let's talk to Josh, Palatine, Illinois, Independent Line.
Good morning.
unidentified
Good morning, Mimi.
You know, I just wanted to say that as like America really should have a zero tolerance policy when it comes to a rogue regime that has this clandestine nuclear program that's killed American men and women in uniform, that's captured and jailed American citizens, attacked its neighboring countries, and is just overall this rogue regime in the Middle East.
And for that reason, we need to stop the war in Iran and bomb Israel.
Well, that was a bit of a hairpin turn there at the end, but that was.
Look, the role of Israel in the world and in U.S. foreign affairs has obviously become massively more controversial.
The assault on Gaza has caused Democrats in particular to become much more sympathetic to the Palestinians than to Israel.
But we also see increasingly on the right commentators like Tucker Carlson and Megan Kelly being very critical of Israel's perceived influence on American foreign policy decisions.
I mean, to the point about stocks, I think the economic impacts of this conflict were, as I said before, the real pressure point for the Trump administration.
We've heard a lot about, in the past few weeks, about asymmetrical struggles.
In other words, no one at all doubts that the U.S. military, especially when combined with the Israeli military, is more powerful than the Iranian military.
But the capacity of the Iranians to disrupt oil and disrupt energy inflicts real economic pain here in the U.S. and around the world.
And the question has been how long President Trump is willing to withstand that pain.
This announcement this morning suggests the answer to that is not very much longer.
I mean, Senator Mullen is himself a fairly combative figure.
But one of the most interesting things that has happened in the wake of the very traumatic events in Minneapolis has been a bit of a pulling back, at least rhetorically, from the Trump administration.
I mean, obviously, Tom Holman has taken over in Minneapolis.
He has sought, I think, to exude a more modulated approach.
You know, there is even some suggestion of the Trump administration being less inclined to use even the term mass deportation and to try to focus the argument more on immigration enforcement efforts against people with serious criminal records.
Oh, well, you know, I didn't really vote for Trump, but it's become pretty clear that he's like the greatest president that we've ever had.
And I think a really great strategy would be for him to stop everything he's doing in Iran and run over to Cuba and take it over, because Cuba really wants him to take over.
So, and the people in Iran would just reopen the Hormuz Strait.
Well, I was at the White House on Friday, and there was some speculation among those of us in the press corps, because, of course, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was accompanying the president for the weekend.
And Rubio is very much identified with the push to supplant the current leadership of Cuba with something else.
Marco Rubio is the son of Cuban immigrants to the United States.
The situation in Cuba is obviously dire on an economic level.
You know, power, blackouts, problems in hospitals.
Yes, and relatedly, the removal of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela, who had been an ally of Cuba and had helped Cuba get that oil.
So the president himself has been quite clear about believing that the leadership of Cuba is on its last legs.
The question, as always, with these things, Mimi, is, well, what if it falls, then what replaces it?
And of course, in the case of Cuba, there have been numerous occasions over the decade since Fidel Castro came to power where the downfall of Cuba was predicted and didn't happen.
Bruce, in Indiana, Independent Line, good morning.
You're on with Niall Stanage.
unidentified
Thanks for taking my call.
I think the war in Iran is a big result from the way President Trump has run the country and also the fact that the elected officials no longer represent the people.
It's the parties that are controlling basically the country and all the elected officials because you can't have this many people on both sides saying the exact same thing and arguing the exact same points when they're supposed to be elected and representing the citizens in there.
state or district.
So we basically lost, it doesn't matter who you elect, the parties are going to control what happens and what's said and what's done.
And Niel, to that point, going back to the Save America Act, what kind of pressure is the White House putting on Senate Republicans on that and House Republicans?
So it's putting on a lot of pressure partly because of President Trump's bully pulpit and because of his dominance within the Republican Party.
Every so often we hear about certain tensions within the MABAS.
That certainly is the case to some degree over Iran.
But President Trump remains far and away the most dominant figure in the Republican Party.
So his mere fact that he is willing to publicly pressure John Thune, for example, the Senate Majority Leader, is something that creates a dilemma for Thun.
Now, there are all kinds of reasons why Thun doesn't, I mean, Thun just doesn't believe he has the votes to pass it, essentially.
And that is the conundrum that he faces.
But the insistence with which the White House is pushing this and in fact ratcheting up the pressure with this suggestion that there is now a linkage between the so-called Save America Act and the funding of DHS, this is all increasing the impetus, even though from what I'm hearing, it's not at all certain that Senate Republicans will go along with that plan.
And this is more of a strategy question, but this is from Lee in Fairfax, Virginia, who says, what specifically is Iran's capability to threaten passage through the Strait of Hormuz?
So the nature of the threat is that the Strait of Hormuz's narrowest point is pretty narrow, 20 miles.
And so what the Iranians can do, if they want to, is use things like small speedboats that just come out, fire an RPG or something at an oil tanker, and disappear again before the U.S. can take action.
As I said earlier, Mimi, that does not require Iran to be able to damage or sink 100% of ships.
The threat itself has major impacts upon insurance prices and upon shipping companies' willingness to sail there.
I mean, there has been, I think the latest tally was about 16 ships have been attacked in some shape or form.
Now, Iran hasn't officially acknowledged responsibility for that, but who else would it be, right?
So those factors are serious factors.
And you would need, if you wanted to stop that, look, I'm not obviously general, but you would need forces that would go to the southern coast of Iran and in some way remove the capacity of the Iranians to stop those ships.
I want to know why we have two real estate agents and Steve Witkoff and Kushner doing our most sensitive negotiations around the world and not Marco Rubio and the State Department.
I understand Marco's got some pretty big shoes to fill, but I mean, shouldn't he do it?
And if they're not, shouldn't they be made available, those two, to the American people to answer some questions?
I mean, I think that there have been a number of reports about the negotiations with Iran leading up to the current conflict, where, frankly, the suggestion was that Witkoff and Kushner didn't have the level of technical knowledge of the production of nuclear weapons or nuclear material that was necessary for negotiations of that scale.
Now, that's a different question as to whether they're real estate agents or whether Marco Rubio would be better.
Obviously, Witkoff and Kushner have taken very central roles, not only in relation to Iran, but in relation to Gaza and a number of other issues.
Whether that's a good or bad thing would take a long time to litigate.
Sabrina, Independent, Asheville, North Carolina, you're on the air.
unidentified
Hi, good morning.
So my problem with this whole thing is we're acting like nuclear is our biggest threat.
The battlefield has evolved over the years, and it's no longer about boots on the ground, which, by the way, I do not support U.S. military going anywhere else in the United States because that's not what they were designed for.
They were designed for here.
But the battlefield is not nuclear.
The battlefield is financial, biologics, and infrastructure.
If we want to fix our gas prices and we don't want to worry about these oil fields no more, then we're going to have to fix our own oil refineries.
We're going to have to do our own thing.
This is just a distraction from the actual war that we are all being attacked by biological companies.
And I think it is a waste of time and it's a waste of effort to spend any more time on the Middle East when we should be focusing on the war that's happening right here in our streets.
Yeah, I mean, I think that Sabrina's central point is that these sort of overseas adventures are a distraction from problems at home.
And we heard another caller at the beginning of the show make a similar point.
That argument, I think, resonates with a lot of Americans.
In fact, you know, when President Trump was first running for election and in 2024 as well, one of his appeals to a number of voters was the idea that he would not get involved in these overseas conflicts, that the U.S. would not get sucked into these foreign entanglements, and that the focus would be on putting more resources into domestic concerns.
Now, as I say, that obviously did appeal to many voters, and that the seeming contradiction between that argument and bombing Iran, I think, has caused real tension and unease, even among people who did support the president.
There was a poll from The Economist and YouGov just last week that had about one in five Trump 2024 voters disapproving of how he was handling the situation in Iran.
So the White House has asserted a number of times that in its view, the objectives have been clearly explained.
And I've been in press briefings where that has been reiterated by Caroline Levitt.
They talk about four objectives, degrading Iran's Navy, taking away the propensity for it to have a nuclear capacity, stopping it from supporting proxies in the Middle East.
Those objectives, of which one I've forgotten, those they say are the arguments for the war.
Now, that leaves open the question of whether they are okay with the Islamic Republic itself continuing to exist, continuing to survive after this.
The other point to the statistics you cite, Mimi, is none of the stated objectives make clear why this had to be done now in a way that it did not have to be done either in the first year of President Trump's second term or in the four years that he was in power previously.
And I think that failure to really identify a specific compelling imminent threat has been a real problem with the White House's message.
There was obviously a fear of this conflict expanding and of other nations being drawn into it.
There is also, of course, the Israeli invasion of Lebanon as part of this whole conflict, which tends to get undercovered.
That all being said, I think World War III seems a bit hyperbolic to me, and especially so if President Trump is lowering tensions.
The pallets of cash, I mean, that controversy is so complicated that I frankly can't remember the exact details of where that money came from and what it was about.
The Iran deal, the argument that advocates make is it restrained Iran from really acquiring nuclear weapons without getting into the kind of direct conflict that we see now.
Critics of that deal, including President Trump, say it was too soft on Iran.
It's not entirely accurate in the sense that it isn't solely U.S. ships that are banned, but it is true that Iran is permitting ships carrying its own oil to other nations to get through.
It is, yes, it is true that not all shipping has been stopped.
And yes, it is true that Iran is letting some tankers through.
I just have comments, two comments as far as our war on Iran.
For me, I support, I pray for our country, our military troops, and our president.
And I feel strong that right now, we need to put the politics aside and get on board behind our military troops and behind the president.
The second comment I want to make is we have had four presidents right now that is too scared, like that one gentleman said earlier, is too scared to do what Mr. Trump is doing right now.
And I just feel like we all need to be praying for our military system, but also backing our president up.
I'm always intrigued when people say we should put politics aside and back the president.
I mean, there are reasons why any president is controversial.
There are reasons why this president in particular is controversial.
And I mean, when people say, for example, we should put politics aside and back President Trump, did they say that when President Biden or President Obama were in office?
Or is their belief that they should put politics aside conditional upon the party that happens to hold the White House at that time?
To celebrate the 250th anniversary since the signing of the Declaration of Independence, thousands of students across America started writing and filming for this year's C-SPAN Student Cam documentary competition.
Nearly 4,000 students from 38 states and Washington, D.C. created documentaries examining themes from American history, exploring rights and freedoms rooted in the foundational document, or tackling modern-day issues from the economy to immigration, criminal justice, education, and healthcare.
They researched, they interviewed experts, and they told powerful stories, exploring the enduring impact of the Declaration of Independence.
And now it's time to announce the top winners of Student Cam 2026.
The middle school first prize goes to Harper Hayden and Helena De La Hussé of Correa Middle School in San Diego, California.
For documentary, This Is What Democracy Looks Like, about free speech and the No Kings movement.
The High School Eastern Division First Prize goes to Kessler Dickerson and Charlotte Liggin from Millbrook Magnet High School in Raleigh, North Carolina for Roots of Freedom, the struggles and tensions of rural American agriculture, about farmers and government policies that impact food production.
In the high school Central Division, Benjamin Curian of On Tangi Liberty High School in Powell, Ohio, won first prize for A Right to Health about health care policy.
And in the high school Western Division, first prize goes to Danaya Safi and Juhi Pari from Indercom High School in Sacramento, California for Dreamers Deferred, the American Dream on Hold about Immigration Policy and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.
And we're happy to announce that Student Cam 2026 Grand Prize winner earning $5,000 is Irena Holbrook from Troy Athens High School in Troy, Michigan for her documentary, The Pursuit of Fair Pay, about the impact of name, image, and likeness, known as NIL, on college sports.
And out of almost 4,000 students who participated this year, you've won $5,000 in this year's grand prize.
Congratulations.
Deep Water Drilling00:05:57
unidentified
Thank you.
Want to see their amazing films?
Watch all 150 award-winning documentaries at studentcam.org and catch the top 21 winners airing this April on C-SPAN.
C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
On this episode of Book Notes Plus with our host, Brian Lamb.
Seth Harp is a lawyer and an Iraq war veteran and an investigative writer and journalist.
His first book, The Fort Bragg Cartel, is about drug trafficking and murder in the special forces.
Near the end of his book, Harp writes, quote, between January 2017 and September 2022, a total of 15,293 active duty service members suffered drug overdoses, and 322 of those were fatal.
The Defense Department data, and we're still quoting, showed that Fort Bragg had far more overdoses than any other military base in both absolute and per capita terms.
Unquote.
Fort Bragg is located in Fayetteville, North Carolina, and is the largest populated Army base with close to 50,000 soldiers and is headquarters of the secret Delta Force.
unidentified
A new interview with veteran journalist and author Seth Harp about his book, The Fort Bragg Cartel: Drug Trafficking and Murder in the Special Forces.
Book Notes Plus with our host, Brian Lapp, is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
I wasn't exactly sure what the number of, you get confused between when was Katrina and when was deep water and things like that.
But anyway, tore up the entire Gulf Coast and just ruined everything.
And I know it's probably been, you know, all that dispersant is just, you know, made all sorts of strange things growing in the bottom of the Gulf, but be that as it may.
This administration, in its infinite wisdom, appointing weird people to different jobs, has the Secretary of Energy has thought it would be okay to give BP another chance at polluting the Gulf of Mexico.
They have been given the contract to go ahead and start drilling something called the ultra deep water oil well.
Now, they didn't have the ability to correct the one at 5,000 feet, which was where the deep water horizon was.
And ultra deep is going to be at 6,000 or between 5,000 and 6,000.
And they are still apparently going to count on any of the types of situations to save in case of an awful thing happening again, is to just spread dispersant on the water.
And because they've never really had to deal with that deep type of drilling and what would happen again.
And certainly, well, we can give it to the same people that couldn't figure out how to fix that deep water horizon, much less add another thousand feet.
And you remember the True Social post saying that President Trump saying that there were negotiations ongoing and that he has directed the military to postpone any attacks on Iran's energy infrastructure.
We do have a response from Iran on that.
This is from the Mir news agency.
It's considered semi-official news agency from Tehran, and it says this: the Iran's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has rejected the U.S. President's claims that there are talks ongoing with Iran saying that Trump aims to buy time for U.S. military plans and reduce energy prices.
It says, this is the quote: There are initiatives by regional countries to de-escalate tensions, and our response to all of them is clear.
We are not the party that started this war, and all these requests should be referred to Washington.
And here is Patricia, North Carolina independent, sorry, North Dakota independent line.
Go ahead, Patricia.
unidentified
Good morning.
I have a situation with our IDs.
I just don't feel that they're adequate.
Like Mexico has a fingerprint on their voter ID.
And how are they verified?
I keep hearing people have fake IDs.
And then on these shows, people are counterfeiting IDs, giving out green cards, IDs, all kinds of things.
So how do we actually verify when you show your ID, they should be run through a scanner and have a tipped or something.
This is Jason, St. Cloud, Minnesota, Independent Line.
Hi, Jason.
unidentified
Hi, Mimi.
Good morning.
Good morning, C-STAN.
Good morning, America.
Long time viewer been watching since the Brian Lamb days.
This might get a little long.
Hopefully, you give me time that you've given other people.
I just want to talk about Mark Wayne Mullen, starting with that, a man who went to college for a year and then had to leave to take over family business due to illness.
But during that time, he basically focused on becoming an MMA fighter and had a radio talk show about upkeep, home upkeep.
Now he's the only senator out there without at least a bachelor degree, self-admitted, they'll never be the smartest man in any room.
And he's up to be the head of the third largest department in the U.S. government with 260,000 employees because Trump likes the way he looks on TV.
These are the same credentials for Pete Hagsepp.
I'm not saying that a college degree is a prerequisite for success, but more is needed to run a department that equals the 90th largest city in the United States, considering the anger issues this that has.
But not a surprise from Trump, whose biggest claim to fame was a reality TV show.
And he likes to go on hunches.
But a hunch is why the U.S. is in Iran right now.
And this hunch came from the same man who's bankrupted several companies, a man who has trash-talked the U.S. intelligence agency, a man who has destroyed relationships with long-lasting allies after he decided to dismantle our international diplomatic expertise and replace it with real estate tycoons and their zero-sum mindset.
Now this baseball hat-wearing clown is disrespecting the first heroes coming back in coffins and lying to Americans about another country using Tomahawk missiles to target a school, which was such a whopper that his Louisiana protector had to come apologize for the military's error.
So now show some courage is what's being told to all the oil tanker captains in the Gulf by Trump and his glamour boy fool at the Pentagon, who's so braggadash docious about war and making us unsafe with his childish video game snippets that the same tough guy can't even handle questions from real reporters and now doesn't even want photos of him being shown because some are unflattering.
Everyone agrees that something had to be done in that region, but it's really worrisome that this administration is the one doing so, that they are the most inept group of sycopants following the corrupt, self-famed, stable genius who sealed his school records, which makes his intellect lower than Bush 2's C average.
Trump's low intellect and need to be in the spot while hiding some Epstein truth has led him to push the lais allies over the Greenland distraction.
Now, his stupid childish comments, like what he said to both Irish and Japan dignitaries, has the world rolling their eyes at America once again.
And, you know, the ICE agents are assigned at many airports across the country already.
They do a lot of investigation, criminal investigation on smuggling airports.
But, you know, there's, I mean, there's got TSA agents covering exits, you know, people that enter through the exits.
You know, certainly a highly trained ICE law enforcement officer can cover an exit, makes people don't go through those exits enter an airport through the exits.
And stuff like that relieves that TSA officer to go to screening and to reduce those lines.
So wherever we can provide extra security, I don't see an ICE agent looking at an x-ray machine because you're not trained in that.
There are certain parts of security that TSA is doing that we can move them off those jobs and put them into specialized jobs, help move those lines.
It's not clear which airports or how many agents will be deployed, but we will watch that for you.
The other thing happening today is oral arguments at the Supreme Court.
So here's the front page of USA Today.
Justices take up mail-in ballots.
Trump and GOP seek to limit grace period.
It says the Supreme Court will weigh the Republican Party's effort to limit mail-in voting when it hears a case March 23rd, that's today, with broad implications for the upcoming midterms that addresses whether absentee ballots must be received and not just postmarked by Election Day.
So we will have live coverage of those oral arguments today.
That starts right after this program at 10 a.m.
Again, it's going to decide whether federal statutes can preempt state laws that allow mail-in ballots mailed in by Election Day to be received and counted by officials after voting day.
And that is right here on C-SPAN.
You can also watch it on our app, C-SPANNOW and online at c-SPAN.org.
The other thing happening this morning on C-SPAN 2 is British Prime Minister Kirst Starmer.
He will be facing questions on the conflict in Iran and the wider Middle East, along with the UK's economic security in testimony before the House of Commons Liaison Committee.
We have live coverage of that at 10.30 on C-SPAN 2.
And here's Thomas in Silver Spring, Maryland, Independent Line.
Good morning.
unidentified
Yes, good morning.
This is about Iran.
I'm not hearing this comment made, and I think it needs to be opened into the debate.
The reports have been that there have been at least 10,000 people were murdered, up to 30,000.
It seems to me that there's a place to argue for, and I'm not a Trump supporter, argue for that these are issues of crimes against humanity.
And that's not being argued.
And the Iranian people asked for our help.
And they asked for our help because they have lived under this oppression for 40 years.
They're tired of it and they're dying.
That kind of argument about crimes against humanity needs to be made.
And Iranian people are arguing this is similar to the Nazi regime during World War II.
They keep talking about voter fraud, and I'm curious about the voter fraud.
The Republicans started the things with the stop, stop, the steal.
So they created this voter fraud thing.
However, Republicans are in control of everything.
So I'm curious, how can Republicans be in control with all of this voter fraud that's supposed to be going on on the other side, so to speak?
And on the Iran war, I just have one thing to say.
There were 77 million of Republicans that voted for Donald Trump.
Donald Trump started this war.
He did not go to Congress for permission, I mean, and consult with Congress about starting the war.
So personally, for all of those in favor of this war, I think that the 77 million that supported him, you should go and all of your immediate family members should go and fight this war for Donald Trump and leave everybody else out of it.
Now, not to say that Iran is a good, those people that's running are good people.
That is not what I'm saying.
But nobody was consulted with this war.
This is Donald Trump's war.
And I think Donald Trump and his supporters should fight this war.
The Iran war, it was necessary, not only for the United States, but for the entire world.
You have people that wants to destroy other people because of their religious belief or whatever they believe on.
And they want to control that.
And President Trump was right in what he's doing, because I believe the word tell me we have to pray for Israel regardless of what's going on over there.
It is not up to Iran to want to enslave an entire nation because you don't believe in their belief.
And whether you want to believe it or not, this is a spiritual war.
It's not a war because they want to control, just like that mayor in New York.
And they will lie, cheat, and steal.
Anytime you are willing to put bombs on your own children, they don't mind blowing up their own people in order to get over on America.
And our president is doing a wonderful job.
And for people saying they don't understand, get in your word and read, and you will understand what is actually going on here.
And this is Freddie in Snellville, Georgia, Independent Lion.
Go ahead, Freddie.
unidentified
Yes, good morning.
I am calling about the Iranian war that the U.S. started with Israel.
I think this is just an illegal act, and Congress is failing to do their job in preventing this president from getting us into potentially World War III.
Those people out there that support this kind of murder and slaughter are really a danger to our country and totally unpatriotic and has turned on the country to allow a president to do the things that he's doing.
Our congressperson, any congressperson that votes to support this $200 Billion dollars request from Trump is also betraying our country when the country can't even run because it's all shut down.
People having to wait for hours and hours at the airport, and the airport workers are the TSA people not being able to be paid, but they're asking for $200 billion to continue to kill people.
Yes, it's the U.S. and Israel are the aggressors in this war.
They've killed thousands of Iranians who had nothing to do with this war.
They did not initiate this war.
The U.S. and Israel initiated this war, and it's going to take thousands of dead Americans for the Americans to finally come to their senses to find the courage and the strength to fight this government and make it stop warring all over the world and now in the Middle East, destroying it, running up gas prices from $355 to $5 a gallon here in Snailville, Georgia.
It's 202-748-8001 for Republicans and 202-748-8002 for Independents.
Regarding ICE deployment in airports, the New York Times reporting that agents have begun to deploy at U.S. airports.
You can see a picture here.
This is from the Atlanta International Airport with ICE agents there.
And the article does say that Newark, Liberty International Airport, that agents were there.
It says President Trump has characterized ICE deployment in part as a threat aimed at pressuring congressional Democrats to agree to a deal to fund the Homeland Security Department, which includes the TSA.
So that is there.
And yesterday, the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, was on the Senate floor and he talked about President Trump sending ICE to various airports around the country.
ICE agents who are untrained and have caused problems everywhere they've gone, lurking at our airports, that's asking for trouble.
And it will certainly make the chaos at the airports even worse.
No one has any faith in ICE agents.
They haven't received training.
They don't know what it is to be a TSA person and do what you need to do there.
And the real problem here is they have no plan for using these ICE agents.
Trump says send them there, they send them there, and Holman says they're still drawing up plans with less than a day's notice.
What is this?
We know what it is.
It's another impulsive action by Donald Trump.
Some idea pops into his head and he announces it.
And then the people working for him, a few of whom do have some degree of talent and ability, not many, underlings, they have to rush to try and implement what they know is an idiotic plan.
In this case, it's a plan that has no planning.
It's another impulsive action from Donald Trump.
When he acts impulsively, there's usually trouble.
Whenever Donald Trump acts impulsively with no follow-through, there's trouble.
ICE agents will be asked to do things they are not trained to do.
They don't know how to perform core TSA screening functions.
Travelers will be on edge with federal agents looking over their shoulders.
All they will do is worsen the situation at airports, which are already on edge.
So I have an idea for Donald Trump.
Instead of sending ICE agents to harass travelers at airports, why doesn't Trump get his act together and agree to pay the TSA workers and get the Senate Republicans to do so?
John Ashburn, Virginia, Republican, you're on the air.
unidentified
Hi.
Well, I'm more of an independent these days.
I kind of like the Republicans the way they used to be before the president was elected.
But my question is this.
There was a colloquy yesterday by Senator Kennedy, who had unanimous consent to talk about a motion he wanted to put into the record.
And I know the Senate is a very curious place.
But his idea, kind of going to last caller, was to actually have the senators vote to hold back their own paychecks until the TSA agents would be paid.
And he sought recognition from the chair who had the presiding officer.
And the chair then had to talk to the parliamentarian.
The parliamentarian then whispered something in there and said, he can't be recognized because somebody objected.
It's unanimous consent.
Somebody objected.
Senator's got to stop.
And then another senator also said he heard nobody object.
Nobody was recognized to object.
They talked again for a little bit, and then they said, but the presiding officer heard, made an objection.
So the understanding Senator Kennedy got was that somebody can object without being heard by the presiding officer, to which two members of the Senate got up and said, how can somebody be recognized if they're not heard?
And this went back and forth for a while until he was ruled out of order yet again.
And the understanding he got was that even though nobody was recognized and nobody did it, that somebody can object who's not there.
So the rules of the Senate are very strange sometimes.
And I wish somebody could explain, at least to the American people, how someone could object under unanimous consent and not be present.
I just wanted to talk a little bit about voter ID and clarify for some people that you can actually, in several states, register to vote without actually, in that process, be a U.S. citizen.
Once you obtain a driver's license in several of these states, then you can go register, simply show that driver's license and a utility bill and register to vote.
That driver's license doesn't affirm you're a U.S. citizen.
I just have a couple of comments on Venezuela, because what I see here is the government goes in for whatever reason there may be, and then they say, okay, we take out who's ever there, and we'll put, you know, somebody else, like Daisy, whoever, whatever her name is, and the people will be better off.
Well, looking at Venezuela, I don't see how the people are better off.
They're just the same.
It's just we're negotiating, but the people, they're not better.
Then in Cuba, they're saying we're going to go in.
So I was just looking at latest news on Venezuela, Liana.
And this is what the Associated Press said.
It says, Rubio to testify and trial a former roommate accused of secretly lobbying for Venezuela.
It says that the federal trial of a former Miami congressman accused of secretly lobbying for Venezuela's government during the first Trump administration begins Monday.
That's today, with Secretary of State Rubio set to testify over his interactions with his old friend.
That's the Associated Press.
And here is John, Norwalk, Ohio, Republican.
Hi, John.
unidentified
Hi.
I just have one question.
If you could verify this or not, I heard it in the news, and I think it was broadcasted on your station for CNN, and it's to do with the Epstein files.
And it indicated that AG's office submitted some documentation that indicated that President Trump had been involved in some sexual conduct with a young lady.
Do you have had anything in your files like that?
I only heard it once, so I'm not sure if it was fake news or what.
I'm talking about a subject I've called a couple of times before.
And the situation in America that we're seeing right now with the president abusing his authority is a constitutional crisis that the originators of the Constitution anticipated.
When they originally set up the Ten Amendments for the Bill of Rights, there were actually with 12.
All 12 were passed by the Congress at the time.
And this was meant to, there was one amendment that was meant to increase the size of the Congress with the size of the population.
And this was stopped in 1921, held at 435.
Had the original amendment been passed by all of the states available, the size of the Congress would be substantially higher, maybe even seven or eight times higher.
This is what needs to be done.
This amendment could not be passed because it was written improperly.
But a new constitutional amendment has to be done to increase the size of the Congress in order for that member of government that's closest to the people to have enough authority and power to speak to the president when he acts in this way.
And coming up next, American University Professor William Leo Grand joins us for a closer look at the Trump administration's pressure campaign on Cuba's leadership to step down.
And if more direct action is coming from Washington, that's right after the break.
unidentified
Best ideas and best practices can be found anywhere.
So I want to start with this article from the Associated Press with the headline, Concern, Anger, and Hope Simmer in Cuba after Trump calls for imminent action against the government.
Where do things stand right now between Cuba and the U.S.?
unidentified
Well, they're at a very tense moment right now.
Cuban Missile Crisis Risk00:14:56
unidentified
President Trump has been saying really for about a month now that he sees Cuba as next on his list of dealing with adversary states, Venezuela first, now Iran.
He said that he hopes he's going to have the honor of taking Cuba.
He didn't say exactly what he meant by that, but it's clear that both he and Marco Rubio are committed to some kind of fundamental change in Cuba.
We know that Cuba and the United States have been talking with one another.
We don't know exactly what the agenda of those talks are.
The U.S. began a blockade of oil coming into Cuba earlier this year.
Why?
unidentified
Cuba is very dependent on imported oil.
They only produce about 40% of their consumption.
And they were getting a lot of that from Venezuela.
That, of course, stopped after the United States went into Venezuela, abducted the president of Venezuela, and then cut off the Venezuelan oil shipments to Cuba.
And then at the end of January, the president signed an executive order that warned we would impose tariffs on any other country in the world that dared ship oil to Cuba.
And no one has.
That executive order was actually rescinded because it relied on the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, which the Supreme Court said was unconstitutional.
But the threat of some kind of U.S. sanctions has deterred other countries from actually trying to send Cuba oil.
So they only have a couple of weeks of oil left for the entire country.
And so, you know, we've heard about widespread blackouts happening.
What's going on on the streets in Cuba?
unidentified
It's a desperate situation.
The government has actually been short of fuel for a while, but now it's running out completely.
And that means that there's no electricity because 80% of Cuba's electricity is produced by thermoelectric plants that run on oil.
It also means for a lot of people there's no water because when the electricity goes out, the electrical power pumps that pump the oil up to upper floors and buildings don't work.
It means that hospitals can't do surgeries and so on.
If you've got a question for Professor Leo Grand on Cuba, you can start giving us a call now.
The lines are bipartisan, so Democrats are on 202, 748, 8000.
Republicans 202, 748, 8001, and Independents 202, 748, 8002.
What would you say is the U.S. strategic objective of this oil blockade?
What are they trying to accomplish?
unidentified
I think that the strategy is to do enough damage to the Cuban economy that the government will effectively surrender to whatever terms the Trump administration has put forward in these negotiations that we know are underway.
It's a risky strategy because if the government doesn't agree to terms that President Trump finds acceptable, the risk is that the whole economy could collapse and you could have real social unrest on the island.
Historically, when the Cuban economy has done very, very badly, Cubans have migrated to the United States.
That's happened three or four times in the past, and there's a risk it could happen again.
Well, let's do some history because there's been an economic embargo on Cuba since the 1960s.
Tell us why.
Why did all this happen?
unidentified
Well, it happened, of course, because in 1959, Fidel Castro overthrew Fulgencio Batista's military dictatorship.
Batista had been a friend of the United States since the 1930s.
And it didn't take long before Castro's revolution moved to the left, and the United States decided that the continued existence of this regime was contrary to U.S. national interest.
And so we had, of course, the Bay of Pigs invasion, which was one of the first efforts to overthrow this government.
And when that didn't work, President Kennedy imposed a complete embargo on the island.
That meant, and means today, that nobody subject to U.S. jurisdiction can engage in any kind of transaction with Cuba unless the president has given permission through a license.
So people can travel to Cuba because there are licenses that the president has approved that allow it.
But we have virtually no economic relationship with Cuba other than the export to Cuba of agricultural goods because the Congress wrote that into law in 2000.
How likely is it that the regime in Cuba would voluntarily step down as a result of this economic pressure?
unidentified
I think it's very unlikely.
The Cuban government has said repeatedly, the president said just recently, the Cuban president said just recently, that Cuba's form of government and the personnel in it are not up for negotiation.
And the Vice Foreign Minister repeated that on the Sunday shows.
All right, let's talk to callers and bring in Howard first in Michigan Independent Line.
Good morning, Howard.
unidentified
Yeah, I have one quick question about Cuba.
What would be the possibility of the current Cuban government giving in to political tensions and the possibility of Cuba becoming a, like Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory?
That's all I have to say.
Thank you, and I enjoy your independent broadcasting.
Well, you know, Cuba became independent as a result of the Spanish-American War in 1898, and that's when Puerto Rico became a U.S. possession.
And the Cubans are very proud of their national sovereignty.
They're a very nationalistic people.
And so the idea that they would agree to become a U.S. possession, I think, is very, very unlikely.
But what's interesting in Cuba these days is that Cuba is changing, particularly on the economic front.
They inherited a centrally planned economy from the Soviet Union that didn't work.
And for the last decade or so, they've been trying to move away from that and more toward a kind of market economy on the model of either Vietnam or China.
What if all economic sanctions and embargoes were lifted on Cuba?
Would we have more influence over their government and having a friendlier government in Cuba?
unidentified
Well, I think we would.
This is a strategy that President Obama tried beginning in 2014 when he and Raul Castro agreed to normalize diplomatic relations and try to move toward a more normal relationship overall.
And President Obama licensed a lot of new transactions with Cuba, economic transactions with Cuba.
He liberalized trade so that more Americans could travel to Cuba and more Cubans could come to the United States.
And in the space of just two years, the two countries were able to sign 22 bilateral agreements on a range of issues of mutual interest, everything ranging from law enforcement, counter-narcotics, counter-terrorism, environmental protection, public health.
So it seems to me that the progress that was made in just those two years of trying to improve the relationship, we got more out of it and the Cubans got more out of it than this 50-some odd years of embargo that preceded it.
Carol in St. Mary's, Georgia, Democrat, you're on the air.
unidentified
Yes, I'm a first-time caller and I appreciate you taking my call.
I read that there's a Russian oil tanker going towards Cuba as we stay supposedly arriving tonight.
I was wondering if that is true and if so, what do you think the ramifications will be?
Yes, so the Russians have always been a supplier in modest amounts of oil to Cuba.
And when President Trump just the other day lifted the or waived sanctions on Russian oil to increase global supply in the middle of the war with Iran, two Russian tankers actually set out for Cuba.
One of them is a shadow fleet tanker, which is to say it's not registered properly, I guess, would be the way to put it.
And President Trump's response was to say, well, Cuba is exempted from this waiver.
Russian oil cannot go to Cuba.
And the ship, the vessel from the shadow fleet turned around.
But the second vessel is on its way to Cuba still.
And it's going to be very interesting to see if the United States Navy tries to intercept this Russian vessel on its way to provide oil to Cuba.
Let's talk to Frank, Montgomery Village on the independent line.
Go ahead, Frank.
unidentified
Hey, how are you?
First of all, I appreciate everything he just said, honestly.
I've been to Cuba probably 60 times over the last 10 years, and I want to ask him: would you agree that them having no oil for power, as I've seen down there, I was there recently,
as within the last month, is it an act of war for America to blockade that oil knowing that there's no power for ambulances, medical equipment, life support equipment, food, refrigeration, etc.
Is that an act of war or even possible signs of a genocide that we're enforcing on Cuba?
Well, as I said, if we stop a foreign vessel that has a legitimate right to be going to Cuba and blockade the island, that is, in fact, technically an act of war.
This is why President Kennedy called his blockade of Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis a quarantine rather than a blockade.
That was really semantics, but he understood the risks involved in imposing a naval blockade.
The impact that this is having on the Cuban people is absolutely disastrous.
I was there in December, and I'm in touch with people on the island almost every day, and the situation is just deteriorating day after day.
They just suffered a nationwide power outage just the other day.
There's garbage in the streets because the garbage trucks don't have any gasoline.
So is it possible, Professor, that there would be an armed insurgency?
The people rise up and demand their government do something about this?
unidentified
So people are incredibly stressed by this situation, and there's a lot of discontent with the government because people believe that the government hasn't done a very good job over the last few years in dealing with Cuba's broader economic crisis.
But right now, it's pretty clear that the United States is the one that's imposing an oil blockade.
We've been very open about the fact that we're doing that.
There have been some spontaneous demonstrations, protests in Cuba.
They're very common at this point because the situation is so desperate for people.
But there's no organized opposition really in Cuba.
The government has been very successful at pushing down, suppressing any kind of organized opposition and forcing the leaders of opposition into exile.
Let's talk to Brian in East Sandwich, Massachusetts, Republican.
Go ahead, Brian.
unidentified
Hi, thank you very much, Professor Leo Grande.
Mercy Ships For Cuba00:16:06
unidentified
To put it facetiously, I mean, for people that consume Cuba Libre from time to time, why did Bacardi choose to move to San Juan?
But more important, what a social breakdown or possibility or what's happening there now.
Do you see a Balcero type phenomenon or an aerial boatlift type operation happening or one foot in the water, one foot on Florida?
I mean, what do you see?
Do you see a brothers in arms, a brothers in rescue, shrink on a perception or something like that?
I'll take it off.
I'll take it offline.
Thank you, sir.
So Bacardi moved to Puerto Rico because Fidel Castro nationalized their operations in Cuba.
I do worry that as the situation on the island deteriorates, people are going to look for ways to leave.
They did that in 1990, as you mentioned, in the Mario boatlift.
They did it again in 1994 with the rafters or the Balcero crisis.
And we've already seen a small uptick in the number of people trying to come across the Florida Strait.
If the situation really becomes even worse, even more desperate, and particularly if there's an outbreak of social violence, I can very well imagine that we're going to see people trying to get onto anything that'll float and come across the Florida Strait.
I was wondering if when we get a new president, perhaps he's a little more tactful and talk to the Cuban authorities and say, can we, if we brought mercy ships, doctors, and tell them we could bring doctors without borders and show them that we really care, perhaps even tell them that we may even consider them being the 51st state.
Know them that we really care about them.
They're so close to us that it would be so easy to help them.
And you saw what happened years ago when Russia put the missiles in Cuba, how close they are to us, what a danger it would be.
I think it would be our advantage and their advantage too.
Thank you.
So the Cuban government and particularly the Cuban people would really like to have a better relationship with the United States.
And we saw that during the Obama opening when there was a really good reciprocity in terms of a whole range of issues.
The help that the Cubans need right now is not actually doctors.
They have plenty of personnel.
What they don't have is any money to provide the medicine and the equipment that doctors need to be able to do their job.
So right now Cuba is in a humanitarian crisis.
I think there's just no denying it.
And they need humanitarian assistance, particularly food and medicine.
And they're getting it from a lot of countries in the world.
They're getting it from Canada, from Mexico, from China.
But they're not getting it from the United States.
And my fear is that as the situation gets worse, Cuban people are going to remember who came to their aid and who didn't.
I mean, the pressure the United States is putting on Cuba today, to be frank, is a violation of the Charter of the Organization of American States, which says no nation can use force or the threat of force to change the internal politics of another country.
It's a violation of the United Nations Charter.
We're in a situation now where the Trump administration has said that it's force and power that govern international affairs, not international law and diplomacy.
And a small poor country like Cuba is really at the mercy of a great power in that sort of law, the jungle model of international affairs.
It was interesting to me that the President commented on what a great tourist destination Cuba is.
It is, and tourism has been the centerpiece of the Cuban economy now for a couple of decades.
Joel, an independent in New York, you're on the air.
unidentified
Yeah, good morning.
Just a quick question.
I mean, it seems like these 50-plus years of sanctions have worked, but what threat does Cuba, I mean, it seems like they're not a threat anymore, so why continue this?
So during the Cold War, Cuba was a partner of the Soviet Union, as we saw in the Cuban Missile Crisis.
And so there was a certain logic to a policy of denial aimed at Cuba because it was part of the Cold War global rivalry we had with the Soviet Union.
When the Soviet Union went away, the threat posed by Cuba is really very much diminished.
Cuba doesn't really try to export revolution to Latin America anymore.
Its troops are out of Africa today.
And Cuba would actually very much like to have a normal, positive relationship with the United States.
The administration argues, of course, that, well, Cubans are hosting intelligence gathering sites for Russia and China.
That may very well be true.
We ought to, in my judgment, we ought to have a conversation with the Cubans about our security and how that concerns us and see if we might come to some kind of agreement.
And President Trump is, just so everybody knows, he is live over on C-SPAN 2.
He is speaking to reporters right now in West Palm Beach.
If you would like to follow that, that's over on C-SPAN 2.
Here is Sophia in Miami, Florida, Republican.
Hi, Sophia.
unidentified
Hi, good morning.
This is my first time calling, so I'm going to ask you to bear with me.
And I thank you for taking my call.
Mimi, you're one of my favorite hosts.
Professor, with all due respect, you are being very disingenuous with your information.
My mother was Cuban, and so is the family, and I have a lot of family members.
I don't know who you're speaking to in Cuba, but you're not relating the truth of how they're living in Cuba.
It's been decades, decades.
They have no food, and it's not just recent.
The Cuban government has repressed, killed, murdered, assassinated, and disappeared a lot of the protesters.
People don't have medicine.
They don't have food.
You know who's supporting them?
Their families living here in the United States.
Send money, send food, medicine.
My church did a very big collection when they had, and no one talked about it, and no one reported it on all the viruses that were going on, people dropping dead in the streets because they didn't even have ibuprofen.
Yet, there's tourism, but the Cuban people living there do not have access to any of those amenities that the tourists have.
So, yeah, I will not and never have gone back to Cuba because I refuse to allow any money to go to the Cuban government.
I've known family members.
They can show you that there's nothing in the hospitals.
You wouldn't even want to take a family member to the hospitals.
But yet, foreigners have access to medical treatment that the people who live in Cuba do not have.
So please, please be truthful.
Tell the truth of what's going on.
It's not the fault of the United States.
It's the Cuban government because all of them are living very, very well, driving great cars.
All right, Sophia, let's get the professor a chance.
unidentified
So first, thanks for calling in.
And good for you and your church for putting together some humanitarian assistance for the Cuban people.
Because as I said earlier, the situation really is desperate.
And the way you've described it is accurate.
There's terrible shortages of food.
There is no medicine in the hospitals.
And many Cuban families are getting by on the remittances that Cuban Americans, not only Cuban Americans, but Cubans who've migrated to Latin America and to Spain are sending.
And I hope they continue to do that for the good of the Cuban people.
You're right.
It's not just the fault of the U.S. embargo that the Cuban economy is a wreck.
As I was saying earlier, the Cubans for a long time were trying to run an economy based on the sort of Soviet central planning model.
And that doesn't work.
And they've been trying to make a transition more toward markets that haven't been very successful at it.
And that's the reason that they're in the fix that they are today.
But we can't deny that the U.S. embargo is having an impact, especially right now when we've cut off oil shipments to the island.
Melody in Kansas wants to know, does the Cuban government block the internet like Iran does?
unidentified
It does that when there are demonstrations that are sizable.
It doesn't do it frequently, but in 2021, there was a nationwide demonstration.
It started as a small demonstration, actually, in a suburb of Havana, but people were streaming the demonstration live on their phones, and that actually triggered demonstrations all across the island.
And after an hour or two, the government caught on to this and they cut off the internet.
And now they do that on a fairly regular basis.
If there's a significant demonstration, say for example, two, three, four hundred people in a town or a city, they'll cut off the internet so that that doesn't spread around the island.
So China, of course, has been trying to improve its influence and its commercial relationships with all of Latin America.
Cuba is one of the places that it has been.
When China adopted its Belt and Road policy of reaching out to the third world, Cuba was high on the list.
And China provides a lot of trade and has a lot of trade, provides a lot of assistance to Cuba.
The relationship is mostly commercial rather than strategic or military, although there have been these reports I mentioned earlier of intelligence sharing between the two countries.
Eric, Washington, D.C., Democrat, you're on with Professor William Leo Grand.
unidentified
How you doing, Sarah?
So I hear people downplaying that how bad Cuba is and stuff like this.
But we put a chokehold on these people because they wouldn't follow the United States capitalism rule.
But people should have a choice of how they want to live.
And it's sad that this country has done so much to their people, but we pretend that we're this good country.
We're not, look at what's going on here today.
Look at what we're doing.
You know, we're supposed to be this Christian-loving country.
And it's like, really?
You know, I'm an African-American, and when we had a million man march, Castro said that he would grant all African Americans a chance to go to college.
All they had to do was, when they come out, is the one stipulation was to take this and go back to your community and help your community out.
They're not bad people.
We put people at a bad brush because they don't want to follow our rules.
They don't have to follow our rules.
They have just as right to do what they want as we do.
Well, I think you've summarized pretty much what the Cuban government's attitude is, which is that they're a sovereign country and they don't have to follow our rules and organize themselves the way we want them to.
And this has been, of course, the point of conflict between Cuba and the United States, really, for the past 60-some-odd years.