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]
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.
C-SPAN's Washington Journal is next.
Join the conversation.
Good morning.
It's Monday, March 23rd.
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.
War With Our People00:15:57
He said he's, quote, currently working on the plan now.
He said ICE agents would not operate X-ray machines, but could guard exit lanes and check IDs to free up TSA officers.
And speaking of airports, there's this news: two killed, dozens injured after Air Canada flight hits fire truck on runway at LaGuardia Airport.
That's CNN.
LaGuardia Airport is currently closed because of that fatal crash.
Well, getting back to our topic of the conflict in Iran, take a look at Ambassador, UN Ambassador, U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Mike Waltz.
He was on Face the Nation yesterday talking about it.
Here he is.
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.
To be clear, that's what we're talking about.
Well, and the president's been clear, too.
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.
That was Mike Waltz.
And while you're calling in, here is some results from that CBS News YouGov poll.
Take a look.
So here's the question.
The military conflict with Iran will make U.S. and oil and gas prices in the short term.
90% said higher.
And in the long term, 58% of respondents said that it would make oil and gas prices longer in the long term.
No impact was at 6% and 15%, and then would make oil and gas prices lower in the long term.
Here is the long-term numbers at 27% for that question.
So the other question, military conflict with Iran will make the U.S. economy.
The options were weaker, no difference, or stronger.
63% said it would make the U.S. economy weaker in the short term, but in the long term, at 44%.
The ones that said that it would make it stronger were at 30% in the long term, 15% in the near term.
And another question, gas prices in your area have been going up.
This is at on February 5th.
So this is before the war.
This is 24%.
Now it's at 85%.
So this is gas prices in your area going down at 2% now and then staying the same 6%, not sure, 7%.
So 85% of people are seeing that their gas prices have gone up currently.
Let's go to the phones now.
Pete, West Palm Beach, Florida, Democrat, you're on the air.
Good morning.
I'm very disgusted with the whole situation.
You know, this war was not necessary.
You know, there's a lot of countries that have atomic bombs.
Nobody uses atomic bomb.
If Iran got an atomic bomb, and God forbid they try to use it or did use it, we would abolish the whole country.
We tell every country, do not use atomic bombs.
We have agreements with all countries.
Nobody wants to commit suicide.
They kept saying if they get the bomb, they'll bomb us.
What do you think we would do?
Sit by and watch this whole situation and say, oh, we got bombed?
We would annihilate that country.
So they would be committing suicide.
I'm a Korean war veteran.
I've seen a Korean war.
I've seen the 3-4 wars.
We cannot keep going to war with our people.
Our young people are dying from these wars.
So, Pete, Pete, if you don't mind, let's go back to what you're saying about them getting a nuclear bomb.
Do you think that it wouldn't really make that big of a deal if Iran had a nuclear weapon because they would be deterred from using it?
Absolutely.
Korea has a bomb.
China has a bomb.
Russia has bombs.
Why aren't they using it?
Because they would be annihilated.
If they bombed us or we bombed them, it would be the end of half of the world.
It's common sense.
A country would not want to commit suicide.
Leaders of any country would say, oh, if we throw that bomb, even at Israel, Americans would come back and bomb us.
All right.
Let's hear from Sabrina in Thomasville, Georgia, Independent Line.
Good morning.
Good morning.
I totally agree with the last gentleman.
And when Trump's three sons and daughter and Kushner, who is over in Israel, go to the front lines in Iran, then I'll support it.
Let's be realistic.
Let's look at the nation's financial profile.
2026, I believe the projected revenue I heard was $6.1 trillion.
$1.2 trillion went to the military.
But I believe we're in debt $32 trillion with everybody complaining and planning about their children and grandchildren's future.
Now they want another $500 million for the military again.
$200 billion, Sabrina.
$200.
A billion.
Yeah, a billion.
Okay.
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.
All right, Sabrina, let's talk to Orlando, Social Circle, Georgia, Independent.
You're on the air.
Hey, good morning.
How you doing?
Good.
Well, you know, the world has 1.1 trillion million, I mean, barrels of oil.
So I don't know why we fight this war.
There's no shortage in oil.
I don't know why we over there, but since we over there, we might as well finish the job.
Because if Iran come back over here and start doing stuff like dropping bombs over here, then we got a real problem.
So sometimes you got to stick behind the president and let him finish the war.
I don't think he should have started it.
So Orlando, explain what you see as finishing.
At what point is it finished?
What are your metrics for being done with the war?
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.
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.
Now, why can't we end it under that?
Say that again, Deborah.
Why can't we end it under that?
Civil rights.
I mean, human rights.
Why can't we put something together to hold Iran and everybody else under human rights?
Do you think that the current combat operations is the way to fix that in Iran?
Yes, because remember, the young man that got a home last week, what was the purpose?
I mean, he was just doing what he grew up to do.
Well, what's the punishment?
Why the harm?
What's the harm around the globe to the human being that just want to live quality life?
Can't the leaders get that in their head?
That's all we want.
All right, Deborah, let's take a look at Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant.
He was on Meet the Press yesterday, and he was asked about the administration's strategy when it comes to the direction of the Iran war.
Is the president in the process of winding down this war or escalating?
Again, they're not mutually exclusive.
Sometimes you have to escalate to de-escalate, Chris.
Okay.
NBC News is reporting that President Trump is considering sending troops into Iran.
Will the administration use troops to secure the Strait of Hormuz or for any other reason, Mr. Secretary?
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.
And also on Meet the Press yesterday, Democratic Senator Chris Murphy reacted to those comments.
Here he is.
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.
Mary in Fort Washington, Maryland, Democrat, what do you think of that?
Yes, good morning, C-SPAN.
I think it's crazy.
Instead, Bassett, whatever his name is, is nothing but a lying machine for Trump.
This administration is illegal and insane.
No, we should not continue it.
We lost the war.
And if the American media would actually tell the truth about what's going on right now, Israel is being plummeted.
We're not sure if Netanyahu is alive.
And no, an illegal war, he didn't go to Congress, and now he wants $200 billion to continue it.
By the way, it's not to continue the war, it's to replenish the armor that we don't have anymore.
And like I said, Iran, it's pronounced Iran, not Iran.
Iran has the cards right now, and they are going to teach America a lesson.
I'm sorry.
Why do you think Netanyahu is not alive?
Well, videos with six fingers and things like that.
But anyway, that could be a rumor.
But like I said, Iran has the cards.
And they're not going to open the strait until they are ready.
And the United States is losing, and Trump knows that.
And he's backed into a corner right now.
So that's how it is right now.
Like I said, please, C-SPAN, put the truth on.
Put the information that needs to be out there.
Let them know what's going on in Israel.
So we are not telling the truth right now.
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.
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.
Now, Bobby, one of our previous callers said, look, I was against this war, but once we started it, we should finish it.
Pull Out Right Now00:14:13
Looks like Bobby left us.
Okay.
Then we'll ask Sal about that.
New Jersey, Republican.
What do you think, Sal?
How you doing?
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?
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.
But didn't we say that with Afghanistan and we ended up with the Taliban again?
Yeah, but what do you think, though?
Do you think they were the right people in charge after we got out of there?
All right, so here you don't know.
It's kind of hard.
I know what you're saying.
I don't know who's going to retake over after we did clean house over there, but I don't think it's good as it is.
Like you said, when you seen the news, them killing their own people, I couldn't believe it.
I was like, what am I watching?
I couldn't believe what I was saying.
And no other countries.
Where's NATO and all the other people mainly going in there?
And nobody complained.
And the United Nations, oh, get in there, do something.
Letting them kill their own little citizens, shooting them down.
I couldn't believe that.
And I didn't hear no countries complaining about that.
All right, Sal.
And this is that CBS News poll that came out yesterday.
It's 47% said it would be acceptable to end the conflict with Iran's current leadership in power.
53% said it would not be acceptable to end the conflict with Iran's current leadership in power.
And the previous caller was talked about if it was Obama or Biden.
It has nothing to do with that.
They did it the right way.
They went through Congress and they did what they had to do.
You know what I'm saying?
This president, everything he does is illegal.
Everybody wants to act like he's not doing or breaking laws instead of just, you know what I'm saying, honing up to what he's doing.
You try to just like give them a blank page to write and do whatever you want to do.
We sending our kids over there, putting boots on the ground.
All that is is death.
And we need to get away from that.
We need to pull out right now, let Iran do what they do, and that's it.
All right.
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.
Here is Roberta, Emerson, New Jersey.
Democrat, good morning.
Yes, good morning.
How are you?
Good.
Go right ahead, Roberta.
Good.
Thank you.
And thank you for taking my call.
I'm a little nervous, but I have a theory.
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.
And that's how I feel.
He lies about everything.
He did this because of, I feel, of this reason.
All right, Roberta, let's talk to Dan, former military in New York.
Good morning, Dan.
Good morning, you know.
How are you?
Good.
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.
Thank you.
Let's take a look at House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries.
He was on CNN's State of the Union yesterday talking about the Pentagon request for the additional funding.
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.
So this is a priority.
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.
Do you think the U.S. should continue military operations against Iran?
That's our question for you this morning.
And we'll hear from Mary Ann, Huron, Ohio, Independent.
Good morning.
Well, thank you for taking my call.
I'm home with bronchitis, so I apologize if I sound like I'm breaking up.
But Sarah, I am just so upset.
I am very, very upset.
I cry, I get upset, it doesn't do any good.
But we can't look back at what we could or woulda should have.
We should not have gone in this war.
Netanyahu tried to do this with Obama and Biden, and they would not go along with this.
Anthony, I can't think of his last name.
He is, but the defense minister actually told Trump not to do this.
That, you know, Netanyahu wants all of our supplies.
Well, he goes and bombs Lebanon and Gaza, and they're making deals on the side.
And I think, in my opinion, Trump got too much power, and he just wants to use what we have.
And he's using up our sources, by the way, that could be used somewhere else.
And he thought he'd be in and out.
And then Netanyahu just wanted to do the dirty work.
And he fell for it.
Now he's stuck.
He didn't have a plan.
He usually doesn't have a plan.
He goes by the seat of his pants and what's threatening him.
He does lie, and he is a liar.
So, Marianne, now that it has started, what do you think should happen?
Should we reach certain objectives and then end the war, or do you think it should be ended immediately?
No, I think it should be ended.
I think it should be ended.
And I think the diplomats are in the other countries.
And surprisingly, we should talk to Congress.
And I know it's not going to be popular, but there are some very educated and brilliant people in Congress.
They are losing power.
But the diplomats in Europe, they are the ones who will come to our aid.
We have been rude to them.
When we were rude to the Ukrainian President Zelensky, it was the biggest embarrassment.
I was embarrassed because they don't have the Trump and Pete Head says, who's and I mean, so Marion, I hope you feel better with your issue.
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.
9-11 Attack Similarities00:15:35
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.
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?
And Pat, what do you think the objectives of this should be?
Do you think it should just focus on the missiles?
Should we try to seize the enriched uranium, which is in the middle of the country?
What do you think?
I mean, at this point, what do you think should happen?
I believe that we should take all their power away, including possibly their oil, you know,
having more money to rebuild that nuclear system and rebuild their military power just so that they aren't a threat anymore to doing what they have.
they have been doing all over the world, you know, and uh, holding uh the straight, uh uh hostage.
Do you think that uh Carg Island should be taken over by U.s marines?
I guess I do believe that.
All right.
Well, senator Lindsey Graham also believes that.
He was on FOX NEWS sunday.
Take a look at what he said about it.
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 this regime down a vine.
Is this going to though, take Carg Island?
Is it going to involve U.s troops on the ground?
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.
I'm sort of tired of all this uh, armchair quarterback.
And this has been an amazing military operation.
God bless the fallen.
But it's a difference when we talk about troops on the ground.
I trust the marines, not that guy.
I trust Dod.
We got two marine expeditionary units sailing to this island.
We did Igo Jima.
We can do this.
All right, let's.
Talk to Anthony in Detroit.
Independent LINE.
Good morning hello, good morning.
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?
And he totally did.
You know, he just sidestepped that.
Who is your congressman Anthony?
Uh, from Detroit, Shree Tanadar.
He's kind of an out there character.
You know, he's now very well known.
But Jeffrey said, oh, there's strong opposition to this war.
No, that's the problem.
There isn't strong opposition to this war.
That's why I called on the independent line, not the Democrat line, because they're no opposition.
What do you want Democrats to do in Congress?
Because they're not in power.
So what do you think they can do?
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.
All right, Anthony, let's talk to Joe next.
Holden, Massachusetts, Democrat.
Good morning, Joe.
Hi.
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.
All right.
Joe, let's hear from Republican Senator Tom Tillis.
He was on ABC yesterday, and he said that the administration's plans in Iran were ambiguous.
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.
Yeah, I mean, they've said four to five weeks to do, again, what the objectives are unclear.
But $200 billion doesn't sound like four or five weeks.
No, it does.
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.
On that CBS news poll, this is the question: Has the Trump administration clearly explained U.S. goals?
Here's how people responded.
They said on March 3rd that 38% said it was clearly explained.
Now that has dropped to 32% and has not done that yet as far as clearly explaining U.S. goals in Iran.
At March 3rd, it was 62%.
That has risen to 68% now, saying that the administration has not clearly explained U.S. goals.
Wonder what you think about that, how you would answer that question.
Angela, Silmar, California, Independent Line, you're on the air.
Hi, good morning.
Thanks for taking my call.
I think Donald Trump and Congress has clearly, clearly let us know as Americans what the goal is in the Middle East.
And we all know what the goal is.
We keep talking about 9-11.
Wasn't the pilots from 9-11 from Saudi Arabia?
And didn't Saudi Arabia fly into another country and dismantle a man and take him out in pieces?
We forgot about that.
And I'm not talking to be talking, I have five uncles that served in the military.
I have nephews.
I have friends.
The kids are still serving to this day, and I don't have kids.
I don't understand how America can sit here and send their souls to another country to die.
When we are attacked, who's going to come to our aid?
Where is the United Nations?
We're talking about in 205 years, Medicare is going to be gone.
I'm 67.
I've paid 46 years into a system that's going to take money away from me when I retire.
Where have our common sense in this country gone?
We're just going to annihilate the whole world, and then we sit and talk about money.
What has happened to us as human beings?
All right, Angela, let's talk to Kenny's former military in Wilson, North Carolina.
Good morning.
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.
And we all know that.
So maybe.
Kenny, where did you serve in the military, if you don't mind me asking?
I'm U.S. Air Force.
And were you ever deployed?
Of course.
I was deployed.
I loved it.
I was a part of something bigger than myself.
I learned a lot.
But, you know, when I look now, I never thought I'd look at my country this way.
And I'm still behind my country.
We have no choice now because this mistake has been made.
But it's the way that we keep doing that getting at these mistakes.
And do you think it should be ended immediately, or do you think certain objectives should be reached and then ended?
The only way that this could be ended is we have to take blame.
And that probably would never happen.
But he has got to send this up now that we can't.
See, man, when you, you know, your Lord's leadership knows this.
And before you go into any war, there's three things that you must do.
And you must have an objective.
You must have a way of accomplishing that ejective.
And you have an exit strategy.
None of that was done here.
Now, when you strew up that bad, it is hard.
All right, let's see what Janice thinks.
She's also former military in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Good morning, Janice.
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
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?
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.
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.
this monster, the We Collective.
And the last thing is...
What monster, Barry?
Go ahead.
Go ahead.
Sorry.
We created what monster?
What are you referring to?
Israel.
You know, we're all bashing them.
They're terrible.
They're bombing children.
You know, the whole nine yards.
It's all horrible.
Of course it is.
Of course it is.
But we created that monster because of what I just stated.
When nobody wants them, when they're kicked out of everywhere, what do you expect?
They believe that land is theirs.
Yeah, I understand that.
So let's talk about Iran now.
What do you think about Iran?
Well, we know the story.
You know, everybody goes back to 1947, and you could, you know, make arguments for that.
And then all the ways and all the killings of Americans throughout the years.
So what do you think of that?
I don't know.
I don't know.
That's a hard one.
I mean, who believes in war?
It's a nightmare.
And one more thing.
Christians, the Muslims, and all that, they're all culpable as long, you know.
But one more thing.
Remember this.
Judas is the hero of the Christian story.
Remember that.
Okay.
Nellie in Toledo, Ohio, Democrat, you're on the air.
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.
He's just next country or islands or whatever.
But.
All right, Nellie, I've got your point.
Let's talk to David, Independent, Crab Orchard, West Virginia.
Good morning.
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.
So David, let me ask you this, because one of the questions was, how much longer will the military conflict with Iran last?
How would you answer that?
Do you think it's going to be days, weeks, months, years?
What do you think?
The main thing is going to be over with within a month.
One month from now.
Yes.
There's a plan.
And they're not going to tell everybody their plan, what the end result.
They've already said what their results are, what they want to achieve.
And they're achieving that.
But yes, it's going to end.
And the people, NATO is going to have to get involved and secure the straits.
And that's a good thing.
But yeah, I hear all these fantasy conspiracies.
All right.
And this is Cheryl, Cumberland, Maryland, Republican.
Hi, Cheryl.
Well, hi.
I'm so excited.
I recently got into politics a little bit more seriously and started watching C-SPAN within the last year.
I have changed from Democrat to Republican this year.
And my point is they talk rightly so, affordability and Medicare, Medicaid, all those things for our country.
However, if we don't have national security and safety in this world, these plans aren't going to do us any good if we're bombed, if we're targeted.
And, you know, we need to prevent another 9-11.
We need to make sure that Iran didn't cross that point where they could do more and more damage, and they were getting closer.
Was there intimate threat the next day?
Probably not, but within a short period of time, oh, yeah, they can already go a lot further than we thought they could.
So I support the president.
I know that I think they have our best views at heart, and they want our safety first.
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.
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.
All right.
Sharon in Oregon, Line for Democrats.
You're on the air.
Oh, hi.
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.
Thank you.
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.
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
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.
They should do it the right way, okay?
We got that.
Shirley, Republican, Pennsylvania, you're on the air.
Thank you for taking my call.
I want to say Trump is doing a fantastic job.
We needed to take Iran out before they took us out.
And people don't understand this.
I can't understand where their brains are, or do they not have any?
When you say take us out, Shirley.
Yeah, go ahead.
What do you mean?
Yeah, we know what they're all about, how many Americans they've already killed.
And look what they do to their own people.
These people don't have any heart, no sense, no brains.
They only know one thing, and that's murder.
And they want to do whatever they can do to whoever.
And it's not right.
How could people have a heart and know what they, look what they just did to those three young boys, 117?
Wasn't that awful?
And how could you stand by and have any sense at all or any, I don't know, don't you have a heart?
So, Shirley, what do you believe the objective should be?
Is it to bring freedom and prosperity to the people of Iran and give them their human rights?
Or is it something else?
Yeah.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
So we would need to remove the regime.
Do you believe that we're going to be able to achieve that objective, to remove the Iranian regime?
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.
All right.
One more call in this segment.
That's David Arcade New York, former military.
Go ahead, David.
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.
These people need to be killed and exterminated.
So, David?
I support a major war against Iran.
So, David, one quick question for you before we end.
Do you support boots on the ground?
Do you support ground forces?
A major military operation and a major war in Iran.
And would you be willing to go?
You said you're former or your current.
I'm more than willing to.
My colon's 64 years old.
I did 33 years, Army National Guard.
I go back in the infantry and fight for my country.
And I'm 65 years old.
All right, David.
And later in the program, we turn our attention to Cuba and the president's pressure campaign for that country's leadership to step down.
We'll talk to American University Professor William Leo Grand about what's next and if direct action from Washington is in the offing.
But first, after the break, White House columnist for The Hill, Niall Stanage.
He joins us to talk about the latest on the administration's strategy in the war on Iran and the political implications here at home.
We'll be right back.
Democracy is always an unfinished creation.
Democracy is worth dying for.
Democracy belongs to us all.
We are here in the sanctuary of democracy.
Great responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies.
American democracy is bigger than any one person.
Freedom and democracy must be constantly guarded and protected.
We are still at our core a democracy.
This is also a massive victory for democracy and for freedom.
We bring you into the chamber, onto the Senate floor, inside the hearing room, up to the mic, and to the desk in the Oval Office.
C-SPAN takes you where decisions are made.
No spin, no commentary, no agenda.
C-SPAN is your unfiltered connection to American democracy.
Advance the mission.
Donate today at c-span.org forward slash donate.
Together, we keep democracy in view.
Who's your representative?
Who sits on which committee?
Where do you even start?
C-SPAN's official congressional directory.
Get essential contact information for government officials all in one place.
The congressional directory costs $32.95 plus shipping and handling, and every purchase helps support C-SPAN's nonprofit operations.
Get your Congressional Directory by scanning the QR code or at c-span shop.org.
Stay informed.
Stay engaged.
Washington Journal continues.
Welcome back to Washington Journal.
Joining us is Niall Stanage.
He is a White House columnist for The Hill.
Niall, welcome to the program.
Always good to be with you, Mimi.
So, breaking news this morning, which was President Trump's Truth Social post about there being negotiations ongoing with Iran.
Oil Facilities Closed00:15:41
What can you tell us about that?
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.
And implications of attacking the nuclear, the power plants in Iran.
What are the implications of that?
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.
You write in your latest piece in the Hill that, quote, the tide of political danger is rising around President Trump.
What do you mean?
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.
If we have that, we can show it.
But what are your thoughts on that?
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.
Let's hear from President Trump.
This is from Thursday.
Here he is.
Yeah, I did.
I did.
I told him don't do that.
And he won't do that.
We didn't discuss.
You know, we do, we're independent.
We get along great.
It's coordinated, but on occasion, he'll do something, and if I don't like it, and so...
So he's here implying that he told him not to do it.
Is there a split between the U.S. and Israel on this war?
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.
And we'll take your calls for Nile Sandage of the Hill.
You can call us on line for Democrats or 202748-8000.
Republicans, your line is 202-748-8001.
And Independents, 2022-748-8002.
You can also text us at 202-748-8003.
So Fortune magazine has this headline.
It says, Trump officials say gas prices will return to normal in, quote, a few more weeks.
But his own energy department says it will be 2027.
What do you make of that?
Is there a disconnect there?
And if it's 2027, that will have an impact on the midterms.
Sure, it absolutely will.
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.
They could keep it essentially closed indefinitely?
Well, we just, I mean, the war, is not finished yet, right?
I mean, the President is talking about negotiations and he won't attack power plants for five days.
As we all know, President Trump is prone to abrupt changes of direction and abrupt changes of mind.
Could it be that in five days he decides that these negotiations, whatever they are, aren't bearing fruit and it's time to go on the offensive again?
It's within the bounds of possibility at least.
So now the President said on Thursday that he's not putting troops on the ground, quote, anywhere.
But reports are that 2,200 more troops, U.S. troops, are being sent to the Middle East and it's ahead of schedule.
So what are your sources saying about why those troops are being sent there and what their mission might be?
So there's obvious sensitivity about discussing operational matters.
Now that being said, you don't send more than 2,000 troops somewhere without the intention of using them or threatening their use.
This again gets back not to harp on the Strait of Formuze question, but it is in fact central to this whole conflict.
In the Strait of Formuzz you have an Iranian capacity to attack ships and they don't need to attack every ship.
They just need to attack one ship and insurance costs go through the roof and shipping companies become unwilling to traverse that route, etc., etc.
Therefore, is there a way of using American troops to further degrade Iranian capabilities in that region?
Maybe there are.
In the abstract, there certainly are.
The question is, would you, as president, be willing to take the political risks that that would entail?
Because then you are getting in, obviously, to a boots-on-the-ground scenario.
Before we take calls, I do want to ask you about DHS funding.
There are reports that there was an offer by Thune that was rejected by President Trump.
Tell us what's going on.
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.
That has not previously been the case.
We'll see how that goes.
All right, let's talk to Thuron in New York City.
Democrat, you're on the air.
Hi, good morning.
Thanks for taking my call.
I'm calling in reference to these gas prices.
And as far as the older people, I'm here in the C Spanish morning, the 80, 75 years old.
Most people that died over there, and I hate that anybody died overseas, but these people were in America.
America was in their business.
America, we are always in someone's business.
If we stayed here in America and spent the billions of dollars here instead of over there, our families will be better off here.
You mean we have kids, young kids that can't get house because of what's going on and what's going on overseas.
We're here.
We're American.
Everybody's 80 and over are very angry.
And I'm listening to how are we going to fix this?
Prices are not going to go up.
We know this.
Prices are not going to go down no time soon.
They continue to lie to us saying next month.
This wasn't a war in the beginning.
Now it's a war.
Remember all these things he said.
So I need to know what's going on in our country.
So there's so many different things.
All right.
Any comment, Niall?
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.
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.
Thank you.
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.
Robert in Mississippi says, no surprise, he so-called postponed strikes.
He was watching those stocks tumble.
He calls the administration a failure and a lame duck.
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.
On another subject, Senator Mullen's confirmation for DHS Secretary, what are you hearing on the timing?
Well, that could happen pretty quickly by all accounts.
I'm not sure if it's going to happen.
I don't believe the Senate is in today.
Maybe I'm wrong about that.
I would need to consult with our Senate experts.
Maybe it's in later today.
But certainly I would expect this week that to be likely.
And it seems almost assured at this point that he will indeed be confirmed.
And what are your thoughts on is it going to be a change in substance or just a change in style at DHS?
Yeah, that's a great question.
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.
Christopher in Hollis Center, Maine.
Democrat, you're on the air.
World War III Hyperbolic00:14:45
Good morning.
Morning.
Go ahead, Christopher.
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.
Thank you.
What are you hearing about Cuba?
We're actually going to have a segment on that later today, but what are you hearing from the White House?
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.
And that's because of the U.S. blockade of oil going into Cuba.
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.
And our producer just confirmed that the Senate does come in at 3 p.m. today.
So it is possible we could get a vote later today.
It is indeed possible.
I should pay more attention to the upper house.
Bruce, in Indiana, Independent Line, good morning.
You're on with Niall Stanage.
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?
And why is the U.S. unable to remove this threat?
Does that require boots on the ground?
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.
And they have fired on the ship.
Oh, they have.
Yes.
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.
It's pretty difficult to do.
Jerry in Michigan, Independent Line, you're next.
Hi, good morning.
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?
Thank you.
It's not an invalid point at all, Jerry.
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.
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.
Have a great day.
Sabrina said that the U.S. military was designed for here in the U.S.
I don't think she meant that.
They were designed to go overseas, but I'll let you respond.
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.
And regarding explanation of the objectives, the U.S. goals in Iran, the CBS, we were just talking about it this morning, CBS News poll.
People are saying that only 32% say that those goals have been clearly explained.
68% say they have not been clearly explained.
What is the White House doing to address that issue?
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.
Terrell Owings Mills, Maryland, Democrat, you're on the air with Niles Stanage.
Good morning.
Good morning, Niles.
Very good, my man.
Hey, Niles, I just want to ask you three quick points, my man.
Was the Iran deal a good deal?
Because we all know that Donald Trump's first Secretary of State was fired because he wanted to stay in the deal.
Was that true?
And then, secondly, pallets of cash.
I hear that all the time when I hear Republicans say that the United States sent them pallets of cash.
Miles, was that Iran's original money?
Was it their money?
Okay, that's another thing.
And Miles, over the weekend, I heard Michael Savage said that this situation that we are in in Iran has ramifications of World War III.
So, Niles, do you think that this war has ramifications of World War III?
All right.
Okay, so let me take the third point first.
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.
Put Politics Aside00:03:07
On the independent line in Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, Tom, good morning.
Hi.
I just sort of see a lot of linkage that I don't see the media really discussing.
From what I've heard, the Straits of Hormuz are really being policed more by Iran than the U.S., and they allow other countries to go through.
They just aren't allowing U.S. ships.
Is that an accurate summation?
Broadly, yes.
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.
Amos, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Independent Line.
Good morning.
Good morning.
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.
And I thank you for letting me make my comment.
Thank you.
Broader discussion, really, Mimi.
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?
That's Niall Stanage.
He is White House columnist for thehill.com.
Thanks so much for joining us.
Pleasure.
In about 30 minutes, we'll take a closer look at the Trump administration's pressure campaign on Cuba.
That is with American University Professor William Leo Grand.
But first, it's open forum.
You can start calling in now.
Whatever is on your mind politics-wise, you can share that with us.
Student Documentary Prize00:02:42
Democrats are on 202-748-8000.
Republicans, 202748, 8001.
And Independents, 202748, 8002.
We'll be right back.
Lights, cameras, impact.
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
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.
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.
Washington Journal continues.
It's open forum, and we'll go straight to calls to hear straight from you.
This is Sarah in New York, Republican.
You're on the air.
So I've been listening, and honestly, Kenny had the most educated comment today.
We are all under political occupation, and Jared Kushner is running the foreign policy of our country.
And right now, Israel is taking land in the West Bank.
What does that have to do with keeping them safe?
So I agree with Kenny's comment this morning.
And Romney said that Trump was a dangerous man, and he wanted to be a dictator.
And he destroys everything he touches.
In New Jersey, he destroyed the casinos.
He didn't want to pay the plumbers and the electricians because he doesn't think they're worthy of anything.
And they still support him.
And I hear these older ladies call, they watch Fox News all day long.
And when you watch that all day, you're going to become brainwashed because it's just like the people in Jonestown.
They just basically.
So, Sarah, let me ask you, since you're a Republican, who did you support in the last election?
I didn't vote for anyone.
I'm a Romney Republican.
I think Romney would have made a very good president.
And now you have Trump trying to make a gold coin with his picture on it.
He went after Kent because he disagreed with what he said.
He's trying to be a dictator, and there's no way to stop him now.
And we are all in trouble.
He cut Social Security.
These older people are getting less in their Social Security check.
He's never been for the people.
He's always been for himself.
And this is Jane in Louisiana, Democrat.
Good morning, Jane.
Good morning.
Thank you for taking my call.
I'm in Louisiana, and people in Louisiana need to know something because I bet you it hasn't been advertised hardly very much.
About 10 years ago, we had the Deepwater Horizon catastrophic drilling accident.
15 years ago.
Wasn't that 2010?
Or something like that.
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.
Iran Response Posted00:03:13
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.
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.
You mean for voting, Patricia?
For voting?
Are you talking about for voting?
Yeah.
So you you don't think that a picture ID like come to show your ID, they don't scan it or anything.
Whereas you go to the airport, they can scan it or something.
But when you go to vote, it just doesn't seem adequate to me.
All right.
And here's Catherine, Burlington, North Carolina, Republican line.
Catherine, good morning.
Good morning.
I have called in to say, I really think now is not the time to back off Iran.
I think we need to decimate them and plow them into the sand.
I am tired of their lies.
I remember when the hostages were taken back in the 70s.
I remember that very well.
Had a friend over there working for Western Electric that barely got out.
I know what these people are capable of.
And the only way to stop them is to ruin their government to where there is not one man standing in their political circle.
And that is my opinion.
And I have a lot of people that agree with me.
And Dawn in Pennsylvania, Line for Democrats, you're on the air.
Hi, is this Mimi?
Yes.
TSA Job Changes00:05:10
Hi.
Okay.
I only have two comments.
I think we can all agree that President Trump is crazy.
He does some crazy things.
So maybe he should get really crazy and take the cap off of Social Security.
And my other comment is I think everybody, every politician should watch the chosen.
Thank you.
This is Jason, St. Cloud, Minnesota, Independent Line.
Hi, Jason.
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.
All right, Jason, got it.
And we mentioned earlier today about Borders R. Tom Homan confirming that ICE agents will be deployed to U.S. airports starting today.
Here is that portion on CNN State of the Union from yesterday.
Are ICE agents even remotely trained to handle security at airports?
ICE agents receive a high level of training.
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.
Okay, that was going to be my next question.
So what you're saying is when you move ICE into airports, they are going to be just around the exits and the exteriors.
They're not going to be helping people get through the lines and screening people's bags.
Those discussions are going on now.
I'm not an expert at TSA, so that's why I'm talking to the TSA administrator and the ICE director, find out where we can fit in.
We'll have a plan by the end of today where we're sending what airports we're starting with and where we're sending them.
But that's the discussion we're having right now.
Voter Fraud Claims00:09:53
I ended discussions to do the show, and I'll be back having those discussions when I finish.
So it's a work in progress, but we will be at the airports tomorrow helping TSA move those lines along.
And that is today.
ICE agents are expected in U.S. airports.
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.
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.
Thank you.
Tina in North Carolina, Line for Democrats.
You're on open forum.
Yes, what I wanted to say, I get so tired of people talking about the voting is fraud.
The voting, you be trained.
I do that.
You be trained to do that voting.
You're on open forum.
You get trained to do the voting and cannot, nobody change your vote.
You put it in yourself and you're penciling it.
They put the machine away that you could automatically put it in.
You penciling it yourself and you putting it in there and someone is there to watch you put your paper into that machine.
Every time somebody that don't win, that they want to win, they say fraud.
Y'all don't do that.
You know that's been over.
Didn't know about it fraud, but Trump.
He was the only one that had Putin helping him.
You get.
This is Donna, South Carolina, Republican line.
You're on open forum, Donna.
Yes.
Hi.
I just have a couple things that I wanted to say.
Number one, I am a Trump supporter.
However, I don't agree with 100% of what he says.
I do thank him for going into Iran.
I think that he is being weak by giving a five-day.
I also think he's weak against Putin.
We need to finish Iran.
Iranian people want it.
We need to just take them out and just be done with it.
They have never honored anything they said for years, and now we're going to talk with them again.
Nonsense.
And as for TSA being in the airports, I think that's fantastic.
I think they should be there at all times.
And I love Tom Hooman.
That is all I have to say.
Thank you, and have a blessed day, everybody.
Yeah, I said at airports.
TSA is already at airports, but I understood what you're saying.
Greg in Richfield, Wisconsin, Independent Line.
Good morning, Greg.
Good morning to all.
Some interesting comments, both from the Republican and the Independent.
The deaths in Iran are unforgivable.
What's happening with the TSA is also unforgivable.
I wish that everybody would try to get along because we're all human beings.
Let's not forget that fact.
Thank you.
Deborah, Montgomery, Alabama, Line for Democrats.
Go right ahead.
Hey, good morning.
I just have two quick things.
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.
And that's all I would like to say.
You all have a great day.
Let's hear from Tiny, a Republican in Texas.
Go right ahead.
Good morning.
Yes.
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.
Thank you.
And this is Freddie in Snellville, Georgia, Independent Lion.
Go ahead, Freddie.
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.
ICE Agents At Airports00:03:12
All right, Freddie, and we're in an open forum.
The numbers are on your screen.
Democrats are on 202748-8000.
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?
Paying TSA Workers00:08:06
And we're hearing from you on Open Forum.
Kevin is up next, Staten Island.
Democrat, go ahead, Kevin.
Yes, good morning, C-SPAN.
I have a I would like to encourage your viewers to consider reading a book written by a two-time Medal of Honor winner, a Marine, a Marine general.
His name was Smedley Butler.
The book was written in the 30s.
It's called Wars a Racket.
And he's arguing that modern wars are primarily serve profit interests of big business at the expense of ordinary people.
And I think that's exactly what's happening in Ireland.
Gas prices are escalating.
They're only going to go up higher.
Howard Burton and these other for-profit companies are going to make billions at the expense of the American people.
And that's all I have to say.
And good morning to the C-SPAN audience.
John Ashburn, Virginia, Republican, you're on the air.
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.
And you were watching all this, John, on C-SPAN 2?
I was watching that on C-SPAN 2.
It was fascinating because Senator Kennedy got madder and madder because he could not get an answer.
So it was kind of funny, but it was also kind of silly.
All right.
Let's go to Rush New York, Independent Line.
Barbara, good morning.
Good morning.
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.
Just a point I wanted to make.
All right.
And Liana, Pennsylvania, Democrat, go ahead.
Hi, yes.
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.
And the same thing happens.
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.
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.
And did you look it up?
Did you fact-check any of that, John?
No, I didn't.
I figured your station could check that out for us.
All right, we'll take a look.
This is Nouri in Nouri in Ellendale, Delaware, Independent Line.
Go ahead.
Yes, good morning.
The reason for my call is I hear people calling in talking about Israel or God's chosen people.
That's a lie.
The chosen people of God is the black man, the black woman of America, not only in America, but throughout the world.
We've been here over 300,000 years.
Before the Colonels, before we bet the Carl Nadas, they have raped, killed, and murdered throughout the world.
And I heard a white man call, and he's going to kill white people, white men.
All right, Nouri, this is Vanya in Maryland, Line for Democrats.
You're on the air.
Good morning, Sisana.
Good morning, America.
I have a question for you, and then I would like to make a few comments about the other stuff.
So the question is, sorry, I have to ask, why do you permit a blatant Islamophobia on your program?
And I'm going to give you an example.
We just had a caller from Texas who connected the Iranian regime with the mayor of New York City, Meir Mandani.
And in the same sentence, he said that those people are setting bombs on their children and sending them to blow themselves up.
If that was about any other religion, that wouldn't ever go to...
Then you'll let him talk for another minute.
Yeah, I know.
I thought he was referring to Hamas, who have used children in that way.
Yes, of course, but he said that that mayor from that guy from New York.
Yeah, that's not correct.
Congress Size Amendment00:03:20
There's the first thing.
Now, let's go about some stuff.
Can someone ask Senator Lindsey Graham Lindsay?
What's his name?
Yep, Lindsey Graham.
Does he know that?
Yes, thank you.
Does he know that 6,800 Marines died on Ivo Jima when he says we did it on Ivojima, we can do it again?
Are we ready to do that?
Which is connected to CBS, CBS Paul, that asked people, are we ready to leave the Iranian regime?
The real question is, how many U.S. troops are we ready to sacrifice to change the regime?
That's very important thing.
There is a distinction.
And the third thing is, I was watching a few days ago.
Our director of national intelligence was in front of the Senate answering the questions.
That's fine, but as the situation is right now, she has probably the same amount of influence as I do at the president.
Why don't we put Kushner and Witkoff in front of the Senate?
Because obviously they are in the face of the United States right now when it comes to negotiations with Iran.
And ask them, why did they advise Trump to start this war?
That's it.
Thank you.
Okay.
Tim, Haverhill, Massachusetts, Independent Line.
Go ahead.
Hi, good morning.
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.
Thank you very much for my time.
My name is Tim Menz.
It's T-G-M-E-N-Z at yahoo.com.
And a previous caller had asked about fact-checking something from the Epstein files and a relationship with President Trump.
The latest fact-check we've got is Snopes, who says a video of Trump and Epstein with young girls at a party isn't real.
And it says that it was most likely generated by AI.
Ed in Waukegan, Illinois, Democrat, you're on the air.
Bridging Political Divide00:03:52
Yes, hi, good morning.
Morning.
I would like to say that the war we fought with Germany in World War II, all the Republicans were against that war.
They called it SDR's war.
Now we have Trump in power and he started the war on Iran.
And if anybody understands worldwide history, excuse me, this war is not regime change.
It is not about a nuclear war threat.
It's about oil.
The Middle East has always been a war about oil that will never change.
Thank you.
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.
Best ideas and best practices can be found anywhere.
We have to listen so we can govern better.
Democracy depends on heavy doses of civility.
You can fight and still be friendly.
Bridging the divide in American politics.
You know, you may not agree with the Democrat in everything, but you can find areas where you do agree.
He's a pretty likable guy as well.
Chris Kins and I are actually friends.
He votes wrong all the time, but we're actually friends.
A horrible secret that Scott and I have is that we actually respect each other.
We all don't hate each other.
You two actually kind of like each other.
These are the kinds of secrets we'd like to expose.
It's nice to be with a member who knows what they're talking about.
You guys did agree to the civility, all right?
He owes my son $10 from a bet.
He's never paid for it.
Fork it over.
That's fighting words right there.
I'm glad I'm not in charge.
I'm thrilled to be on the show with him.
There are not shows like this, right?
Incentivizing that relationship.
Ceasefire, Friday nights on C-SPAN.
You're watching democracy happen in real time.
For 47 years, since March 19th, 1979, C-SPAN has made that possible.
No commentary, no spin, no government funding.
Just democracy, unfiltered.
As we celebrate our Founders Day, join viewers like you who are helping C-SPAN carry this mission forward.
Visit c-span.org slash donate or scan the QR code.
Make your contribution today.
Preserve the legacy.
Power the present.
Shape the future.
Support C-SPAN with a Founders Day kit.
In a divided media world, one place brings Americans together.
According to a new MAGIT research report, nearly 90 million Americans turn to C-SPAN, and they're almost perfectly balanced.
28% conservative, 27% liberal or progressive, 41% moderate.
Republicans watching Democrats, Democrats watching Republicans, moderates watching all sides.
Because C-SPAN viewers want the facts straight from the source.
No commentary, no agenda, just democracy unfiltered every day on the C-SPAN networks.
Washington Journal continues.
Welcome back.
Joining us now to talk about recent and potential U.S. actions against Cuba is William Leo Grand.
He's a government professor at American University.
Professor, welcome to the program.
Thanks for having me on.
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.?
Well, they're at a very tense moment right now.
Cuban Missile Crisis Risk00:14:56
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?
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?
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.
A modern economy just can't run without energy.
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?
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.
I want to play you a short segment of Cuba's deputy foreign minister, and he was on the Sunday shows yesterday.
I'm going to play it, and then you can respond.
Very good.
Is your military preparing for a potential engagement with the United States?
Our military is always prepared, and in fact it is preparing these days for the possibility of military aggression.
We would be naive if looking at what's happening around the world, we would not do that.
But we truly hope that it doesn't occur.
We don't see why it would have to occur, and we find no justification whatsoever.
Why would the government of the United States force its country to take military action against a neighboring country like Cuba?
What's the condition of Cuba's military?
Well, it's not in very strong position.
It really is more of a territorial defense force than anything else.
It doesn't really have any off-island capability.
It doesn't have air defenses that could stand up to a U.S. attack.
It really, in that sense, is defenseless if the United States wanted to go in and occupy the island.
But the Cubans' military doctrine is not to try to defend airports, seaports, cities against a U.S. invasion.
It's for the entire armed forces to essentially melt back into the population and fight a guerrilla war over time.
And they've pre-positioned supplies to do that.
That's been true ever since the 1980s when Ronald Reagan first threatened military action against Cuba.
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?
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?
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.
That the leader of Cuba, the president, would not step down.
The president will not, well, that none of Cuba's leadership or its structure of government was subject to negotiation with the United States.
All right, let's talk to callers and bring in Howard first in Michigan Independent Line.
Good morning, Howard.
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.
Thanks.
Thanks, Howard.
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.
So we've talked about the sticks.
What if we used carrots?
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?
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.
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.
A sort of mini-Cuban missile crisis, if you will.
When is it supposed to actually approach?
Within the next couple of days.
So the Miami Herald is reporting that U.S. says Cuba can't buy Russian oil just as a tanker approaches the island.
I guess that would have to be enforced militarily.
It would.
It would.
And that's obviously potentially a dangerous thing.
I don't think Russia is going to go to war with the United States over it.
But to intercept A vessel of another country blockade a country is technically an act of war.
Let's talk to Frank, Montgomery Village on the independent line.
Go ahead, Frank.
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.
Taxis are not running.
Buses are not running.
Soon, trains won't be running.
So is it possible, Professor, that there would be an armed insurgency?
The people rise up and demand their government do something about this?
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.
Hi, thank you very much, Professor Leo Grande.
Mercy Ships For Cuba00:16:06
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.
And talk a little bit more about that.
Then what happens?
We've got people on boats trying to get into Florida.
Then what?
What does the U.S. government do?
Well, the Coast Guard will try to intercept them and take them back to Cuba.
We do have an agreement with the Cuban government that Cuban refugees intercepted at sea can be returned to Cuba.
The danger is that the numbers may just overwhelm the Coast Guard's ability to manage this.
And you may also see Cuban Americans get on boats and head south to rescue their family and friends.
That's what happened during the Carter administration in 1990.
And if you have both of those phenomenon at the same time, it's going to just overwhelm the Coast Guard's ability to manage it.
Let's talk to Cliff.
He's in Albany, New York, Democrat.
Go ahead, Cliff.
Yes, thank you.
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.
All right.
Well, let's take a look at what President Trump said in the Oval Office last week about Cuba.
When you say Cuba is next.
Cuba.
It's Cuba.
Whatever you do with the military there.
It seems like something.
Well, that looked more like Iran or Venezuela.
Can't tell you that.
I can tell you that they're talking to us.
It's a failed nation.
They have no money.
They have no oil.
They have no nothing.
They have nice land.
They have a nice landscape.
You know, it's a beautiful island.
I think they have great people.
You know, I know so many people from Cuba that were treated terribly, and they're over here and they became rich.
They're very entrepreneurial people, very small, and a lot from Florida especially.
There's so many people.
A friend of mine started over nothing.
He's now the largest owner of gas stations in the country and stuff.
I mean, Cuban.
I also know I was just with a fantastic person who's Cuban and made a fortune in sugar, you know, Fan Hoo family, right?
And this family wants to go back to Cuba to visit it.
They haven't been back in like 50 years or something.
They come from, largely come from Cuba.
And we'll see what happens.
They were asking me about that.
They want to go back.
Not only Fan Houl.
A lot of Cubans have said, oh boy, would they love to go back.
I think Cuba, I don't know, in its own way, if tourism and everything else, it's a beautiful island.
Great weather.
They're not in a hurricane zone, which is nice for a change.
They won't be asking us for money for hurricanes every week.
But I think Cuba is the end.
You know, all my life I've been hearing about the United States and Cuba.
When will the United States do it?
I do believe I'll be the honor of having the honor of taking Cuba.
That'd be good.
That's a big honor.
Taking Cuba.
Taking Cuba in some form, yeah.
Taking Cuba.
I mean, whether I free it, take it.
I think I could do anything I want with it.
You want to know the truth?
They're a very weakened nation right now.
They were for a long time.
Very violent, very violent leaders.
Castro was a very violent leader.
His brothers are a very violent leader.
Extremely violent.
That's how they governed.
They governed with violence.
But a lot of people would like to go back.
What was your reaction, Professor, when you heard that?
Well, Cuba's a sovereign nation.
It's not ours to take.
That's my first reaction.
President.
And sorry, just to follow that, Chas in Jacksonville, Florida says the same thing.
He says, what law says it is legal for the U.S. to blockade or quarantine Cuba?
It isn't.
It isn't.
There is not.
There is not a law.
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.
Just not Americans.
Well, some Americans, actually.
It is possible to go, not as a tourist per se, but you can go.
There are 12 legal categories of travel, everything from journalists and diplomats all the way down to educational travel.
You know, the National Trust for Historic Preservation might do a trip to look at Cuba's colonial architecture, for example.
That's actually legal.
So who are the tourists?
Who's going to Cuba?
Canadians have been the largest market for Cuba, followed by Spain and Italy.
But the number of people going to Cuba from the United States is actually right up there in the top five.
And Cuban Americans specifically as a separate category, right up there as well.
So we, the United States, have been a very important part of the Cuban tourist market, much reduced today under the Trump administration.
Joel, an independent in New York, you're on the air.
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.
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.
They eat well and they live well.
All right, Sophia, let's get the professor a chance.
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?
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.
What is China's involvement in Cuba?
What's their strategic interests there?
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.
Sovereign Country Rules00:01:55
Eric, Washington, D.C., Democrat, you're on with Professor William Leo Grand.
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.
One more call for you, Professor.
This is Jeremy Ontario, California, Republican.
Go ahead, Jeremy.
Hello.
How are you doing this morning?
Good.
I heard the last caller, and I tend to agree with what he said.