Washington Journal 04/28/2026 features retired Major General Randy Manner condemning Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Lloyd Austin for purging 15 generals, dividing the military into political loyalists, and promoting neo-Christian nationalism. While Representative Mike Flood defends President Trump's military actions in Iran against war powers resolutions, Manner argues decapitation strikes are a "fool's dream" without verifiable negotiations. The episode also covers partisan debates over White House violence, Florida redistricting maps violating the Voting Rights Act, and conspiracy theories labeling Trump as the Antichrist, ultimately highlighting deep fractures in national security leadership and political discourse. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
Source
Time
Text
Political Violence and Rhetoric00:15:16
And then Nebraska Republican Congressman Mike Flood will talk about the latest on the Iran war and other congressional news of the week.
Later, retired U.S. Army Major General Randy Manner on top changes at the Pentagon and the latest developments in the U.S.-Iran war.
And Emma Davidson Tribbs of the National Women's Defense League on the recent sexual misconduct allegations in Congress and the findings of her organization's annual abuse of power report.
That's coming up on Washington Journal.
Join the conversation.
Good morning.
It's Tuesday, April 28th.
A suspect faced federal charges yesterday in connection with Saturday night shooting at the White House correspondents dinner.
It's the latest incident to reignite a long-running debate over political violence and the rhetoric that surrounds it.
Democrats and Republicans are pointing fingers at each other.
Democrats say years of heated language from the right have contributed to a climate of fear, pointing to the attempt on Governor Josh Shapiro's life.
Republicans counter that the left has normalized hostility toward conservative figures, citing the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
Each side says the other is not doing enough.
So our question for you for this first half hour is this.
Are political leaders on both sides doing enough to condemn violent rhetoric?
Here's how to share your thoughts.
Republicans call us on 202-748-8001.
Democrats 202-748-8000.
And Independents 202-748-8002.
You can send a text to 202-748-8003.
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.
We will start before we get to your calls with Caroline Levitt.
She's the White House spokesperson.
She said yesterday at a briefing that it's the constant attacks on President Trump that have led to the recent violence.
Here she is.
We should not live in a country where such constant fear of political violence permeates our society every single day.
We can and we should have fierce disagreement in this country.
As you all know, we disagree often, myself in this role and all of you in the news media, but those disagreements must remain peaceful.
Debating, peaceful protesting, and voting are how we need to settle disagreements, not bullets.
Nobody in recent years has faced more bullets and more violence than President Trump.
This political violence stems from a systemic demonization of him and his supporters by commentators, yes, by elected members of the Democrat Party and even some in the media.
This hateful and constant and violent rhetoric directed at President Trump day after day after day for 11 years has helped legitimize this violence and bring us to this dark moment.
Those who constantly falsely label and slander the president as a fascist, as a threat to democracy, and compare him to Hitler to score political points are fueling this kind of violence.
The left-wing cult of hatred against the president and all of those who support him and work for him has gotten multiple people hurt and killed, and it almost did so again this weekend.
And here is a perspective from CNN about that.
It says Trump's hypocritical crusade on violent rhetoric and the country's emerging split reality.
And it talks about, it says here, Trump long ago ceded the moral high ground.
And then it shows these examples.
It says this.
He celebrated Mueller's death.
He responded in remarkably callous fashion to the murders of Rob Reiner and his wife in December.
Despite complaining about the left making Nazi comparisons, he in 2017 compared the intelligence community to, quote, Nazi Germany, and in 2024 called former President Joe Biden's team a Gestapo administration.
It goes on, despite complaining about the left calling him a fascist, he spent years using the word against his foes.
He made light of a hammer attack on Nancy Pelosi's husband that left him with a fractured skull and other serious injuries.
He mused about Second Amendment people blocking Hillary Clinton from appointing judges.
And he reposted a video of a supporter saying, quote, the only good Democrat is a dead Democrat.
That goes on.
Let's hear from top Democrat Hakeem Jeffries responding to White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt's comments, singling out Democrats for using violent rhetoric.
The so-called White House press secretary, who's a disgrace, he's a stone-cold liar, had the nerve to stand up there and read talking points being critical of statements all taken out of context that Democrats have made and didn't have a word to say about anything that MAGA extremists have said or done,
including providing aid and comfort to violent insurrectionists here at this Capitol on January 6th, who brutally beat police officers.
The president then pardoned those violent rioters, many of whom have gone back into communities across the country to reoffend.
And as you pointed out, one of whom threatened to kill me.
He said, kill the terrorist.
Where did that language come from?
What Republicans use that language?
Why did that pardon MAGA extremists, violent insurrectionists, choose to use the language of terrorism directed at me when he threatened to kill me at an event?
And so how can we take them seriously when they raise these partisan attacks?
We're getting your thoughts on that.
Do you think political leaders on both sides are doing enough to condemn violent rhetoric?
What do you think, Dean in Arkansas, Line for Democrats, you're on?
Go ahead.
Yeah, I think both of them do the same thing, but most of it's coming from the Republican Party.
You got Marsha Blackburn, you got Ted Cruz, you got a bunch of more of them that talking the same talk that Donald Trump talked.
He's out everybody's president, but this man acts like he's only one president, but one set of people.
So the thing about it is this.
You think of all the things that you could be talking about other than somebody trying to get something to President Trump.
You have a wrong for that guy to do that, but you didn't steal who promotes all this crime and stuff that's going on?
Donald Trump.
And this man don't care nothing about no one.
Instead of talking about this stuff here, he should be talking about how he cut Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security going to run out.
The elderly people are going to suffer.
People running out of money now because of gas and everything else.
But now we're going to talk about this from now on out.
I don't know whether it was real or what, but I feel sorry for the fellow that did.
He should have had no business trying to do nothing to President Trump.
That's all I can say.
Thank you.
Here's Dan, Republican, Youngstown, Ohio.
Good morning, Dan.
Yes.
So when you talk about Josh Sapiro, the people on the far left had a problem with Jewish people.
I mean, do you know that it was a conservative that made attempts on him?
I don't know that.
And then also, you have Democrat after Democrat talked about Donald Trump's demise.
I mean, come on.
You know for a fact that over and over again, the Democrats attacked Donald Trump, saying he was a traitor, that he doesn't deserve to be president.
He didn't legitimately win the presidency.
I mean, come on.
Wait, about Donald Trump?
Hold on, hold on, Dan.
You're saying Democrats said that Donald Trump didn't win the presidency and was not a legitimate president?
Yes.
The Democrats over and over attacked Donald Trump.
Are you going to say that they didn't?
No, no, no, no.
You said that's not what you said.
You said that they have said that he's not a legitimate president.
That's what I'm asking about.
Okay.
Here is Kieran Independent in Brick, New Jersey.
Hi, Kieran.
Good morning.
It's Tim Lauren.
Hello.
Hi.
Go ahead.
What do you think?
I think leaders are all at fault for doing the wrong thing in this country.
Yeah, we've got to bring the people to have a way to get back together.
Okay.
This is an opinion from the Washington Times that says this.
Left uses violence as its stock in trade.
Cole Thomas Allen's ideology raises questions about rhetoric from Democrats and activist movements.
It says, were you shocked, shocked to learn that the man under arrest for trying to shoot up the White House Correspondents Association dinner was a Dronair leftist?
The manifesto reads like it was scripped from a speech at the latest Democratic Party convention.
Besides targeting Trump administration officials, the alleged shooter hated Christians and attended No Kings rallies in California.
It says President Trump has now survived three assassination attempts.
The perps weren't exactly members of Moms for Liberty.
It says the liberal media like to portray violence as coming exclusively from the right.
President Biden claimed that white supremacy was the greatest threat to America.
Let's hear from the acting attorney general Todd Blanche on the rise of political violence.
Here he is.
Beyond the assassination attempts against President Trump, you've had someone try to burn down the mansion where the governor lives in Pennsylvania.
You had those state lawmakers attacked in Minnesota.
You've had two Israeli embassy staff members murdered in the city here.
You had the Charlie Kirk assassination.
You had the National Guardsman killed in the city.
Can you, each of you, describe the current threat environment and what DOJ's stance is about?
Well, you just described the current threat environment pretty accurately, which is that the political violence and rhetoric has got to stop.
And that's something President Trump said right after the incident on Saturday night.
It's something that Carolyn Levitt talked about a couple hours ago.
It is something that is, when you have a president who, and many people in this room, if we're going to be honest about it, have done it, has done as well, they're just as guilty as a lot of people on X. When you have reporters, when you have media just being overly critical and calling the president horrible names for no reason and without evidence, without proof, it shouldn't surprise us that this type of rhetoric takes place.
If you look at what it appears that this defendant had in his past, we're talking about somebody who is college educated, who has a job, who is otherwise living his life.
And we'll find out more about him, I expect, in the coming days and weeks.
But he chose to do what he did.
And so our threat environment is, we are ready.
I mean, I'm not going to go through what Director Patel just talked about with the way we responded, but this was something that we will always be prepared for.
And it's sad that it has to happen, but it's not a new thing, unfortunately.
And our question is this morning: Are political leaders doing enough to condemn violent rhetoric?
We've got a couple of responses.
Anthony on X said, Are the politicians who start wars doing enough about violence?
Laugh out loud.
And Just a Guy says, No.
President Trump says things, Democrats respond with bullets.
And J.D. Redding says, No, political leaders on both sides are not doing enough, especially Trump.
And here is John sharing his thoughts on the line for Democrats in Brooklyn, New York.
Good morning.
I'm John from Brooklyn, New York, John Salters.
I'm 77 years old.
I remember Eisenhower.
I remember up to Kennedy, right on up to this president.
There always been hate, not really hate, but this, well, hate, you could say hate.
We had presidents assassinated since the 1800s, right on up to now, they're attempting Trump.
But I have never seen a president with the attitude and the things that Trump say, he put this hate, a dislike of steroids by knock them out, put him on a stretcher when he his first term, I'll pay for it.
Police put a man in the car, bump his head.
He started calling people names.
I have never seen a president, not Nixon, not any of them, that would give people names, call people out their names, lock them up, shithole nations in an airplane, viewing doo-doo all over people.
I've never seen the president do this in 77 years of my life.
I never knew that officers of the United States would stoop so low.
So, John, do you also believe that Democrats have stooped low?
That's why I said since the 1800s, we had Lincoln assassinated and there was another president assassinated.
There were attempts on other presidents.
But I'm proud of the rhetoric and the tone that Trump set that I haven't seen.
I remember President Eisenhower.
I remember Kennedy.
But the tone of the president office, the way Trump, when he came in that first time he run, he started saying things like, lock them up, knock them out, take them out on stretches.
Yeah, John, we got that.
So let's hear from Nita now in the Fort Payne, Alabama, Republican.
What do you think, Nita?
Well, first of all, he's wrong.
I have never heard Donald Trump call anybody Hitler.
I have never heard Donald Trump say fascist.
Second of all, there were Democrats in that dinner also.
Illegitimate President Claims00:07:50
So these Democrats better wise up.
They could have been in the line of fire also, maybe mistakenly, but they were in that room.
And as far as Hakeem Jeffries, he needs to shut his mouth.
So, Nita, so let me ask you: do you think that members of your party are doing enough to condemn violent rhetoric?
Do you think Republicans are doing enough?
Or would you like to see more?
Yes, I do.
And I've not heard any of them call anybody Hitler or fascist or any of that.
I've not heard that from them.
Donald Trump gets the job done.
That's why they don't like him.
And somebody the other day said, why didn't they attack Biden?
Biden didn't do nothing.
Why would anybody want to attack him?
All right.
And here's Iris, Independent, Harrisonburg, Virginia.
Go ahead, Iris.
Yes, I was just wanting to thank you for your journalism and everyone that it is in journalism.
But I do think the rhetoric on both sides has really got to calm down.
I know it started a long time ago because when Obama was in office, I was called like trash and by two people I didn't know.
And it really hurt because, you know, they didn't know me.
I didn't know them.
And I think the rhetoric is on both sides.
And that's all I have to say, but thank you.
And I hope you have a good day.
Take a look at this text that we got from Ed in Hilton Head, South Carolina.
He said, C-SPAN, I never thought I would say this, but you are part of the reason for the violence toward the president.
Every morning on Washington Journal, there are terrible hate calls toward the president of the United States, day after day for months.
And comment on that as well.
Let's hear from Don, Democrat, Orlando, Florida.
Good morning.
Good morning.
How are you doing?
Good.
Well, I would just like to say that we all live under the same roof.
We all share the same air.
And we must learn how to get along and care for each other.
Now, as far as Donald Trump and the Republican Party is concerned, I truly believe that they are inflicting more violence on the American people every day.
Every day we go to the pump and we put gas in our car.
We're paying a dollar, dollar and a half more.
Yeah, but Don, that's not violence.
I mean, that's expensive gas.
And I get that that bothers you.
You're taking somebody's money.
And I mean, you just look how things have just in such a short time have gotten out of control with, you know, the invasion in Iran, you know.
Okay, but the question is, how do you respond to that, Don?
And this shooter was upset about those things too.
And he brought a gun to an event that President Trump and senior officials were at.
Well, that's true.
And I was there, ma'am.
And there was plenty of security there.
And I truly believe everybody was safe.
And from my observation, I truly believe they knew the guy was in the hotel and they were waiting for him to make a move.
But that's just my opinion.
And you said you were at the dinner in Washington?
No, I was outside.
I was outside on the perimeter.
What were you doing outside on the perimeter?
Just watching and observing.
I was trying to get a ticket inside to go to the show so I could watch it and see what, you know, what it was all about.
I was there a couple of years ago and I actually got, I was actually inside the hotel upstairs, but they wouldn't let me downstairs.
You know, and it was the same thing.
I was just trying to get a ticket to get in so I could sit and watch it.
All right.
And here is Cheryl, Holly Hill, Florida, Republican.
Good morning to you.
Hello, Mimi.
Your question this morning should be, is the media doing enough to calm the violent rhetoric?
Because the media is what is driving the hate in this country.
And when you read the list of the things that President Trump said, are you going to read a list of all the things the Democrats have said that were violent and sick and hateful towards not just the president, but his supporters and his administration?
Read that list, please.
That'll take you a couple weeks.
Seriously, I see SPAN, you gleefully allow these people to call with the most hateful things they could possibly drink.
Hold on, Cheryl, Cheryl.
Let's talk about this.
So we need to talk about what people are saying on our air.
And I get it.
We read that text and what you're saying.
Last administration, people called up and said hateful, vile things against former President Biden.
We allowed that.
This is a form for you to share your opinion, and that's people's opinions.
So what do you think?
I mean, is it now that you're upset because it's against the person that you support?
Every hour of every day, the left-wing media is saying awful things.
People are listening to this.
But isn't the right-wing media saying awful things?
And yes, he has been called an illegitimate president by Hillary Clinton herself.
He knows he's not a legitimate president.
Her exact words.
That he didn't win the election?
They said he didn't win the election in 2016.
He was an illegitimate president.
Look it up.
It's black and white.
And then what about the 2020 election?
A lot of people said that Biden didn't win the election.
Long.
I watched it like I do every four years.
When the lights went off in the critical states, I knew they were up to something.
All right, Cheryl.
Got it.
Let's take a look at Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
He spoke on the Senate floor yesterday about this topic.
Take a look.
Can you believe it?
Can you believe it, America?
At a time when Americans are crying out for relief, Republicans are tying this Senate in knots, all to cut Trump's rogue agencies a blank check with no significant reform, reform that the American people want.
If Republicans think they're finished taking these difficult votes, they got another thing coming.
Democrats will make sure Republicans face more votes on affordability when reconciliation comes back up in a few weeks because it's so important to the American people.
We will continue to expose Republicans' economic agenda for what it is, an utter disaster for working Americans.
It's no wonder Trump's numbers are lower than they have ever been.
He's not addressing what the American people want, and Republicans in the House and Senate just follow him blindly.
The GOP has completely lost sight of the needs of the American people right now.
Trump wants to seclude himself in a walled palace, literally.
His party's now trying to use their reconciliation process to pave the way for Donald Trump's gilded ballroom.
If Republicans truly want to improve security, they should join Democrats in funding the Secret Service, not Donald Trump's luxury ballroom.
Americans want us to help them put food on their tables and gas in their tanks, not to help Donald Trump put more gold on his walls.
Media Role in Politics00:09:30
Here is what Cheryl was just saying, our last caller.
This is an article in the Washington Post from September 26, 2019, with the headline, Hillary Clinton says Trump is a, quote, illegitimate president.
It says this, Hillary Clinton dismissed President Trump as an illegitimate president and suggested that, quote, he knows that he stole the 2016 presidential election in a CBS News interview to be aired later.
Former Secretary of State who lost the presidency to Trump offered a scathing assessment of the president, his 2016 win, and the latest allegations that he tried to obtain incriminating information from a foreign government about Joe Biden, a possible 2020 opponent.
That's in the Washington Post.
Again, that's dated September 26, 2019.
Elizabeth in Las Vegas, Republican.
Good morning, Elizabeth.
Hi, Mimi.
Hi.
Hi, I'm not going to go rogue.
I got it together this morning.
Trump, his rhetoric in the beginning, you know, he was kind of obnoxious, of course, but I think he had to come out like that just to get everybody shocked.
And it was shocking.
And, you know, I heard a team Wednesday, I think it was.
What a terrible stuff he said.
And then Schumer.
If people, you know what?
If Trump gets killed, and if somebody would have got in there, they would have killed press agents.
They would have killed so many people.
And there'd be people out in society going, wow, cool.
And, you know, that's really sick.
And I don't know what to do anymore.
I'm 66 as of the 26th.
And I'm glad I'm 66, Mimi.
In fact, I don't mind being 77 about now.
The media needs to cool it.
Jimmy Kimmel, I don't know about him.
He's just nuts.
And they're all damaged.
And nobody really knows what to do.
And everybody just wants their own way.
And you're not, you gotta, isn't that part of being a mature adult, not always getting your own way?
And that includes our president, too, who I love dearly.
But, you know, I know he's kind of nutty sometimes.
So anyway, it's been a pleasure.
I guess Marie left.
I miss her.
And Mimi, you're a really nice person.
And I appreciate what you do.
And I'm glad you guys are communicating back and forth now.
Have a good day, okay?
Thanks, Elizabeth.
And she mentioned Jimmy Kimmel.
This is the New York Times on that.
It says president and first lady demand ABC fire Jimmy Kimmel over widow joke.
It says the joke was recorded two days before the White House correspondence dinner where a gunman tried to storm the press gala.
It says Mr. Kimmel, who has a long history of sparring with the president, had imagined himself as the MC at the dinner.
Of course, our first lady Melania is here, he said on Thursday night.
Then, pretending to address her, he called her so beautiful and added, Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow.
He made cracks about Mr. Trump's age and health.
This was before a gunman broke past a security perimeter in the Washington Hilton.
It says in the social media post Monday afternoon, Mr. Trump described the comedian's joke as really shocking, something far beyond the pale.
He ended his post.
Jimmy Kimmel should be immediately fired by Disney and ABC.
We have not heard a response yet from Disney or ABC on that.
We're looking to see if they have made any kind of response.
But here is that joke, if you want to see it.
This is again from Thursday before the dinner.
And of course, our first lady, Melania, is here.
Look at Melania.
So beautiful.
Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow.
You know, Melania's birthday is on Sunday.
That's right.
She's planning to celebrate at home, same way she always does, looking out a window and whispering, what have I done?
And here is Ray calling us from King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, Independent.
Hi, Ray.
Hey, how are you doing?
You know, my thing when people call in saying I'm Democrat, Republican, Independent, especially the white people.
When they look in the mirror, they're all on the same team.
And when they say, oh, because if they all weren't on the same team, this country wouldn't be the way it is.
They vote every day.
And I don't think that's fair, Ray.
Kathy in Ohio, line for Democrats.
You're on the air.
Oh, good morning.
I am, you know, Trump has such vile and violent rhetoric against female reporters.
He is so insulting.
I don't even see how that is presidential.
He is a nut.
Thank you.
This is what Michael in Plant City, Florida says on text.
President Trump directs his rhetoric at individuals.
Democrats are directing bullets toward Republicans.
That's the fact.
Chris in Elgin, Illinois says Trump spouts violent rhetoric on a near-daily basis, from publicly dancing on others' graves to calling for the execution of those who speak up against him, to literally threatening to wipe out an entire civilization.
And that's not even considering his role in the January 6th riot.
For anyone who supports him to suddenly decry violent rhetoric is the very depth of stinking hypocrisy.
And this from Harry in Mount Lebanon, Pennsylvania: term limit, not limits, would inoculate us against bile and hatred spewing from the mouths of politicians.
Suing others in civil courts for slander and libel would remove a lot of the anger from public speech.
The courts are open.
The targets of hatred should use them.
Mary in New York, Republican line, what do you think?
Well, I have to agree that somebody has to start, stop doing this.
And I think the media could lead this.
I think, like anything, the media is amping it up and getting people to watch.
I like C-SPAN, but I must admit, I think you're kind of leaning towards one thing and not the other, and keeping the rhetoric up by reporting all this stuff.
It's not only just political violence, there's violence in the malls, there's violence everywhere.
It's got to stop somewhere.
And I think the media could lead in knowing that your words and what you're reporting carries weight.
So, Mary, let me ask you when it comes to C-SPAN or this program: if the president were to put out a social media post that, you know, for instance, a whole civilization will die tonight, we showed that to you so that you would know that that happened.
Are you suggesting that we not show that?
Why would you show it?
I mean, what does it do?
What did it do?
Just get everybody divided.
Again, oh, I don't like Trump.
Oh, I don't like the Democrats.
I mean, you can see it on either side.
I don't think, what does it do?
It only carries weight.
You know, we are responsible for our words.
And reporters, such as you, is supposedly not leaning one way or the other, I think, has a responsibility to kind of weigh in what you're doing.
All right.
Here is Donna, Grapevine, Texas, Independent.
Good morning, Donna.
Oh, good morning.
I just had to call in because I'm just so tired of people calling in and saying, oh, poor Trump, why do you pick on Trump?
Why do you call?
Because his behavior warrants it every single day.
And just like right now, that lady doesn't want to know that he said he'd blow up a civilization.
It's insane.
I don't understand these people who continually stick up for Trump.
It's so obvious.
But thank you.
So wait, Donna, before you go, do you think that people on the left are doing enough to condemn violent rhetoric?
It's, I don't know.
I mean, the left is, they can be guilty of it also, but Trump is the leader of the nation.
And any president who stands there and says he hates Democrats, that's insane.
He's the leader.
He sets the mood.
He's the one that sets, and how can you deny it?
His rhetoric is horrible.
All right, Donna.
So we are going to switch to open forum just in case there's other things happening in the news that you'd like to talk about, whether it's the conflict in Iran, what's happening on Congress, or the King and Queen's visit.
Florida Redistricting Map00:05:45
Lots happening.
So we want to give you a chance to weigh in on other things.
Of course, you can continue to talk about this topic as well.
So go ahead and start calling in.
And while you're doing that, we're going to talk about what the redistricting push in Florida with Jacob Ogles.
He is delegation editor at Florida Politics.
Jacob, welcome to the program.
Thank you for having me on.
Okay, so tell us what's going on.
Governor Ron DeSantis unveiled a new map for a congressional map for Florida.
What's happening?
Well, this map most notably shifts Florida from having eight Democrat majority seats to four, which is meaning there's a lot of jockeying going on among the current congressional delegation for one thing.
But there's a lot of people trying to digest a lot of the argument.
Another very notable fact is that the governor who released this map with districts that were colored in red and blue is saying that he no longer has to follow a requirement in the Florida Constitution that prohibits partisan intent in drawing lines for Congress.
So there's a lot of legal ramifications to this map, even beyond just the partisan makeup.
So yeah, so I was going to say, so you're expecting there to be court challenges to this.
Almost certainly there will be court challenges as soon as the legislature passes this in special session this week.
So what do you think this is going to mean for the midterm elections?
Well, there's a belief that Florida has waited as long as it has in order to kind of force a Purcell principle to go into effect, meaning that once these maps are passed, they can be legally challenged, but the sorting of the legal matters will be so close to the election that the courts will just put off any hearing of the challenge until after the midterms.
Now, I know that the people planning to wage those lawsuits have already said, no, that's turning Purcell on its head.
And what they expect to argue is that changing the midterm lines like this just six weeks before candidate qualification in the state of Florida, that would be what creates chaos in the electoral process.
So there's going to be some immediate fight about even if this legal challenge should be heard in full right now, or if the map or the entire challenge should just be put off until after this cycle.
So there are GOP analysts and operatives warning against redistricting in Florida.
What are the risks here for Governor DeSantis?
Well, there was a pretty serious and lengthy analysis put out by one conservative analyst down in South Florida a couple of weeks ago, Alex Alvarado.
He said that even a defensive map from the governor could put a lot of incumbents at risk.
The main issue is everybody in Florida is going to have their lines shifted, every member of the U.S. House delegation in some degree.
And some Republicans are having substantial differences when it comes to the lines for their district.
That means they're going to be running not very long from now in districts that they have not been representing for the last four years and having to reach whole new levels of constituency.
It's not the best environment for Republicans to be reaching out to voters who don't already have a relationship with their congressmen.
That just innately creates a risk, even for Republican incumbents, going out there trying to convince a whole group of unfamiliar voters that they should go with a Republican, even in this political climate when the president is very unpopular.
And if you were to go from eight Democratic safe seats to four, what happens to those four representatives?
I know one of them has resigned, Chair Floss McCormick, but what happens to the other three?
Well, one of those is going to be probably Kathy Castor in Tampa Bay, and she has vowed that she's going to continue running for reelection.
She does intend to see how the challenge goes and won't announce where she's going to run.
But a lot of people have pointed out there is a district over there that was won by Trump by about 10 percentage points.
That includes a lot of her area.
And she has typically overperformed the top of the ticket when she has run for reelection.
She outperformed Kamala Harris.
She outperformed Barack Obama when she was running in that district.
So a lot of people think that she could in this environment at least survive even in a Trump 10 district.
It's a little more perilous for Darren Soto, who's had his Kissimmee area district cut into several different pieces.
The Puerto Rican community in central Florida has been significantly chopped up into different districts.
A lot of people think that's a violation of the Voting Rights Act.
He has also vowed to run for reelection, but he is probably far more reliant on a challenge just because the best district he probably has to run in over there voted for Trump by 18 percentage points.
Voting Rights Act Violations00:08:26
All right.
Yep, I was just going to say thanks for the update on the Florida redistricting battle.
That's Jacob Ogles, delegation editor for Florida Politics.
Thanks so much for joining us.
Thank you.
Getting back to your calls for Open Forum.
Ray, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, line for Democrats.
You're on the air.
Hi, how you doing?
Good.
Thank God I don't have to answer that question that was there before, and it's just open forum.
But I do have a few points.
First, your question was wrong.
It should have been, do you believe in free speech in America?
Second.
Meaning free speech to incite violence, though?
Because that doesn't include...
Okay, okay, okay.
Give me a definition or an example of violent hate speech that causes people to go out and shoot somebody.
What is a specific example?
Yeah, what do you think about that?
I think that calling somebody a name is not violent hate speech or saying that you don't like someone or you don't like what he does or anything like that.
I mean, in the history, since there have been political parties, they've been after each other like that.
You can go back all the way through history.
So it's not a matter of rhetoric.
It's a matter of Trump, you had a list that Trump said things like somebody should be executed.
He was glad somebody's dead.
Hillary Clinton should go in front of a firing squad.
That is your example.
Now, to make a good example, a true example, an apples-to-apple example, you would have to go back and find a Democratic president who said similar things.
You can't do that.
I challenge anybody of the color of the orange monkey to go and find a president who said the same thing that Trump did.
Now, you know, you're never going to find that.
It won't be apples to apples unless you can find a Democratic president who said that.
So that's anything on that.
But my real reason I want to, I did call, was that and the Iran situation with the bombing.
First off, I heard a guy say on a talk show, you can't bomb a country into stupidity.
Iran knows how to build a nuclear bomb.
You can't just keep bombing them, bombing them, and hope they'll forget how to do it.
They're going to do it.
They have the knowledge.
Second, if you have to be a pea brain to believe that after the first so-called obliteration of their nuclear facility, they didn't take all of their enriched uranium and scatter it all over the country.
It's going to be there.
You'll never find it.
They'll never find it.
And so that's another stupid thing that they keep saying that they're going to get that enriched uranium.
They're never going to find it.
Same thing with the scientists who know how to build these bombs.
They're scattered all over.
So, Ray, we've got a segment coming up later in the program about Iran with a retired Army general.
And we'll definitely bring up these points.
Here's Wanda Waverly, Virginia, Republican.
Good morning, Wanda.
Good morning.
I just have a couple things I'd like to say.
You know, they talk about the rhetoric.
The thing is, you will go to jail if you holler fire in a theater.
But you have Democrats calling the president Hitler.
Horrible, horrible name.
It's to me, it's the same thing.
I don't understand why the Democratic Party stands more for illegals than citizens.
I've had a family member murdered.
It is so hard and crushing that a life has been taken for no reason.
Was that by an illegal immigrant, Wanda?
No, it was not.
Okay.
Was there anything else you wanted to add?
Yes.
You know, they talked about Hillary Clinton earlier.
I remember her in her hearing talking about Ambassador Stevens.
What does it matter at this point?
It matters a lot because it was, turned out, he wired her for extra security and it was denied.
That's not protecting our ambassadors.
And those are the Benghazi hearings, Wanda.
And just so everybody knows, they can go back and watch those on our archive, c-span.org.
William, Arlington, Virginia, Independent Line, you're on the air.
Hi, can you hear me okay?
Yes, go right ahead, William.
Hi.
Yeah, so I just wanted to say that I used to support President Trump, and I don't as much anymore, but I will respect him as my president.
But, you know, he's been very disappointing to me because I thought with his business acumen and his ability to bring people together that he would support policies that are in the middle of the country and supporting this vast middle group of independent people as well.
And that, you know, he would not veer so far to the right and that he could, with his communication skills, which are great, you know, bring people together in the middle.
And he has not done that.
So you voted for him in this last election, 2024?
I did not vote for him in this last election.
So when did you stop supporting President Trump?
About when the thing at the Capitol happened, when he didn't recognize that he had lost.
All right.
And here's Ed in Maryland, Democrat.
Good morning.
Hey, good morning.
I'm going to talk about the Jimmy, the joke that he made.
I'm going to tell you, these are some things that President Trump said.
I hate Democrats.
Democrats are a scum.
The media is the enemy of the people.
Robert Mueller died.
A Marine did his time.
Bronstar married for 60 years.
How many people could actually say that?
Married for 60 years.
You know what he said about this guy?
I'm glad he's dead.
I have no sympathy for Donald Trump whatsoever.
Goodbye.
Let's hear from Barbara in Waco, Texas.
Republican.
Hello, Barbara.
Hello.
I wanted to say that I was very impressed by the speed with which the Secret Service got to Donald Trump.
And I wish that they had had that kind of response in Mac Allen, Texas for those school children rather than standing around the hallways.
Violence is all over the place these days.
I'm 78 years old.
But aside from the 60s, it just hasn't been that way.
When I was a little girl, the only thing I was scared of going to school was tornado drills.
I certainly didn't expect anyone to come in with a gun and was not at all concerned about anything like that.
And that's really all I wanted to point out.
And I didn't vote for Trump either.
And I didn't vote for anybody.
And why is that, Barbara?
Why I didn't vote?
Yes.
I didn't have a candidate to support.
All right.
And here's John in Baltimore, Independent.
First Amendment Concerns00:07:42
Hi, John.
Hi.
Disregards the White House correspondence dinner incident this weekend, and I think there's a relation to all similar types of incidents and why we're seeing more of these.
I think the common thread here, whether it was the Charlie Burke assassination or Luigi Mangioni as a healthcare professional murder, is that we're giving, I think, these killers, people who are actually disturbed, a form.
And when we publish our manifestos, because I must be thinking there are hundreds, maybe thousands of disturbed individuals out there who prepare their own manifestos, but those will never see the light of day unless they commit a heinous act like what you saw this weekend.
And when we publish these manifestos and when you know we have like political analysts going over them in every single detail, like as if it was a New Testament, this is what they want.
And the more we do this, the more we put actually these individuals on a pedestal, it only incites more acts like this.
And that's what we're seeing, especially now in this social media environment.
So, you know, John, it was the New York Post that published the manifesto.
Did you read it?
No, and actually, that's a point.
I don't think these should be published at all.
These should not, it's basically just ramblings of a disturbed individual and what the context of this.
I know we're all curious what is the motive behind these things, and we want to know about what's in their head.
But when we do that and when we like put these, put this information out, their manifestos and what their talking points are, we're giving them the platform that they're seeking and which only encourages other similar and disturbed individuals to up the game, seeing like, okay, what can I do to get my thoughts published and make the world know who I am?
That there would be copycats.
That's a common platform.
Yes.
And not just copycats, but just basically people just believing that this is the only way that I'm going to get the attention that I so deserve.
You know, that's what they're thinking in their head.
And in this world where basically social media, everyone's got a phone, it's just amplified.
It's like, you know, a thousand times greater than it was in any previous generation.
And that's why I think we're seeing such an increase of these things.
And that's from like, you know, all these infamous shootings or mass killings that are just increasing.
Just, I mean, just think about how all these killings have just increased just over the past 10 or so years.
All right.
Yep, got that, John.
Yep, got that.
Brent in Axtel, Nebraska, Republican.
Good morning.
Good morning.
I think it is pretty concerning the shooter.
Good morning.
Brett.
Well, maybe you can try to call us back.
Deborah Lewisburg, North Carolina, Democrat, you're on the air.
I just can't believe some of the things that are coming out of these people's mouths.
Donald Trump has been spewing this garbage for years and years.
Why in the world would he say such horrible things that he says, but everybody else spoke like a Democrat?
Okay, Deborah, is that what you wanted to say?
Yes, I'd like to say something else.
If he can calm it down, maybe everybody else could calm it down.
I never heard of such myth in my life coming from a so-called president.
Come on now, people, get it together.
Thank you.
On the Independent Line in Anderson, South Carolina, Will, you're next.
Good morning, Mimi.
How are you this morning?
Good, thanks.
Well, great.
Listen, I'm, as usual, in disbelief.
I noticed the Washington Times headline that you just put up there that the left uses violence as its stock in trade.
And then I recall that Trump calling for the death of Liz Cheney and Mark Milley.
I remember the Capitol Gazette slaughter by the Trump supporter where five people in Annapolis were killed.
All the things he said over the year, the only good Democrat's dead Democrat.
Oh, my Lord.
And now he's going after Kimmel again.
He's trying to take our First Amendment rights.
You know, supposedly he's going to protect Second Amendment rights, but he's taking those two.
But, you know, nobody's concerned about the First Amendment with this guy.
He's just threading the whole Constitution.
And as far as being illegitimate, he was in violation of the emoluments clause on day one.
Day one.
There was an organization that I, yeah, I guess I'm a leftist because I'm concerned about the emoluments clause, but he was in violation of it.
And he was cited as being in violation of it on day one.
Hell yeah, he is illegitimate.
But in everything he's done over the years, he should have been removed long ago.
The destruction of our Constitution, our White House, the insurrection, pardoning 1,600 violent offenders.
And now the Democrats and the left are using violence as their stock and trade.
The right and Trump uses deceit, deception, and lies as their stock and trade.
It's incredible.
All right, well, let's hear from Jodi in Lake City, Florida, Independent.
Hi, Jody.
Hey, Jody.
Hey, Mimi.
Good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
I just wanted to go down maybe a little bit different.
Sometimes I like to go on and surf the internet.
And Tucker Carlson brought me in to his podcast.
And he was bringing up the fact that he believed he knew who the Antichrist was.
And he was going off and telling, you know, the signs of the Antichrist.
And one of the things that he brought up was Revelation 13.
And, you know, I'm not a real big church person.
I kind of listened in on it.
And the things that he was saying about this Revelations 13, I cannot fathom that we are not in that time right now.
He was telling that the mark of the beast, it'll be seven things.
And one of the things that he was saying, this mark of the beast will have a wound in the head that everybody will be amazed with and they will admire him.
That's one of the things that the second thing is he will be called himself a peacemaker, but he will not be the peacemaker.
One of the other signs is that he will have the mark of the beast, which will be on the hand or wearing the, you know, the on the head, the forehead.
All the things that he was saying, it seems like that is what's happening with Trump.
All of the predictions that he will drop.
One of the predictions was with fireballs falling from the sky.
I believe that's happening right now with Israel.
I believe, you know, what his name will be blasted.
He will go after the church and Christian.
And Jody, here is the Daily Mail with the headline: Tucker Carlson suggests Trump might be the Antichrist after President's AI image of himself as Jesus.
We're in open forum.
Tax Dollars and Policy00:05:12
This is Angela Columbus, Ohio, Democrat.
Good morning.
How are you?
Good.
Yes.
So I am a Democrat from Ohio, but I'm more eccentric on these issues.
I do not sit here and say Republicans is Democrats diet.
Where I'm at, our leadership passes policies.
They recently gave themselves raises, city council, the school board, and the mayor, but they took all the transportation away from our schools.
They're constantly having to fight for teachers' raises.
They gave developers 30 years of tax exemptions.
So, under House Bill 33, and I'm just wanting to show that we can have neutral understanding.
It's not just Republicans, it's not just Democrats.
You guys have this thing called the power to vote.
And this is a known fact: 72% of voters are over the age of 55.
I'm concerned about seniors being forced into homelessness, seniors who bought their houses, paid their taxes.
You know, they pay sales taxes, they pay property taxes, they pay payroll taxes.
And then when they go to retire, they have to pay $180 plus out of their Medicare check for Part B.
They don't get Part D.
I used to work for United Healthcare and Medicare.
If you don't get Part D within six months of retirement, and it's retirement age, not when you retire, you get fined.
Then you have developers buying up property because they can get it for tax-free for 30 years.
And then your seniors, when they can't afford the property tax, they lose their homes and they're homeless.
We have 35,000 homeless veterans.
Instead of saying it's the right, it's the left.
We have to look inward.
We have to look at our environment.
What a Republican needs in Utah will not be the same thing a Republican needs in Texas.
Look at your neighborhood.
Look at your council.
Look at your local government.
Look at your schools and ask yourself: what do we need here, not as a party, but as a community, and come together and make sure you have those needs met.
Otherwise, vote those people out, whether they're right or left, vote them out.
Those are your tax dollars paying their paycheck.
And as far as the Constitution goes, we do have freedom of speech.
I do not think calling Trump Hitler is the same as yelling fire in a crowded theater because one causes public safety concerns and could possibly end up in a situation where someone's harmed.
And the other is an opinion.
All right, Angela, we got that point.
Coming up later on the Washington Journal, we'll dig into some of the high-profile firings at the Pentagon amid the ongoing conflict with Iran.
We have a conversation with retired Major General Randy Manner.
But first, after the break, a conversation with Republican Congressman Mike Flood of Nebraska.
He'll preview the busy weekend in Congress and on how best to lower the political temperature here in the U.S. We'll be right back.
You're watching C-SPAN.
C-SPAN brings you democracy unfiltered in real time.
Democracy doesn't take sides, neither does C-SPAN.
In a world full of opinions, C-SPAN gives you direct access to the people and institutions that shape our nation.
Unfiltered coverage of Congress as laws are debated and decided.
Live proceedings from the United States Supreme Court.
Presidential speeches, briefings, and historic moments as they happen.
No commentary, no spin, no agenda.
Just the democratic process presented in full without interruption.
So you can watch the debates, hear every word, and make up your own mind.
C-SPAN's respected nonprofit service has offered Americans unfiltered gavel-to-gavel coverage of their government in action.
C-SPAN, bringing your democracy unfiltered.
C-SPAN is brought to you by the cable, satellite, and streaming companies that provide C-SPAN as a public service.
Campaign 2026 is underway, and the stakes couldn't be higher.
Every seat in the United States House of Representatives is up for grabs, along with 33 U.S. Senate races.
And the outcome of both could reshape the balance of power in Washington.
Voters will also decide 36 gubernatorial contests.
From the campaign trail to election night, follow campaign 2026 on the C-SPAN networks, C-SPAN, bringing you democracy unfiltered.
Washington Journal continues.
Welcome back to Washington Journal.
We're joined now by Representative Mike Flood.
He's a Republican from Nebraska.
He's the chair of the Financial Services Subcommittee.
Welcome to the program, Representative Flood.
Good morning.
White House Correspondents Dinner00:15:51
Thanks for having me.
I want to first talk about Saturday night at the White House Correspondents Dinner.
You were there.
You were actually at C-SPAN's table as a guest.
Tell us about your experience.
Well, you know, walking into the Washington Hilton, the first round of security, there were a lot of protesters, and I guess I didn't pay much attention to it, but they were yelling like vile things.
And then you go through that ring, and you go through the second ring where there's the magnetrometers, and then the third.
You know, I was just enjoying dinner.
I thought, you know, it was a great venue.
I was excited because humor brings people together.
Humor unites people.
Here we had all these Republicans, all these Democrats, the president, the vice president, the press corps, you know, who, you know, hold elected officials accountable.
And everybody was having a good time, you know.
And I think we need that as a country.
We need to use humor to bring us together.
And I had a feeling that Donald Trump was going to bring the heat.
And I had a feeling that they were going to have some fun with him, which is what should happen.
And then, you know, as you know, I heard what I thought was a bunch of plates breaking in the back.
And I've been to a thousand of these dinners where, you know, you feel terrible when the wait staff drops the plates and you're like, oh, no.
And so I heard these plates breaking back behind me.
And I kind of looked there and then I looked, my left eye caught what was happening on the stage with all of the, you know, Secret Service coming out, violently taking out the vice president and then the guys with the big guns with the flashlights at the end of them.
And I thought, this is a real deal.
And then as President Trump was leaving, I saw him, I think, trip or something.
And I was convinced something terrible had happened.
And I was like, I can't believe I just saw what I saw.
But he tripped.
He got back up.
And then, you know, like where I was sitting at the table, the leg of the table was right in front of me.
So there was no way I was going to get under the table.
And a lot of people at our table, as you know, did get underneath there.
And then I was kind of like looking around and I was like, we're better than this as a country.
You know, like something I had been looking forward to for 45 days gets stopped by this.
And I, of course, by that time realized those weren't plates breaking.
Those were gunshots.
And first time I've ever been in a situation like that.
And when you say we're better than this, we were just talking on the program about political rhetoric.
And are leaders of both sides doing enough to bring down that political rhetoric?
What do you think?
Well, there's always room for improvement.
I tell people all the time, the only person I can control is myself.
And I hold myself to a higher standard where I don't engage in, you know, name-calling and things like that.
You know, politics is a rough business.
And unfortunately, and this isn't C-SPAN's deal, the people who engage in the most vile rhetoric end up on TV at 9 o'clock Eastern because anger is the cheapest emotion.
It's easier to invoke anger than it is to inspire people, to get people to be better.
And it's celebrated on whatever flavor of news network you're on.
And as the chairman of the Main Street Caucus, I work with 89 members of Congress that go to work every day and deliver results for the American people.
Not many of us are on at 9 o'clock Eastern because we're not stoking the fire that leads to people engaging in that anger moment that gets people to watch and continue to consume media.
But you're welcome here on C-SPAN anyway.
Yes, yes, yes, yes.
So this is what Press Secretary Caroline Levitt said about this.
She said, this political violence stems from a system, systemic demonization of him, meaning Trump and his supporters, by commentators, by elected members of the Democrat Party, and even some in the media.
Do you agree with that?
Well, there is definitely truth to that.
There are people that, no matter what he does, they are 1,000% opposed to him.
And we see that, obviously, all the time as a member of Congress.
You get the calls.
But, you know, I'm not going to say that it's only on one side.
It's everywhere.
Like, Americans are mad.
Like, people feast on anger.
And, you know, walking into that event the other night, I didn't pay it much attention, but I thought to myself, how desensitized am I that people can yell anti-Semitic slurs and talk about horrific things and accuse you of being X, Y, or Z on the way in, and it didn't even phase me.
Like, you deal with that when you walk from the Cannon office building into the U.S. Capitol when you cross Independent Street.
And, you know, looking back, like, that shouldn't be normal, but it is normal.
It is what we deal with.
And I don't know how you fix it.
The President Trump has been talking about the need for his ballroom.
Some Republicans are saying this illustrates why we need a ballroom.
Do you agree with that?
I do.
You know, he's been targeted multiple times.
You know, this is the third assassination attempt.
He understands this better than most.
I guess Donald Trump at his best is a, you know, like he understands hospitality.
He understands how to celebrate things.
And, you know, he sees this as a necessary.
I think after the other day, after the other night, I get it.
Like, I totally understand why he would say that.
And this is something we should have done a long time ago.
I also don't want to stop assembling outside of a secure environment.
We have to be able to get together at the Washington Hilton or the Super Bowl.
We have to be with each other.
And we have to be with each other in events like that as well.
And how do you do that in such an open space where the alleged gunmen checked into the hotel?
Yeah.
I guess we have to check everybody who's at the hotel and see what's going on.
I mean, that was a shock to me, but we can't hide behind a fence because of this.
We have to figure out a way to get together in public.
If you'd like to join our conversation with Representative Mike Flood, you can start calling in now.
Republicans are on 202-748-8001.
Democrats 202-748-8000.
And Independents 202-748-8002.
We'll get to your calls shortly.
Let's talk about what's happening in Congress this week.
Let's start with FISA.
So Section 702 expires day after tomorrow.
What's happening with that?
Well, there's been extensive negotiations over the Section 702 provisions.
Listen, from where I sit, this is non-negotiable.
It has to get extended.
This is not something you can play any games with.
Extended with changes or without changes?
It has to get extended, like bottom line.
We made 56 changes last year, and that has in most part been very positive.
There's a few good changes that are being proposed by some members of the House.
I've been involved in a lot of those negotiations.
If we aren't able to get together on those, we have to extend it.
Like, this is vital to our homeland security.
This is vital to protecting Americans.
I think you will find if we're unable in the House to pass a bill, the Senate sends us over a clean extension, there will be plenty of people that will vote for that.
Enough?
I hope.
I believe so.
This is not something you can, this is not political.
This is a must-have to have.
Let's talk about Iran.
You have supported President Trump's actions in Iran.
You've opposed war powers resolutions.
Later today, the House is expected to take their third war powers resolution of the year and vote on it.
What are your thoughts on that?
Because that 60 days is coming up very soon.
Well, you know, right now there is a ceasefire, and we have naval operations in the Strait.
We're dealing with a country that we don't know who's actually in charge.
Now is not the time to cut and run.
Now is the time to support our president's position to make sure that we give him the maximum ability to get a good resolution.
Listen, these people are martyrs.
We've taken out how many rings of their leadership, and people keep stepping up saying, yeah, I'm going to die.
This isn't like doing a deal with a nation state that we're used to dealing with.
These are people who vow death to America, sponsor terrorism, have killed Americans, and they've been in a 50-year jihad with America wanting death to all of us.
So that begs the question, Congressman.
Is military action the best way to change that ideology?
Well, we've tried everything else.
We've tried, you know, president, former presidents have written them a check.
It didn't work.
We've tried the UN has gone in there and said, we're going to look into their nuclear program, and they stall, they stall, they stall.
Listen, they want a nuclear weapon, and I think if we've learned anything, if they get one, they're going to use it.
So we either deal with it now or we deal with it in five or ten years later.
Let's talk to callers.
We'll start with Ron San Clemente, California, Republican.
Hi, Ron.
Hey, how are you doing this morning?
Congressman Flood, I really got to ask you a couple of very serious questions about Iran.
First of all, why do we always demonize our enemies, no matter what they are?
We point to Iraq.
We point to Serbia.
We point to Vietnam.
And every single one of those countries had national health care, affordable housing, and had a good food supply.
And here we are going into a country with 93 million people.
And here you are again attacking these people.
And, you know, you said they're stupid because they must be very stupid because it took them from 1979 to today, and they still haven't built a nuclear weapon.
They could have bought one from Pakistan or from North Korea easily, and they haven't done it.
So why would we worry about the nuclear weapon issues?
The second thing is with Iran, come on.
These are elegant people, intelligent people, and we're killing them, killing 5,000 of them so far.
And with impunity.
Now, who's responsible for that?
And the bottom line is, you wonder, they didn't come over here and bomb us.
We went over there and bombed them.
So please rectify in your mind that it's a very good thing to continue this war against Iran.
All right, Ron.
I mean, I cannot defend the Iranian regime.
I think the people of Iran are good.
The Iranian regime recently killed, what, 30,000 of their own citizens?
That's indefensible.
This is a country that is the state or the world's largest state-sponsored nation endorsing terrorism.
They're funding Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis.
They vow death to America.
There is no part of me that wants to in any way celebrate the Republican Guard or the leadership or the regime in Iran.
It has been a problem for 50 years, and I'm not going to apologize for that.
Here's Darrell calling us from Washington State, Democrat.
Go ahead, Darrell.
No, I called it as an independent, not a Democrat.
Okay.
Yeah, it looks like that's correct.
Independent.
Go ahead, Daryl.
Well, I agree with you on Iran.
I wanted to change the subject just a little bit and talk about the previous subject, why this nation is becoming so divided.
Because we're not only being divided by politics, we're being divided by people moving to where they agree with people.
And then they're not interacting with people they disagree with on a personal note.
I mean, it gets worse and worse every year.
I see people moving.
I'm in the Pacific Northwest, and I go between Washington, Oregon, and Idaho.
And I see everyone in Idaho thinks one way.
Everyone in Oregon and Washington think a totally different way.
And in some cases, when you try to communicate with them, they won't even listen to or even try to listen to any media that disagrees with their point of view.
Do you have a specific question, or do you just want to comment on that?
I just wondered what his opinion was on that.
And is there any way to turn that around?
I mean, the more that we separate, the worse it gets.
Representative Flood.
I think there's a lot of truth to what he's saying there.
You know, I'm one of the Republicans that holds town halls, and I don't screen.
I don't make sure they're from my district.
I open the doors and we have questions and answers.
And as you've probably seen, it can get a little raucous.
But things don't get better if we're not in the town square with each other.
Things don't get better if we curate environments where it's just our supporters.
And I think he's right.
You know, there are a lot of people that move to places where all the political views are similar.
And that's not the America that was ever designed or the America that I want to live in.
And it becomes tribalism.
It does.
It does.
My mom and dad were Democrats.
I'm a Republican.
I've always been a Republican.
I've been raised in a Democratic household.
I understand it.
And I think we as lawmakers need to put ourselves in the town square to make sure that we're in front of everyone.
And independents, they like that the most.
They may not agree with what your position is, but they want to see their member of Congress in the town square defending their votes.
Let's talk to Frank in Dallas, Texas, Democrat.
Hi, Frank.
Yeah, hello.
Yep, go ahead.
You're on the air.
Doesn't look like we've got Frank.
John in West Yarmouth, Massachusetts, Republican.
Go ahead, John.
Yes, um, I saw that in Korea in 1976, uh, Operation Paul Bunyan.
I was just saying, you know, my point is like peace to strength, and hopefully that will work in the future and stuff.
And it's worked in the past.
I just want to support our troops.
That's all I got to say.
Thank you.
We need more of that.
You know, like I remember when we, Operation Desert Storm, the country was united behind our military actions in the Gulf.
And regardless of what your opinion is on who the president is or the decisions that are being made, let's remember that we have men and women that are in our armed forces that are defending our interests in a dangerous situation.
And it would go a long way if we had more talk about supporting our troops and less about what we see every day.
How confident are you in negotiations with Iran?
Well, I think the president made a good point the other day when he said, we don't even know who we're dealing with or who's in charge.
And I think some of that obviously is because different rings of their leadership have been eliminated.
So how is this going to resolve?
Yeah, I mean, that's a good question.
Supporting Our Troops00:15:25
I don't, you know, who is in charge.
Ultimately, if I could write the next chapter, the Iranian people would rise up in their own way and take their country back from this, the religious zealots that have forced them into a terrible place for the last 50 years.
But that's not...
Are you surprised that it hasn't happened yet?
I don't know enough about the environment there, but when you kill 30,000 of your own people, I mean, if there was a reason to rise up against your government, there's Exhibit 1 right there.
Calvin and Georgia, Democrat, go ahead.
You're on with Representative Mike Flood.
Hello.
Hi, go ahead.
You're on the air.
Yes, I just got a small question.
Why did President Trump rip up the deal that they had in place with Barack Obama and Iran?
Yep.
Yeah, and Iran.
Why did he rip that up?
I don't understand that.
He shouldn't have ripped it up.
And I want to ask you, do you think that he regret ripping it up?
Okay.
And just to add to that, Jerry in Delaray Beach, Florida says, Representative Flood, tearing up the Iran deal was so dumb.
Trump should have kept it and moved on to improve.
Experts crafted it.
This is about Trump hating anything Obama accomplished.
The strait was open, and we could inspect and verify.
This is so short-sighted, the world suffers.
You can't write terrorist checks.
You can't give money to a country that vows death to America.
It's just that simple.
And we've seen what happens.
Like, they are still engaged in the process of wanting a nuclear weapon.
They are still vowing death to Israel.
They are still...
That's because, but the pursuit of nuclear weapons is because the JCPOA has the U.S. pulled out of it.
I talked to an inspector, a British citizen who was a U.N. inspector who said when she was assigned to go to Iran and to inspect their nuclear system or their progress or lack thereof, they stalled, they delayed, never let them in there.
This is the tactic we're used to.
Listen, we aren't dealing with people that are above board.
We're dealing with terrorists.
And case in point, who's funding Hamas?
Who's funding Hezbollah?
Who's funding the Houthis?
Like, we can't write checks to people that are writing checks to terrorists that are killing Americans and Israelis.
So you're confident that we can get a deal with the Iranians without lifting sanctions, which is essentially writing a check.
We have to, you know, the only thing that they understand right now is force.
And so the president has made the decision to use force to accomplish an outcome that I think we all want in America.
The next chapter hasn't been written, but I'd much rather be doing this than sending checks to Iran so that they can fund terrorism across the globe.
Here's Bonnie, Republican in Colorado.
Hi, Bonnie.
Hi.
My question is to Mike: what is the latest news about the building that President Trump has been trying to build and got nothing but negative static from all kinds of Democrat people, and they've even stalled it because you're talking about the ballroom, Bonnie?
Yes, the ballroom.
Okay.
And they really do need it.
He was telling some of this stuff that people that go visit the White House, when they want to do anything outside, they have to wade through soggy soil and everything.
And this ballroom, in my I'm thinking that they don't even, it's not even going to be publicly paid for.
It's going to be paid for by private means.
And from the very time he announced it, they have put him down and called it terrible.
And I mean, there's been bowling owlings that's been built in the White House.
There's been swimming pools.
Why not have a ballroom, which would have completely helped what happened Saturday?
So what was your opinion about that?
Congressman Flood.
Well, I support the ballroom, and I think the latest update is last I checked, there was a federal judge that had put a stop on the building of that.
But I guess I haven't gotten a briefing since Saturday to see where that's at.
The president makes a good point.
He wants to convene people.
We want to be together.
I've been told by other members of Congress that it's not usual for a president to invite members of Congress over as much as he does.
I mean, I've heard that prior presidents, it was rare to get the invite.
President Trump likes to be surrounded by members of Congress, likes to be surrounded by people.
Do you worry about the private funding of that ballroom?
Do you worry that some of that money might come with strings attached or expectations?
Well, first of all, do you think the Democrats would ever authorize the building of a ballroom?
And second of all, there's precedent for this, like the inaugural balls.
All of that is privately funded.
So in a perfect world, it would have gone through Congress.
It would have gone through that way.
But I think there's more to this than even meets the eye.
Let's talk to Peter, who's calling from Gardner, Massachusetts, Independent.
Hi, Peter.
Good morning.
Thanks for taking my call.
Congressman, when you said that we don't know who is the one in charge, I had to pay close attention.
Were you talking about Iran or were you talking about the United States?
Because coming out of our government, we sent a real estate guy who represents Israel and another guy who's got no experience in negotiation over to negotiate an end to this war along with Vice President Vance.
How do they know who's making the decisions?
Trump goes back and forth all the time on all kinds of subjects and it just is not consistent.
So I think the whole world is wondering about the United States.
Who is in charge?
I don't think there's any question.
President Trump is in charge.
He's demonstrated that over his first and now his second term.
I think it's a real question about who's in charge in a run.
DHS Department of Homeland Security still is not funded.
Can you give us an update on where that stands?
So it's a two-step process.
And by the way, this is a terrible way to do things.
If we could get to 60 votes in the Senate, we could avoid setting a precedent here.
But we're using the reconciliation process to fund core services in government, which is a terrible precedent.
It's bad for appropriators.
It's bad for Congress.
It's a terrible precedent.
And we're going to vote on the resolution, then maybe next week or a week after, vote on the next step.
But I wish we weren't doing any of this this way.
This is a bad way to do business.
So what's going to happen this week on that?
Because they're being paid.
The employees of DHS are being paid by executive order, and that funding apparently runs out very soon.
I saw the president put out a truth social yesterday that said this needs to get on his desk by June 1.
I read that to believe that he can.
That's still more than a month away.
Yeah.
Is that going to take you that long to get?
I don't think so.
I don't think so.
I think we'll pass a resolution this week.
And, you know, second week in May, we could be passing the second step.
But wouldn't it be better in the Senate if we could just get to 60 votes and finish this out?
And it would be better in the House if you guys could, you know, agree.
And, you know, the Senate passed something.
The House can pass it.
We would have been done.
But look at what we have accomplished.
For the first time since, what, 2017, 11 of the 12 major appropriations bills were passed on a bipartisan basis in this environment.
Like we've done something without using a continuing resolution that we've got no credit for.
And those 11 bills got 60 votes in the Senate.
They got Democrat votes in the House.
Like, yes, this DHS thing is not good, and I understand why we're here, but you've got to look at the situation.
Tom Holman, Mark Wayne Mullen, much different than Christy Noam, much different situation.
And if 60 votes is what it takes in the Senate, come work with us so that we can.
So you don't think that ICE needs any reforms put into law?
I do think that it's going to happen naturally because we've got a new secretary.
I think Tom Holman going to Minneapolis, working with the mayor, working with the governor, working with the police, that made an immediate difference, a huge immediate difference.
Nancy is in Austin, Texas, Republican.
Hi, Nancy.
Hi.
Well, here's something I want to know.
Since you brought up illegal immigration, the man, I listened to a space last night on X. What's from the man that got moved out of that position that we used to head up the Border Patrol?
We have like, according to him, we have like 100 million illegal aliens in this country.
We need to do something stronger than just go get the bad ones.
We have wholesale being invaded.
I don't like to switch to let's not get rid of a bunch of illegal aliens.
Let's just go get the quote-unquote bad ones.
We have a big problem here.
We need to address it before it gets worse, sir.
I am a conservative.
I'm 69 years old, and I've been a Republican all my life.
So I kind of remember what a real conservative used to be, where we used to care about fiscal responsibility, and we're not anymore.
You guys have bankrupted our country.
We cared about things like how can you, we used to know that government should not allow to be done, do anything that people can't, that citizens can't.
Why are you insider trading?
Why do we not have, why is there not a law that representatives cannot do insider trading?
This is ridiculous.
A lot of you ought to be thrown in jail.
All right, Nancy.
A couple things there.
I do support the ban on stock trading.
I don't own any stocks, but I understand the sentiment of the American people, and if I get the chance to vote on it, I will do that.
It's hard for me to say that Donald Trump isn't doing enough on immigration, illegal immigration.
He has a lot of credibility with the American people on that topic, and he has moved the ball forward more than any other president in the modern era.
I think that the approach that he's taking and his agencies are taking are making a difference.
Crime is down in a lot of communities across America.
In my hometown, like when President Biden was in office, our local police stopped a guy with a bunch of marijuana, and he'd been stopped, or he'd come over the border like more than 20 times in the course of 18 months.
And that has come to an end.
Regarding a stock trading ban for Congress, would you extend that to senior administration officials and Supreme Court justices?
I'd be very open to that.
Yeah.
I think when you're at this level of government, you have to be very transparent.
And, you know, I don't know where the insider trading information comes from because I don't ever hear it, but I don't have any stocks, so it's okay.
Edward, a Democrat in Toms River, New Jersey, good morning.
Good morning, Mimi.
Good morning to the congressman as well.
Good morning.
Go ahead, Edward.
My concern of deep nature is the fact that after this unfortunate tragedy on Saturday, I think it would have been appropriate to come to the public, the United States people, and say, I am glad that everyone's alive and we had no tragedies.
We didn't lose anyone in President Trump's cabinet.
And it seemed very poor timing to come out into the press room about 45 minutes to an hour after it and say, this is the reason I need a ballroom.
Okay, it seemed like the whole timing of saying that to the public and this whole project started without congressional approval as it is.
So my question is, don't you think that the president should have come to Congress before demolishing this structure?
What do you think?
You know, I haven't been targeted by an assassin three times.
The president, President Trump has.
He has made the case for his ballroom.
He has undertaken steps to get it done.
It's in the courts now.
I do believe that what happened on Saturday makes the case for a good ballroom.
But aside from that, we have to be able to assemble.
We have to be able to be together.
We have to have Democrats, Republicans, administration officials, judges, whoever in the same room because we're all Americans.
There's Republicans and Democrats, there's Independents, but we have to be able to be in the same room.
Jackie in New York, Independent Line.
Hi, Jackie.
Hi, good morning.
Thanks for taking my call.
Good morning, Congressman.
My comment, really, I really don't have a question, but my immediate thought, and I appreciated your reflection on the events happening on Saturday.
But similar to what the caller was saying before me, is my thought immediately went to school children.
Schoolchildren that are sitting ducks in their classroom when they I have two school-aged children and they have regular drills, active shooter drills, and the terror that everyone felt in that ballroom.
And for everyone to then immediately pivot to having a designated space where they can entertain instead of the fact that we regularly do this to our children in their schools, I just don't know how the congressman can reflect on this and go and pivot to an entertaining space.
It's ghoulish.
It's like, I can't believe we're living this way in this country.
And that's all I have to say.
Thank you.
Well, to be fair, the ballroom conversation was the question that I was asked.
But yeah, I mean, I did think about that on Saturday.
I thought, you know, our kids are going through active shooter drills.
And that's not something I ever encountered when I was in K-12.
And, you know, I think there's a bigger issue in this country with mental health.
Mental Health and Military00:04:51
We need state psychiatric hospitals.
Again, we got away from that.
We have limitations on the number of inpatient lock-secure beds you can have.
And you've seen a rise in violence from people that are mentally ill.
I'm not saying it would have stopped on Saturday, but we have to find the right balance about how we deal with the mentally ill population.
And a school shooting innocent children, that is horrific.
And we need to do everything in our power to make sure our schools are secure.
We have more resources going to school resource officers.
We have fortified a lot of our schools.
There's training.
There's a lot better security than there was 10 years ago.
But we can't do enough to protect our young people.
Are there any gun control laws that you would support?
I'm a firm believer in the Second Amendment.
Listen, the bad guys already have guns.
Those that have guns that are lawful, that's a right that they have under the Second Amendment.
I think the issue is more how are we dealing with the mentally ill in our society.
Let's talk to John in Oklahoma.
Republican, you're on the air, John.
Yes, I'm a non-Trumper Republican, and when I hear people say there's 100 million illegal aliens, most of the aliens aren't illegal.
They don't do illegal things.
And shame on Trump and the Republican for taking advantage of stupid people that would believe one of every four American is a illegal alien.
It's just ridiculous the stuff they proffer for information.
That's it.
That's my short comment.
I don't believe there's 100 million illegal immigrants in this country.
I want to ask you about the nomination of Kevin Warsh for Fed chair.
Are you in support of his nomination?
And do you believe that he has exhibited enough independence from President Trump to be effective at his position?
You know, I'm on the Financial Services Committee in the House of Representatives.
I think he was a good pick.
I was happy to see the criminal probe into Jerome Powell was ended.
I think that ought to break the log jam over in the Senate.
Listen, presidents have the ability to appoint, and I think that this gentleman will do a good job.
Ultimately, you know, there's more than one person at the Fed that has to make those decisions.
I strongly, strongly, strongly support an independent Federal Reserve.
It's one of the, it's part of the magic recipe that makes our financial system so unique, robust, and successful.
And we got this from a comment on X from Wouldn't You Want to Know, who says, when does the House plan on reclaiming its war powers from the executive?
Or does this representative support ceding more and more of his branch's power?
Well, look back 20 years.
Look at what President Obama did in Libya.
I mean, there are numerous examples of presidents exercising military force, responding to different countries around the globe.
We have to support the president in what he's done.
And ultimately, there's going to be a conversation about a supplemental that's going to be necessary, even if it is to resupply our munitions after what we've already gone through.
And there's a clock running on the use of military force.
So those are things that will get dealt with by Congress.
We have not ceded any of our authority.
Are you in power of that supplemental once it comes through?
I want to see what it's for.
I want to see how much it is.
And my sense is that most of that money is going to be needed just to resupply the armed forces so that we can remain vigilant against other threats.
All right, Representative Mike Flood, Republican of Nebraska.
Thanks so much for joining us.
Thanks for having me.
After the break, a conversation with retired Major General Randy Manner on the latest in the conflict with Iran and the fallout from some of the high-profile firings at the Pentagon recently by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseph.
We'll be right back.
In a divided media world, one place brings Americans together.
According to a new MAGA research report, nearly 90 million Americans turn to C-SPAN, and they're almost perfectly balanced.
28% conservative, 27% liberal or progressive, 41% moderate.
Republicans watching Democrats, Democrats watching Republicans, moderates watching all sides.
Because C-SPAN viewers want the facts straight from the source.
No commentary, no agenda, just democracy.
Unfiltered.
Every day on the C-SPAN networks.
Best ideas and best practices can be found anywhere.
But we have to listen so we can govern better.
C-SPAN Audience Balance00:02:18
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 Coons 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.
Liz did agree to the civility, all right?
He owes my son $10 from a bet.
He has never paid 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.
On this episode of Book Notes Plus with our host, Brian Lamb.
Sir Anthony Bieber, an historian based in London, has authored 13 books which have sold at least 8.5 million copies and been translated into 35 different languages.
In his latest book, he focuses on Ras Putin and the downfall of the Romanovs.
The country is Russia, and the timeframe is the early 1900s.
Sir Anthony Bieber on his official website sums up his findings this way.
Gregory Ras Putin, a barely literate peasant from Siberia, is one of the most enigmatic and influential figures in modern history.
Anthony Bieber points out, quote, in a bizarre reverse of the great man theory of history, he had no official position and no mass following, unquote.
His book details Ras Putin's relationship with the Tsar and Tsarina of Russia before their downfall.
A new interview with author Anthony Bieber about his book, Ras Putin and the Downfall of the Romanovs.
BookNotes Plus with our host Brian Lamb is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
Washington Journal continues.
Welcome back to Washington Journal.
Joining us now is retired U.S. Army Major General Randy Manner.
General, welcome to the program.
Thank you for having me.
Iran War Status Update00:04:46
Can you tell us what your take is on the current status of the Iran war?
I'm very pleased that Iran has offered at least one way forward to be able to cease hostilities and to reopen the strait.
I'm not saying it's the best deal.
I don't know all the details of it, but at least it is some kind of positive overture, some kind of positive movement.
I think we are truly stuck in a stalemate with no clear, since there were no clear objectives to begin with, these are unintended consequences we are dealing with, which are having a huge negative impact on the United States economy and, of course, the world.
Well, let's take a look at what White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt said about that Iranian proposal and President Trump's reaction to it, and then I'll get your comments.
Well, only because it's been reported, I will confirm the president has met with his national security team this morning.
The meeting may be ongoing, maybe not.
I don't want to speak affirmatively because I was prepping to come out here, but the proposal was being discussed.
I don't want to get ahead of the president or his national security team.
What I will reiterate is that the president's red lines with respect to Iran have been made very, very clear, not just to the American public, but also to them as well.
I wouldn't say they're considering it.
I would just say that there was a discussion this morning that I don't want to get ahead of, and you'll hear directly from the president, I'm sure, on this topic very soon.
And President Trump has rejected the offer to postpone talks on the nuclear program in exchange for opening the Strait of Hormuz.
Where do we go from here?
Again, I think it's one of those deals where big achievements are not going to be done overnight.
I feel strongly this administration has a very, because of their lack of experience and competence, they expect things to be done instantly.
It took 18 months to negotiate the previous treaty.
It's one of those things where we should try to look at small gains on both sides that show trust to each other and then take on the very difficult tasks.
Obviously, the Iranians should never, ever have a nuclear weapon.
That's been every administration's perspective from literally for years.
That's mine as well.
I think beyond that, we need to start with small things, small steps, work on them toward the hard things.
Were you in favor of the original deal with Iran, the JCPOA?
Did you think that that was a good deal?
I thought that was a very good deal, given that the deals before that were not verifiable.
And it really broke my heart when I saw that this president threw it out, in my opinion, because it did not have his name on it.
And quite frankly, we were now, we allowed the Iranians to go completely crazy with their uranium enrichment program, and we had no way to verify where they were.
But General, like the representative that was just on, a Republican, said that he's completely against writing a check to Iran.
And critics of the JCPOA will say that's exactly what happened.
They used that money to support proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah.
I think there are two sides to every single story.
I am not a Republican.
I am not a Democrat.
I am a registered independent.
I have voted for both sides of the aisles throughout my military and civilian careers.
This is something where what is the best deal for both sides, where usually the best deal is where it's not a great deal for either side, but it's an acceptable deal.
It is absolutely the case that Iran has funded through their oil money and other means, they have funded their proxies.
That's a fact.
On the other side of the coin, Israel has been doing substantial efforts on their own.
We have been assisting them.
And of course, this most recent situation where the Israeli prime minister finally talked a president into using huge amounts of U.S. munitions, U.S. taxpayer dollars, and most importantly, U.S. lives to diminish the Iranian offensive capability finally did happen.
So why is it, why do you think this war is not over yet, given the enormous advantage, military advantage of the United States and Israel?
The Iranians can just wait this out.
They can just continue to wait it out.
Remember that the Iranian regime does not really care about their people.
So the pain and agony that has been happening to their people, that's not necessarily number one on their list.
Because of that, the Iranian regime, which is very deep, the idea of decapitating the regime and we have a new regime, that's a fool's dream.
Iranian Regime Agony00:15:20
There is no such thing.
Just like in the United States or any nation, there is layer upon layer upon layer of leaders.
And they just rise up to the new position and they'll keep on going.
So that's the situation as I see it.
It will continue until there is some feeling of this president that he has won, despite the fact that he's, I think he said, we have won, I don't know, 30 to 50 times in the past six weeks.
If you'd like to join our conversation with retired Major General Randy Manner and ask about the conflict in Iran, you can start calling in now.
Republicans, call us on 202-748-8001.
Democrats, 202-748-8000.
And Independents, 202-748-8002.
I want to ask you about General Randy George, four-star Army Chief of Staff.
He's the highest, he was the highest ranked military officer in the Army.
He was forced out earlier this month.
What was your reaction to that and what impact do you think that could have?
I need to be perfectly clear with everybody here.
The Secretary of Defense is a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States.
He has eliminated himself more military leaders than we have ever lost in war since World War II.
He has fired them not for lack of competence, not for the idea that they did something that was chargeable under UCMJ.
He fired them because they apparently have disagreed with him.
He's also expended one-third to one-half of our most important munitions, which will take between two to five years to replace.
He has actually divided our military by increasing mistrust among our military into which are the political loyalists to the president and which are not.
And of course, he has raised the idea of the neo-Christian nationalist religion within the Pentagon and around the armed forces, which is very disturbing.
So again, this is something that is not in keeping with our military tradition of separating the church and state.
It is not the idea that the military is politically independent.
He is making the military, he's trying to make it a completely politically loyal organization, the same way that other, well, like Stalin and Hitler have done over the time.
And of course, Putin is doing today.
I mean, calling the Defense Secretary a clear and present danger to the United States is quite the statement, General Manner.
Can you give us an explanation as to how Secretary Hagshess's actions are dangerous to the United States?
Well, I just recounted all of them.
The idea that, number one, he is he himself.
Now, he fortunately didn't take them out and have them shot, but he eliminated and eliminates at least 15 general and admirals, generals and admirals over the past year.
So, I mean, does that leave us vulnerable to attack by our enemies?
How?
You don't go out and hire a general or an admiral like you do in the civilian world for a new CEO.
You have to grow them over 20 to 30 years of experience.
The idea that the Secretary of Defense with the president chose a retired three-star over 100 four-star generals and admirals that have considerably more experience.
We don't have A players in our military in many cases.
We have B and C players, and that's very dangerous for our national security.
You've said publicly that there's a, quote, quiet resistance within CENTCOM to push back on some orders.
Can you explain what you meant by that and what impact that that would have?
What I mean by that is, and this is secondhand, and I want to make sure I've always said that, there are people that are trying to ensure that targets that are identified are what we're going to call legitimate military targets.
They may not be valuable targets, but they are legitimate military targets and they are not targeting civilian power plants or civilian bridges and so on.
If you recall, the president himself has said we will destroy all the bridges and all the power plants and all the desalination plants.
Well, those are the words of a potential war criminal.
They're not right.
So what I mean by the words that there is a quiet resistance, they're all following legal orders.
But if you say we have target A, B, and C, well, then we're going to make sure that we offer up target A and B for legitimate military targets.
So that's what I mean.
Right.
We'll bring in our callers.
Brenda is on the line for Democrats in St. Louis.
Good morning, Brenda.
Good morning.
Thanks for taking my call.
You know, I just don't understand the negotiations.
I always thought when they were nearing the end that then you renegotiate to try to get a better deal.
You don't take everything and just throw it away and think it's just going to ride on your name.
Then we go around, we fire everyone.
We get Trump that don't know what he's doing.
Then we get a talk host, talk host personality that don't know what he's doing.
We're just in a hell basket here dealing with Donald Trump and this whole negotiation things, dealing with all these people don't have no idea of what they're doing.
I mean everyone in this administration.
Now I know what DEI looks like.
Let's hire people that I know whether they don't know what they're doing or not.
I don't remember all this confusion going on before him.
Have a blessed day and thank you.
And Major General, I'll just add to that the firing of the Navy Secretary, John Phelan, and your reaction to that as well.
Again, we're talking about firing senior military and civilian leaders during wartime.
This is very, very, very unusual.
There's only been one by President Truman and one by President Obama that have occurred in this manner.
And that's because those two leaders, one spoke up personally against the president and the president's policies, meaning to the press, and the other person allowed people on his staff to be able to speak disparagingly of the president with, of course, reporters present.
So those are the only two cases that I'm aware of.
Here we have a secretary who is firing over a dozen senior leaders during wartime.
This is unprecedented, and it's a very dangerous situation to do during wartime.
David, Independent Line in Florida, you're on with retired Major General Manner.
General, good morning, sir, and thanks for taking my call and thanks for your many years of service.
I know you've done a great job.
One topic that I would like for you to address, why is it that we talk about Iran not having a nuclear weapon, but we never address the nuclear weapons that Israel have.
He's your reply offline.
Go ahead, General.
Okay, so first of all, Israel has allegedly had nuclear weapons for a long, long time, decades apparently.
And so far, of course, the Israelis have never threatened the use of one.
Also, I want to be clear to you and to everyone listening that I fully support Israel's right to exist.
I fully support it.
If we go back in history, and of course, it's all about how long do you go back?
You go back 100 years, you go back 1,000 or 2,000 years.
They have a right to exist.
And I think that is their deterrent that if they were ever to feel that they were under threat of annihilation, they would say, no, no, no, no, don't do it.
It's the same thing with the United States and Russia.
We have mutually assured destruction.
If they attack us, they know we're going to attack them.
No one wins.
No one lives.
And therefore, we don't do it.
And that's what's a very, very important part of having a nuclear weapon.
With Iran, because they have used proxies to attack many of the other countries in the area and around the world, they're not to be trusted.
And General, you have a background at the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.
Given that background, how do you assess Iran's current nuclear capabilities?
You know, we have heard before this war started that they are two weeks away from a bomb, that they're two months away from a bomb.
Is there any way of knowing?
There are ways to knowing because they have to have enriched uranium in order to do this.
Over 90, I think 98%, 96%.
So it is now, please understand, I do not have access to classified data, nor would I be allowed to share it, of course.
So it is my professional opinion, based on reading unclassified sources, they are probably still years away from developing a nuclear weapon.
Could they do it?
I believe they have the scientists and the capability.
The president himself said 10 months ago that we destroyed their capability to do nuclear weapons.
However, I don't believe that.
And then, of course, he said it again.
I'm not really clear what to believe in the administration's claims that they've destroyed the capabilities, their capabilities to enrich uranium or to develop a nuclear weapon.
But I think we're talking years away.
Stephen, Dayton, Ohio, Independent Line.
Good morning.
Hi.
Well, I'm just calling.
The whole thing's frustrating to watch.
But it appears to me that when Trump began to negotiate with the current regime, he surrendered.
They've become bolder and bolder in negotiations.
I want to hear what God had to comment about that.
It's clear that they don't feel threatened by the United States any longer.
If we don't take it over militarily by force, use ground troops, allow for a free, uncompromised election, and arrest the coal regime and the army officials who are associated with it so they don't attack the population after we leave.
Once they get new people in power, it makes sense.
But as long as we negotiate with the same regime, we're going to have the same result.
And eventually they will have some kind of a threat, whether it's a dirty bomb or a terrorist attack.
So I wanted to see what he had to say about that and us negotiating with the current regime.
General.
I think that it's so very, very important that two parties come together and negotiate with verifiable means.
And I say verifiable means.
So before Trump got rid of the treaty with the Russians, for example, I was outside of Moscow at a nuclear missile base as part of an inspection team on the ground.
We were allowed to go anywhere we wanted under the treaty.
And the Russians, we would host them to come and visit our facilities as well and to fly over the United States in the same way that we were allowed to fly over Russia.
This is something where it was verifiable.
It was completely open door.
We could go where we want with them as hosts, and they would do the same with us.
We need to have something that is verifiable.
I need to say that over and over again.
I am not trying to write any blank check for anybody because I don't trust them either.
Given that, I want to make sure you understand the size of Iraq compared to Iran.
We had a quarter million military of all many services in many countries to be able to do what we did in Iraq.
It would require perhaps half a million, which guess what?
We don't have because it takes one-third of our country, of our military to fight, one-third to be ready, and one-third that returns from the fight.
We have approximately a million men and women in uniform.
The most we could ever put on the ground anywhere, including the United States, is about 350,000 max.
So I just need to make sure to say the way forward is negotiation with complete, open, and verifiable means to say that we each are doing what we say we're going to do.
Now, about the enriched uranium, it's said to be about 60% enriched uranium, about a thousand pounds of it.
How do we get that out of the country if that is not part of the negotiation, if the Iranians refuse to let that go?
There's a lot of questions about where is that?
Meaning, has that been stored somewhere before all the strikes that occurred 10 months ago, or is it buried literally within millions of pounds of rubble?
That's going to be a very important question.
And again, this has to be something that negotiated and verified.
It will be impossible for the United States to go in there with force to find it and get it because we would be under constant attack.
Remember, the reason why the strait cannot be opened at all is because the Iranians can fire missiles or drones from anywhere in Iran to hit a ship.
You don't have to just sit on the mountain ranges on the edges of the strait and have a direct fire weapon.
You can fire from anywhere.
The same thing would happen if the United States, quote unquote, secured a particular area of Iran and used heavy machinery to start digging it or to find it.
This has to be negotiated with complete, open, verifiable inspections.
Jack in North Dakota, Independent Line, you're on with retired Major General Manner.
Go ahead, Jack.
Thank you, sir, for speaking out.
I agree with you 100%.
You've answered a lot of my questions this morning.
My main concern was how we get out of this mess.
We Trump, the Trump administration, got us on to.
Thank you again.
Well, thank you for your kind words.
The number one thing that everyone in this country can do, whether you are Republican, Democrat, or Independent, is to vote and to support the causes you believe in.
And it's also very important.
There is a line.
You can just Google to get the number.
And you can call the Senate operator and you can, well, Senate and the House operator.
And you can ask to speak whether you have a Republican or a Democratic representative or senator.
You can call them and express your support or lack of support or your ask of your representative or senator.
But if you don't call them, they will not hear your voice.
And then lastly, I'd like to recommend that everyone around the country, everyone who's listening, take care of your families, take care of your community, take care of your church, take care of your neighbors, because that's where it all starts.
Speak up, be kind, treat others with dignity and respect as you would like to be treated yourself.
Hi, General.
I want to ask you about the reports that Russia's Vladimir Putin met with Iran or some Iranian officials.
Do you know about that?
What can you tell us about the significance of that?
So I only can verify what I have read myself.
Russia Iran Intelligence Support00:02:40
It does not surprise me whatsoever.
The Russians, and we know the Chinese, do support the Iranians with intelligence and potentially, by the way, well, the Russians already support the Iranians with various weaponry.
The Chinese, although they are denying it, there is a possibility that they could offer them defensive weapons.
We're talking about anti-aircraft type of missiles and so on.
So I think it's something where the Iranians, just like us, the United States, they absolutely have the right to ally themselves with whomever they like.
And that is their call.
We can use economic, it's important also, all the viewers have to understand the three aspects of national power, diplomatic, economic, and military.
Diplomatic, negotiating.
Economic, it's the power that we can persuade people to do through economics.
And military is, of course, the power of last resort whenever we're trying to truly defend the United States.
Lastly, General, do you think that this ceasefire is going to hold?
Do you think that there will be a resumption of military action?
What are your thoughts on what's coming next?
There was some very disturbing news or an announcement by the State Department earlier this, I'm sorry, last week that said all Americans should leave the Middle East immediately.
There has been partial airspace reopened and so on.
That was very unusual.
It made me think, okay, that's, they didn't do it the first time, of course, because I was actually stuck in the Middle East transiting for business and just happened to go through there and got grounded by the incoming missiles.
In this particular case, I think we're talking great uncertainty.
It's all truly up to the president.
How does this president feel?
Does he feel that he is on top of things and so on?
Then the peace will continue.
I'm sorry, the ceasefire will continue.
The problem is the economic stranglehold that is on the world right now is causing tremendous havoc.
And the only people that benefit are either the oil companies or the very rich.
And it's very sad.
All right.
Well, we will certainly continue to watch that and bring you whatever developments happen on this show.
But Randy Manner, retired Major General of the U.S. Army, also former Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau, I want to thank you so much for your time this morning.
Thank you so much.
And the House is about to gavel in, so we will take you there.
But before I do that, just want to make sure you know that King Charles and Queen Camille