♪ host: good morning, it is saturday, april 27, 2024. campus protests are spreading across the country prompting crackdowns by campus officials and in some cases the police. and the continuation of the donald trump hush money trial in new york and here in washington oral arguments before the supreme court on just how far presidential immunity should go. we are looking for your top new

story of the week. the number four republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents can call in at (202) 748-8002. if you would like to text us, that number is (202) 748-8003. please be sure to include your name and where you are writing in from. you can reach us on social media at facebook.com/c-span and on x @cspanwj. some top stories we have been following, of course the college campus protests as we mentioned, and the supreme court immunity case. we have economic news with gdp slowing to 1.6% in the first quarter. the trump hush money trial entering week 2 as well as a gag order debate in that case as well. also, president biden signed a foreign aid package.

the package of aid to ukraine and israel and taiwan. that piece of legislation also had a provision that could potentially ban the social media video-sharing apps tiktok. here's president biden speaking at the white house on wednesday after signing the $95 billion package of aid. [video clip] pres. biden: it is a good day for america, for europe, for world. this is consequential. i signed into law the national security package that was passed by the house of representatives this weekend and the senate yesterday. it will make america safer. it will make the world safer. it continues america's leadership in the world and everyone knows it. it gives vital support to america's partners so they can defend themselves against threats to their sovereignty. and the lives and freedom of their citizens. it is an investment in our own security, because when our

allies are stronger -- and i want to make this point again and again -- when our allies are stronger we are stronger. i'm grateful for all of those in congress who voted for this bill. it is a path to my desk that was a difficult path. it should have been easier and gotten there sooner, but in the end we did what america always does. we rose to the moment, we came together, we got it done. host: on aid to ukraine, the developments in that ongoing conflict as well. here is a story in "the associated press" that russia renews attacks on the ukrainian energy sector as kyiv launches drones at southern russia. russia launched a barrage of missiles against ukraine overnight and attacks appeared to target the country's energy infrastructure. russia says that its air system intercepted 60 ukrainian drones over the southern region.

the ukrainian air force says saturday russia launched 34 missiles against ukraine overnight, of which 21 had been shot down by ukrainian air defenses. a bit more news on those campus protests that we were talking about at the top of the show. it is on the front page of "the washington post" along with photos about how these protests started at columbia university in new york. at columbia, the seeds of a revolt. police raided a protester encampment at columbia last week. the students at yale were tracking every minute of the chaos that followed with smart phones on social media. students at the new york city ivy league school, if they were going to risk arrest, they would too. by the next morning yale demonstrators pitched their own tents. on a zoom call students around the country were strategizing on how they could replicate columbia's protest.

we talked about what it was like to recruit people, to join, what it meant to stand in solidarity together, and what it would look like if these camps started popping up everywhere. representative mike johnson, the speaker of the house, went to columbia university and spoke to the students. here is a portion of his remarks on wednesday. [video clip] rep. johnson: i'm here to proclaim to all of those who gnash their teeth and demand to wipe the state of israel off the map and attack our innocent jewish students, this simple truth. neither israel nor the jewish students on this campus will ever stand alone. today, hamas issued an endorsement statement of the protesters on this camp is calling them the future leaders of america. it is detestable. this has to be said because the cherished traditions of this university are being overtaken by radical and extreme ideology. it places a target on the backs

of jewish students in the united states and on this campus. a growing number of students have chanted in support of terrorists. they have chased down jewish students. they have mocked them, reviled them, shouted racial epitaphs. they have screamed at those who bear the star of david. [crowd chanting "we can't hear you"] rep. johnson: enjoy your free speech. they tell students who wear the star of david to leave the country. some professors and faculty have joined the mob. things have gotten so out of control that the school canceled in person classes. they have come up with a hybrid model where they will discriminate against jewish students. they are not allowed to come to class for fear of their lives and it is detestable. columbia has allowed these lawless agitators and lawlessness to take over. the virus of anti-semitism has spread across other campuses. by some counts as many as 200 universities have a similar form

of protest right now. host: it was on wednesday that the house press secretary was asked about events at columbia and other protests. here is a portion of her remarks. [video clip] >> columbia is a private institution and we have been consistent about not commenting on personnel matters. that is something for the board of columbia university to speak to you and the president to make that decision. i will not comment on that. that is the speaker's privilege to speak for himself and what he sees. so, look, i would say more broadly, and i said this moments ago, this is a deeply painful, painful moment for many communities and we understand that, but the president believes that free speech, debate, and nondiscrimination on college campuses are important, important american values. so, he will always be, we will always be very clear about that here.

but protests must be peaceful. students must be safe. when we see violent rhetoric we have to call that out. when we see physical intimidation and grotesque anti-semitic remarks we have to speak that out. you saw that from the president's statement on passover. he talked about action, taking action, and making sure we are calling that out. we will continue to do that forcefully, condemn anti-semitism from this administration. we are implementing, as you know, the first ever national strategic effort to counter anti-semitism, because there should be no place in this country when it relates to that type of hate. host: once again, our phone lines for your top stories of the week, republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002.

let's start with mike in sun city, california on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. relative to the trump trial, i have to agree with most that it is really a sham. how does your side not control the media if you can get away with such blatant manipulation of the judicial process? you had the third guy in charge, or something like that, coming over from the supply department to help with the prosecution. they can't even effectively find a crime. the statute of limitations has run out. on and on and on. it is political. the judge has given to the biden campaign. his daughter has raised $100 million for the biden campaign. on and on. i am embarrassed for them. it goes to prove that -- my old

political science professor said at ucla, to understand politics you have to understand the elite liberal media serves as the offensive team to the left and democrats serve as the defensive team to the left. here you have case in point. it is really pathetic watch. it makes me proud that i am a republican. host: thank you for your call. danny in yuma, arizona on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm calling from yuma, arizona. for one thing, it took you guys long enough to start covering this terrible anti-semitic things that are going on at columbia, harvard, and other top universities across the country. you know something? two things. one, kimberly, -- i don't know

the percentage, but college students cannot go out and afford these tents that all of a sudden popped up, pun intended. someone is funding all of these educators. i believe it is george soros. college students are not going to go out and do this. not only that, kimberly, what the democrats are doing to donald trump and the american people as a whole is terrible. democrats are telling us, democrats think that we are stupid, that we don't see what is going on, that they know better than us who to vote for. in america, i have the right to vote and to make my voice heard. the democrats are taking that away from us. it's crazy. the only the -- the only

way to get rid of these lunatics is to vote them out. i will not generalize, but a lot of your democratic callers are so misinformed on what is going on at the border. we are being invaded, kimberly. i challenge c-span to come down here with a news crew and set up and do a live shot from down here in yuma, arizona. it is terrible what our hospitals -- host: we will get to a couple more colors. thank you for calling in. bob in new hampshire on the line for independents. caller: yes, good morning, thank you. i kind of agree with the spirit of peacefulness for a college campus. like when we went against apartheid in south africa we

divested. a good place to start is the colleges. i am not saying that that government should pullout with weapons and stuff like that. israel has to defend themselves. that brings me to point number two. the gaza situation. number two is it has to ba.2 state solution. -- be a two -state solution. these student protesters should say that hamas should surrender and xo themselves -- exile themselves. if they don't do it themselves they are prolonging the war and are just as bad as what is happening on the others. that will lead may be to the u.n. coming in and taking over military in the gaza strip, working towards a two state solution. that has to happen. for that to happen, iran has to kick in. these students should be looking at iran saying stop the violence

there. you're not going to have a two state solution if iran is throwing missiles in there through their surrogates. oh, the fifth thing. if they are so worried about war and people being hurt, say something about ukraine. get russia out of their. -- of there. if they are sincere. host: to take your point and give more scope about the conflicts across the country, in "the washington post" it details where the campus protests have led to arrests so far. not just where they are in general. you can obviously see that there have been arrests at columbia university, yale university where 60 were arrested, new york university, california state polytechnic university at humboldt, university of minnesota nine protesters arrested on trespassing charges,

the university of texas at austin, and the university of southern california, ohio university, emerson college, emory university, and the list goes on. indiana university also. let's go to bob in st. paul, minnesota. one place where there were arrests in protests. bobby, what is your top new story of the week? caller: thank you for taking my call, kimberly. it is the protests going on. i am 78 years old. i went to school in the 1960's. i went through the vietnam protests. i am not -- not necessarily in chronological order you had rodney king and the beating that he took from the policeman that were acquitted. then you have those protesters, black lives matter, vietnam, it is a racist country, you can go

on and on of protests for global warming, protests for pro-choice -- excuse me. host: what do you think of all of the protests, bobby? caller: i am getting to my point. what i think, kimberly, is this. maybe i have been living under a rock and i've been listening to all of these protests over the years. i am the son of an immigrant and i look at all of the folks trying to get into this country legally and illegally for a better life, for food, clothing, shelter, medicine, education. and then i hear this, death to america. it was like someone stabbed me right in the chest. my friend said, you are old-fashioned, those are words. i don't think it is. now you look at where the protests are going. it started off with, stop the bombing release the hostages. now, it is death to america,

jews go back to poland, kilda jews -- kill the jews. it seems like it is anti-american. i think the president has to be more vocal about this. the fbi has to come in on this because it is absolutely orchestrated from coast-to-coast. they're talking about funds coming in from different areas, soros and this and that. this is the tip of the iceberg, ok? host: we have james hopkins who posted on facebook, the trump trial in new york city has to be the story of the week because it marks the first time a former u.s. president faces criminal charges in a state court. this sets a significant legal precedent and underscores the principle that no individual, regardless of their position or status, is above the law. where the law ends tyranny begins. bob in mooresville, new york.

good morning, bob. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to speak about the trump trial. i think that it is pretty obvious to the american public what is going on here. they have tried numerous times to indict trump and they just want to keep him off the ballot. i think it is going to backfire against the democrats. we will see in november. thank you. host: next, tampa, florida on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning, kimberly. how are you? host: i am good. thank you. what is your top new story of the week? caller: so many of them. i want to address first of all that we set and we wave our finger at everyone else and we don't even look at the mirror. the ridiculous stuff that we are arguing about these days is always other americans.

we have americans that are hating other americans and we have real problems in this world. we cannot wait to point at the other guy when this is our house. all we do is hate each other and blame the other guy for it. we have all of these protests across the nation, and there are people in those protests paid to make those other people who are there righteously look bad. it is happening everywhere. there are traitors across this nation for cash. we are turning americans against americans, and we cannot help but eat it up and it is disgusting. it is disgusting that we have a president and a courtroom who has broken so many laws. my party even refuses to watch the trial. all they do is say the devil is a good man, and they don't have

a single shred of proof. all they do is say the democrats are bad because our president -- he is not president. he is the ex-president and he broke the law. watch the trials. i am so sick of -- host: i want to talk about the hush money trial in new york. here is coverage in "the washington post." secrets, lies, chaos laid bare in week one of the trump testimony. trump fought mightily before and after elected president to keep secret the embarrassing details of his private life but often failed despite having a fat checkbook and well-connected template editor in his pocket, according to the first week of evidence at his trial. warmer presidents typically spend -- former presidents typically spend their time writing memoirs making speeches . trump is sitting in court

watching someone else try to define his legacy even after he campaigned for a second term in the oval office. over four days of testimony, the former national enquirer executive david pecker told the jury not just how deeply involved trump's team was to use the supermarket tabloids to fuel his 2016 campaign, but how celebrities and politicians generally try to buy, trade, or believe their way out of scandalous stories. the top story for scott rich who posted on facebook, it was just revealed how detached from reality the supreme court has become. several grand juries have found enough evidence to charge him, referring to former president donald trump, with crimes, but the court sounded ready to twist the law again. that is referencing the supreme court oral arguments around trump immunity. here is a portion of trump's attorney delivering opening arguments in the immunity claim

case before the supreme court on thursday. [video clip] >> mr. chief justice, and may it please the court, without immunity from presidential prosecution there can be no presidency as we know it. for 234 years of american history, no president was ever prosecuted for his official acts. the framers of our constitution viewed an energetic executive as essential to securing liberty. if a president can be charged, put on trial, and imprisoned for his most controversial decisions as soon as he leaves office, that looming threat will distort the president's decision making precisely when bold and fearless action is most needed. every current president will face to fecteau blackmail and extortion by his political rivals while he is still in office. the implications of the court's decision here extend far beyond the facts of this case.

could president george w. bush have been sent to prison for obstructing an official proceeding or leather delete -- or allegedly lying to congress to induce war in iraq. could president obama be charged with murder for killing u.s. citizens abroad by drone strike? could president biden some day be charged with unlawfully inducing immigrants to enter the country illegally for his border policy? the answer to all these questions is no. prosecuting the president for his official acts is an innovation with no foothold in history or tradition and incompatible with our constitutional structure. host: here's a portion of the opening argument livered by the counselor to the special counsel in the u.s. government's case against former president's claims of presidential immunity. [video clip] >> mr. chief justice, and may it

please the court, this court has never recognized absolute criminal immunity for any public official. petitioner, however, claims that a former president has permanent criminal immunity for his official acts unless he was first impeached and convicted. his novel theory would immunize presidents for treason, sedition, murder, and here conspiring to use fraud to overturn the results of an election and perpetuate himself in power. such presidential immunity has no foundation in the constitution. the framers knew too well the dangers of a king who could do to wrong. they devised a system to check abuses of power, especially the use of official power for private gain. here, the executive branch is enforcing congressional statute

and seeking accountability for petitioners' alleged misuse of official power to convert democracy. that is a compelling public interest. in response, petitioner raises concerns about potential abuses, but established legal safeguards provide layers of protection with the article three court providing the ultimate check. the existing system is a carefully balanced framework. it protects the president, but not at the high constitutional cost of linkage criminal immunity. that has been the understanding of every president from the framing, watergate, two today and the court should preserve it. host: now, back to your calls looking for your top new story of the week. charles in alexandria, virginia on the line for independents. caller: good morning.

it is very good to see another beautiful woman on c-span at this time, particularly of color. thank you for taking my call. i can -- this trial for immunity like slavery. when the slave master decided that whenever he wanted to come in and take my wife, my daughter, whomever, and take her back to his quarters and do whatever he wanted to and then bring her back to me, the law couldn't do anything to him. why? because he had total immunity. i say the same thing to black women, white women, like men, white men all over the country. is that what you want? for donald trump to have total immunity to do whatever he wants to get your woman, your family members, to do what he wants to

do and then brag about it like he did on hollywood tapes? where are we going? if there has never been a time when no one -- there has ever been a time that anyone is about the law, truly, america, this man is above the law. you have people trying to support him to stay above the law. if donald trump were to apply for any job, salesperson, security, babysitter, anything, with the charges he has against him, would he be hired would be the question. the answer would be no. if it were me, an african-american, doing the things he has been charged, alleged to have done, what i be going through all of this? no. i wouldn't have a chance to have

a gag order because i would be put in jail. host: i know you're talking about the hush money trial, but i wanted to circle back and give our audience more information about the hearing before the supreme court you were talking about at the beginning of your call. in terms of how those arguments turned out, pbs newshour has coverage saying in the trump immunity case, divided supreme court appears open to some protection. the supreme court's conservative majority on thursday appeared open to recognizing some level of immunity from federal prosecutions for the official acts of former presidents as they wait a blockbuster dispute that will be critical to the fate of donald trump's 2020 case in washington, d.c. the court expressed skepticism to the broad argument that he should be immune to conduct that occurred while he was in office. david is in capitol heights, maryland on the line for

democrats. good morning, david. caller: good morning. good morning to c-span and the american people. mr. charles, that is a comment that i was going to make. i will leave it at that. thank you and you have a good day. host: thank you for calling in. next, in dearborn, michigan on the line for independents. what is your top new story? caller: good morning. thank you for allowing me to speak. my name is rochon, i am calling from detroit, dearborn, michigan. i was born in iraq, but i lived 50 years of my age here in the united states. i have been watching the news. i think, unfortunately, the united states government and the media taking side with israel. as a democratic country and as the best country in the world

and the best accomplishment of human being in the history, we should be neutral. like president biden, he went to israel and told that yahoo! -- and told benjamin netanyahu i am a zionist. this country is made of jewish and christian and muslim and more. we should be more neutral. for example, the title of your program, you said countless demonstration about the problem between hamas and israel. it is not between hamas and israel. it is between the arab or muslim and israel. host: the campus protests over gaza? caller: yes. anyway, i think we should be more honest, because nobody talk about the occupied land in

israel. like, for example, the golan heights of syria. the seven villages. in south lebanon. i think that it is better and greater for this great country and for its democracy to be more fair and speak the truth as it is.neither government no one media should take a side. just be neutral. host: ed in clarksburg, west virginia on the line for independents. what is your top story? caller: good morning. there are several i would like to talk about. one of them is, i am tired of hearing people say nobody is above the law. my god. out there running wild like a bunch of i don't know what. wearing masks. that is above the law.

i'm sorry. i'm confused. i am 80 years old and blind. i only know the news as i hear it. this trial for trump is a farce. by what i've been able to pick up, there is no crime. they haven't really charged him with a crime. what is the crime? i am not a fan of mr. -- of the ex-president. i wanted to call to say everyone seems to be above the law. i don't care about demonstrations. you demonstrate, that is their business. host: to answer your questions

specifically, the charge in the hush money case is, this is me reading from "the new york times," mr. trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records in an effort to conceal a payment to adult film actress stormy daniels. if convicted, he could face 40 years in prison. mr. trump has pleaded not guilty and denied that he had sex with mrs. daniels.that is the specific card charge in that case. caller: i am 80 nine years old. when i was growing up it was called black male. if he give her money, i don't know if he did or not, that was black male. -- blackmail. they don't prosecute the one being blackmailed. they prosecute the one black mailing, not the one being blackmailed. host: on the line for

republicans, good morning, james. caller: this might not be the most important, but we have 6500 troops in niger. we have another puppet for the united states is out. russia is now there. we were told in niger from the coup we can have our troops back, but we have to give up the airbase. another $100 million airbase. are they going to ask for our weapons, too? they have no water. no medicine. the defense secretary was grilled on capitol hill with no answers whatsoever. biden was a joke in afghanistan. he will capitulate again and it doesn't make the news. everything this man touches turns sour. thank you for your time and god bless the troops. host: to give folks more

information on that story that you highlighted, here are some reporting from the associated press with the latest headline being, no final decision on withdrawing u.s. troops from niger and chat. -- and chad. there has been no final decision. this is from april 24. there has been no final decision on whether or not all u.s. troops will leave niger and chad, two countries vital to counter extremist organizations. niger's ruling ended in an agreement that allowed troops to operate in the west african country. wednesday night u.s. and nigerian officials would meet on thursday in the capital to initiate discussions in an orderly and responsible withdrawal of u.s. forces are that meeting comes as the two countries have been unable to reach an understanding to continue operations in a manner that addresses the needs and

concerns of each side, the state department spokesman said. next, betty in massachusetts on the line for democrats. what is your top story? caller: i have been watching the hush money trial all week. it shouldn't even be called hush money. it should be called election defrauding. i remember when there was a debate between trump in hillary. trump had all the bill clinton's accusers in the audience at the same time. karen mcdougal, stormy daniels, and the doorman. it wasn't blackmail. but people don't understand is that these people went to other sources to tell their story. "the inquirer" found out about it and it was catch and kill. stormy daniels went to "good

morning america" but the inquirer found out about it and catch and kill the story. they were just trying to tell their stories. the immunity trial too is heartbreaking. to think that our supreme court is in the pocket of our ex-president, they are not going to give him immunity but they will delay the trial until after the election. they are in trump's pocket which breaks my heart. the people out there for trump, he cheated to get into college, he cheated to stay out of the military, he cheated on his three wives, he cheated the people from trump university, he cheated from a children's cancer fund, he and his family are not allowed to be on any charity

because they cheated on a children's cancer fund. he cheated on his three wives. he wanted to have his vice president hung. i don't understand what people see in this man. i can't. it is heartbreaking to me. host: fred in bradshaw, nebraska on the line for republicans. caller: the last caller said the case in new york is election manipulation. how about we arrest the 50 former and current intel agents who said hunter biden's computer was a russian disinformation case? they should be arrested and charged. then about the immunity case in the supreme court right now, old joe biden better hope they give donald trump immunity. if they don't, he should be open for being sued for all of the fentanyl deaths and other people dying because of all of the illegal immigrants coming across the border. i guess if the democrats want to

play the game, the republicans should play the game, too. thank you. goodbye. host: robert in western, massachusetts on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. lord have mercy on all of us. i would like to start out now with the supreme court. if anybody looks up for supreme court justice, he was a kkk member. the only statement hugo black ever made was he said, yes, i once was a kkk member, but now i'm not. they let him go on the supreme court. now, when you talk about the young kids today in the street, this disturbed me to see the young kids.

my father fought in vietnam, to see these young babies, young children living in their mama' s basement. up to the age of 26 years old. you have four kids. i can't understand. host: thanks, robert. getting back to the immunity trial at the supreme court, justice sotomayor raised a hypothetical for trump's attorney on whether or not a president should be allowed to assassinate his political rivals. [video clip] >> council, it can be alleged but has to be proven, it is a concept long viewed as appropriate in law that there are something so fundamentally

evil they have to be protected against. i think, and your answer below i will give you a chance to say if you stay by it. if the president decides his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military, or order someone to assassinate him, is that within his official acts for which he can get immunity? >> it would defend on the hypothetical. it could well be an official act. >> why? he is doing it for personal reasons. he is not doing it like president obama is alleged to have done it to protect the country from a terrorist. he is doing it for personal gain. isn't that the nature of the allegations here? that he is not doing them, doing these acts in furtherance of an

official responsibility. he is doing it for personal gain. >> i agree with the characterization of the indictment and that confirms immunity. the characterization is that there were a series of official acts -- >> immunity says even if you did it for personal gain we won't hold you responsible. what -- how could that be? >> that is an extremely strong doctorate in this court's caselaw law in cases like fitzgerald -- >> back to justice thomas's question, where does that come from? it tells us the founders talked about whether to grant immunity to the president. in fact, they had state constitutions that granted some criminal immunity to governors. yet, they didn't take it up. they passed an impeachment

clause that basically says you cannot remove the president from office except by a trial in the senate, but you can impeach him after. or you can impose criminal liability. we would be creating a situation in which we would be saying, this is what you are asking us to say, which is a president is entitled, not to make a mistake, but more than that. the president is entitled to total personal gain to use the trappings of his office. that is what you are trying to get us to hold. host: some questions of the oral argument in the supreme court this week. let's get back to your calls. scranton, pennsylvania on the line for democrats. good morning, neil.

caller: the top news story unfortunately is trump, but it shouldn't be. if it weren't for the spineless republican senators who failed to impeach him. if they follow their oath of office and thought of their country first, they would have impeached him and he would be gone. not running for office. which he shouldn't be. colorado had it right, 100% right to follow the constitution that he was involved in an insurrection and should not be on the ballot. the supreme idiots that we have now, the supreme court idiots, the supreme trump supporters, you can't do that. the stupid republicans -- host: let's go to barbara in philadelphia, pennsylvania on the line for independents. what is your top new story? caller: good morning.

i want to propose a challenge to every listener out there who is attacking jewish people and these kids on college campus that is supposed to be higher learning, educating the next generation. my challenge is, if you can't get in to call today, keep calling until you get in and answer this question for me. none of us have anything to do with our birth. we were here when we got here because of your parents. if you are jewish, whatever you are, you can't take credit for it. why would you attack someone because of their ethnicity or their race?

i want to hear someone give me a good reason. i am not saying that you shouldn't protest or whatever, but keep your hands off of other people who have nothing to do with their existence. i bet we won't have anyone to call in and answer my question. host: thank you, barbara. gary in connors ville, indiana on the line for independents. caller: good morning, ma'am. first of all, i love the awesome hairstyle you have. you look stunning today. i want to take my hat off to betty from massachusetts. she emphasized the points that i want to make, too. that is a manlike trump, with all of the indictments and things i know he is guilty of, everyone knows he is guilty of it. for this man to be allowed to run for president, for people to say that that is acceptable,

there is a certain word i want to throw out. this might mean something to some of you, it might not. values. values, principal, character. that means nothing to you people? that is why our political system and sense of moral character and the concept of politics in general is all lame. we should be ashamed. this is where the chinese want us to be right now. we are ripe for the picking right now. they are looking at us, laughing at us, saying i can't wait to get them right where we want them. that is where we are heading, ma'am. host: richard in columbus, ohio on the line for republicans. what is your top news story? caller: i think my top story today is definitely around gaza. i want to remind everyone that

there are -- it has been over 200 days, and there are still hostages. i think, i firmly believe in protest. -- sorry, have your voices heard. i have heard people talk. there is definitely a line of crossing between free speech and speech that is not protected. i fully get that, but a reminder that we need to get stronger and remember there are hostages and that is a terrible thing. i heard the commentators say this morning that it is not a question of if but when israel goes in and finishes off the job

in -- in raw for. i wish you would be sooner than later for those hostages. host: this week,'s released video showing one of the hostages, a well-known hostage who is israeli-american. here's the story in the associated press. hamas released a hostage video on wednesday showing a well-known israeli-american man among scores of people abducted by the militants in the attack that it ended the war in gaza. the video was the first sign of life since hamas's october 7 attack on israel and it has ignited new protests in jerusalem calling for the government to do more to secure the captives' release. gold word accused -- goldberg accused israel's government of accusing those held hostage by hamas and said 70 captives have been killed in israel's bombing

campaign. he was clearly speaking under duress and the claim could not be independently verified. it wasn't clear when the video was made. he was at the music festival when the attacks were launched in nearby gaza. he is missing part of his left arm in the video. next we have sam in arlington, virginia on the line for independents. caller: good morning to you.. i am going to respond, if i could, to barbara a few callers before. what she needs to understand is we cannot have judaism and zionists. not all jews are zionists. our president claimed to be a

zionist. he is catholic. back to the demonstration. as we know, the majority of the demonstrators are jewish people. jewish students. jewish voices for peace. they celebrate passover with their brothers, muslim and other religions. the fact of the matter is this. this is a cherished privilege that we have is our first amendment. we see that in the past ran our police savagely killed four students. maybe barbara has to study, read. three of the students -- host: let's hear from paul in

new york on the line for republicans. what is your top new story? caller: i top news story is about the protests on these college campuses. i am all for freedom of speech, all for a good protest. i have marched in many protests in my day. this is the tailwagging the dog once again. these colleges to have to cancel graduation commencement ceremonies for students who have worked really hard to get a eat education, to make something in this world, that is unfair to do to those students. that is ridiculous. i see images you are showing on the screen right now. i don't know what these kids are thinking. that is all they are thinking. get off of these campuses. get yourself an education and educate yourself. remember, hamas threw the first punch.

have a great morning. host: richard in oceanside, california on the line for democrats. caller: hi, it is richard in oceanside. host: hi. caller: my big story, donald trump is the big news of the week in my opinion. his trials are unprecedented. this kind of thing is just not done. i like to refer to this man as the former liar in chief. i have in my hand a book by mcintyre who had interesting stories. he is a research fellow at the center for philosophy and history and science at buffalo university. this is called on this information -- on disinformation. i would recommend that you guys have him on your show, by the

way. it is a great read. it is a short book. 15 bucks. everyone who thinks that mr. trump is a fit resident should read this book. he is the liar in chief. host: james in pennsylvania on our line for independents. what is your top new story? caller: my story of the week is the fact that iran is getting closer to having nuclear weapons , closer to getting a nuclear weapon. i would like to congratulate the democrats on their efforts to subsidize iran getting those weapons. case in point, they are continuing to waive sanctions for sales of electricity of iran to a rock -- iran to iraq.

being able to sell their energy to iraq, they can operate their peakload of energy infrastructure at a much higher capacity. if they have a place to find a home for the energy on thir off-peak loading, when they are not producing, spinning the centrifuges, that is 10 billion more dollars going that the democrats are subsidizing the acquisition of, iran getting nuclear weapons. host: john in costa mesa, california on the line for democrats. what is your top news story, john? caller: thank you for c-span. i am sort of addicted to "washington journal." i did watch the supreme court.

it is amazing how many vehicles that trump has, and our democracy has, for justice, the avenues. it was a serious conversation about whether donald trump should be given complete immunity. i am sorry to see it go back to the courts. it has already been determined by the press that it will go to the lower courts even though we haven't heard it from the justices. yeah, they are tied, biden and trump. trump is in court all the time. how does that happen that he manipulates the media and to be tied with the incumbent president? besides that topic, there was another one on the indo-pacific cooperation of japan, south

korea, and australia in "the new york times" and the positioning of different forces to push back against china for dominating that part of the world. that is really a cooperative effort. it doesn't seem like the cooperative effort on our institutions that we rely on for serious conversations about this. host: i will have to stop you because we have to get to a couple more before we have to end the segment. steve in pennsylvania on the line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to talk about the colleges and what is going on. i blame the professors on this deal because they are trying to change american history. that land over there is the jewish land. we look at it as a western

nation not as a religious war. you have to go back to where it started with abraham. this is going to continue. i listened to a guy yesterday, this guy was in italy when hitler's took over. he sees a comparison between germany and the united states today. most of the young people today, and i see it here, are anti-israel. it is their land. it is not palestinian land. the palestinians never existed. they were a bunch of people when it started out from egypt, lebanon, jordan, and other places. those people did not want those people so they pushed them out. one gentleman was correct. if iran gets -- host: we will get to james

before we have to end, lancaster , texas, on the line for democrats. caller: thank you for taking my call. i enjoyed the program. i think we are missing the boat. the same thing that is happening in israel happened in america. people can get on the phone and talk about hamas, israel, but they forget the history of this country. this country has done the same thing that is happening over there. we have to wake up. the fact that we are ignoring what america was built on is ridiculous. we have a person who will be a president that with his resume doesn't make any sense, but we go along with the program. i appreciate taking my call. god bless america. please. host: thank you, james, and everyone else who called in this hour. we will hear from andrew

seligsohn, the president of public agenda who will be here to discuss free-speech and public safety amid the protests on college campuses over the israel-hamas conflict and the war in gaza. we will have author and journalist ray suarez here to discuss his podcast, "on shifting ground with ray suarez," and his book "we are home: becoming american in the 21st century: an oral history." later on tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern, we will have the white house correspondents dinner. you can watch that here on c-span. it features "saturday night live" weekend up date coanchor colin jost as the featured entertainer. president biden is also expected to make remarks. you can also watch at c-span.org or on the free c-span video now app. at the white house correspondents' dinner in 2005,

it was then first lady laura bush who stole the show. here's a portion of that. [video clip] >> so they asked the old guy -- >> not that old joke. not again. [laughter] [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, i've been attending these dinners for years and just quietly sitting there. [laughter] well, i've got a few things i would like to say.

[laughter] [applause] this is going to be fun, because he really does not have a clue what i am going to say next. [laughter] george always says he is delighted to come to these press dinners. [laughter] baloney. [laughter] he is usually in bed by now. [laughter] i am not kidding. [laughter] i said to him the other day, george, if you really want to end tyranny in the world, you're going to have to stay up later. [laughter] [applause] i am married to the president of the united states, and here's our typical evening. [laughter] 9:00, mr. excitement here is sound asleep. [laughter]

and i am watching "desperate housewives." [laughter] [applause] ♪ >> the house will be in order. >> this year, c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979, we have been your primary source for capitol hill, providing balanced, unfiltered coverage of government, taking to where policy is debated and decided, all with the support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting, powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. we are joined now by andrew seligsohn, president of the group public agenda, here to tell us more about the group's work and talk about these college protests happening all over the country. all come to -- welcome to "washington journal." guest: thank you very much.

nice to be with you. host: can you tell us a bit about public agenda, where you get your funding, and the type of work you do? guest: public agenda is a nonpartisan, nonprofit research to action group. we conduct research intended to be valuable to people will intending to take action to strengthen their communities and our democracy. we believe in a democracy in which all voices are heard and our future is shaped by the values and priorities and goals of all americans, including people whose voices typically are not heard. and we are funded primarily by private foundation grants, foundations that share our goals , and through generous individuals who contribute to our organization. host: public agenda is mission includes, as you said, strengthening democracy. how does this work factor into these campus disputes we are seeing all over the country? guest: i think they raise a

whole range of questions relevant to our work at anyone who cares about the strength of our democracy for it on the one hand, a key element of democracy is that all of us must be open to hearing perspectives that we do not agree with right now, because that helps us decide what we do believe, and we can sort through that ourselves. it is also just the case that we should accept that people have rights to accept views including those we may find horns or objectionable or plain wrong. it is also true that these protests raise questions about the role of our public officials and institutions as well as private institutions in advancing the good of the country. one of the very serious questions raised by all of this is whether it makes sense for any of us when, for example, members of congress start putting direct pressure on leaders of private institutions, a very important private's additions that contribute to research and teaching in the future of our country, and seek

to influence their decisions directly. there is a whole set of questions. we all serve -- also are seeing lots of questions between the real gap of views between young people on many issues -- this is just one of them. the israel-palestine question is one of them. but there is a big cap between younger people and older people on lots of issues, and i thing that is also one of the things playing out. host: let's start tackling those questions you lay out. what is your assessment on this situation in particular in terms of how universities are reacting to these protests on their campus? guest: i think one of the things i think is that these questions are really difficult for administrators, just in practical terms. we have heard from many commentators over recent years very persuasive arguments that colleges and universities have been too restrictive in the area of free speech. they have been too willing to step in and intercede when someone feels harmed by the statements of another.

i think those arguments have been, in many cases, quite right , so i think university administrators have actually learned from that, and they have been seeking to allow free speech to take place on their campuses, because that is really consistent with both our public values and also the purposes of a college or university, to support free expression. at the same time, sometimes the way protests are conducted may interfere with the legitimate operations of the institution, and sometimes, there are people involved in the protests who may threaten other individuals. i think college presidents. have been -- i think college presidents have been trying to sort that out. one thing clear to most of us as most of us recognize we do not want private institutions or just local situations of all kinds, public or private, to be governed by people who are very far from those places, who cannot see what is happening on the ground. i think one of the things we are seeing is many university presidents right now have been

intimidated by members of congress and instead of making what they take to be the best judgments aced on the values of their institutions and the facts on the ground, they are trying hard to avoid being the subject of pressure by politicians in washington or in their state capitals, and they are taking actions that probably do not make sense at the local level, in terms of those values and the purposes of their institutions. i think that is bad for everybody. whatever your views about the content of the protests, i think all of us should be concerned when we see that level of interference with these institutions. our country has thrived on having a system of public and private higher education, where academic freedom, freedom of expression has been respected. these institutions have been engines of innovation. they have powered our economy for a century and more. when we see interference with those institutions, especially

for people who may be pursuing short-term political ends, that raises very serious concerns for anyone who believes in a strong democracy and a free society. host: some pro-palestinian groups have expressed violence intense against israel, and some jewish students and faculty have encountered threatening rhetoric and harassment. how do you balance the need to protect students' free speech while also making sure it does not extend to violence or intimidation? guest: yeah. i should note in talking about this, i am a jew, i'm a son -- the son of a holocaust refugee and the grandson of a holocaust victim, so i am keenly aware of the real danger and the persistent danger presented by antisemitism. anybody's whose physical safety is threatened deserves protection, and anyone being intimidated by words or actions deserved protection. it is also true that, in any

situation like this, balancing those interests against the real interest in free expression for individuals and for our society as a whole, these are challenging decisions. so it is very difficult, from a distance, to evaluate the particular choices within particular institutions when, quite frankly, i lack, and most of us lack, the relevant facts. that is why it is really important these decisions not be made from a distance and not the imposed on institutions by people who really cannot have insight into or clarity about the particulars of what is happening. host: we have special phone lines for this segment if folks want to call in for questions for andrew. if you support the protests, that number is (202) 748-8000. if you oppose the protests, (202) 748-8001. and if you happen to be a current college student or an administrator, and you want to wait in, it special line for you, (202) 748-8002.

we have got one caller already. let's hear from rhonda in freehold, new jersey, who is supporting the protests. go ahead. caller: hi, good morning, america. i would like to say about these protests, i support them, because they are not anti-israel. that is insane. they are anti-genocide of what is going on in the gaza strip, where millions of women and children, who had nothing to do with hamas, are being starved to death. no water -- host: did you have a question for andrew about the free-speech questions around these protests? caller: yes. we deserve free-speech. we have a right to protest against genocide. this is what we went through with african-americans, with the

jim crow era. we are reversing our history -- host: ok. andrew, over the last week, there have been more than 120 arrests as these universities have removed -- have moved to try to prevent these encampments from taking hold, for example, the way they have at columbia university. critics of the protests say these encampments are interfering with the proper functioning of the university. what is your take on that? guest: right, it is certainly plausible in individual cases that, based on where and cabinets are and what needs to happen on a campus, that they may interfere. it has always been the case, under u.s. law, for example, that public authorities and others in authority may restrict speech and expression based on time, place, and manner. in other words, you cannot just say what you want, where you want, anytime you want.

but they can never restrict it based on content. when you see public officials, in a first amendment context, and many universities say they respect the same principles. when you see them interfering with especially based on the content of the expression, that is what really does not fit with our values as americans and with a history of institutions of higher education. i think what people are worried about is that when college and university presidents have to deal with these situations on their own, it is complicated enough. they are trying to balance the interests of allowing the expression but also conducting the operations of the university. when you start to have politicians on the outside telling college presidents what to do, not really based on the facts of the situation on the ground but based on whether or not they approve of or do not approve of the content of the expression, that is the sort of thing that ought to raise alarm bells. nobody elected members of congress to run universities,

whether public or private. it is a different role. so it is appropriate for members of congress to gather information about what is going on on campus is to inform their decision-making, whether there should be general legislation that affects anyone equally, that is an appropriate rule. it is not an appropriate role to make those judgments about public safety versus freaks pression. -- versus free expression. host: let's hear from byron in north carolina, supporting the protests. caller: i support it all the way. i do not understand what the big deal is. they are saying antisemitic. these people are protesting against genocide in palestine. i have not heard anybody say anything about any jewish students, and it seems like they are trying to make this as if they are out there beating up jews. you may have one or two every now and then, but overall, they are talking about the war.

let me tell you this. trump is trying to capitalize on this and make it political. i do not hear any democrats or no one else saying that. when trump said there were very fine people on both sides, they said jews would not place me to they were saying jews by name in charlottesville. nobody said -- c-span did not complain about that. nobody complained about that. that was worse than what these people are doing, it but it was accepted. it is very hypocritical. these kids are only protesting against the war -- host: ok. we want to get some news director from columbia university right now. we have with us isabella ramirez, the editor in chief and president of the columbia spectator, the student newspaper there, who has been actively covering this story as it has been going on and getting quite the bit of national attention. good morning. guest: good morning. host: first, can you give us the latest developments on campus,

what is going on? guest: sure. right now, we are in a process between the negotiations between student organizers and the administration is continuously ongoing. one of our latest updates -- we have been receiving quite a bit more messaging from the office of the president and the president and also through press briefings, so we have been getting more insight into at least some of the progress that has been made. although it has been a bit tightlipped as to what is exactly happening in the negotiations, shafik, alongside a co-statement from the board of trustees, as well as a vote last evening saying that -- essentially promising no more nypd presence or interference on our campus for the time being. they sort of acknowledge -- of course, they did use the nypd to clear the encampment's when first constructed, but they consulted with a series of experts and the community and determined that has not seemed

to be a good path forward. they mentioned explicitly that they were not looking to proceed in a way that would involve another clearing of the encampment that would be through maybe a police force but rather moving forward in good faith negotiation. although there have been many parties at the university discussing what good faith looks like and whether the university is proceeding in that manner. we also had a university senate meeting just yesterday, and that is a body of faculty, students, and administration to talk about the most pressing issues, and they were able to, in a public forum, be able to discuss some of what has been going on in terms of the negotiations with the university and also be a platform for faculty and students the debate and discuss back and forth what has been happening on our campus. host: obviously, you had the very visible clearing by nypd earlier. what is the status of the

encampment and the protest now on campus? guest: the encampment is still there. it is still dozens of tents. i was just there yesterday, dishy reading our newspaper and there as a reporter. in terms of the outside protests, that certainly has calmed down quite a bit. we had a pretty significant protest just recently, but in this case, a united march for israel just happened thursday. but in terms of protest to the outside, we have seen a big dip in that. there used to be daily protests outside of our campus, outside of our gates, and the used to be also -- they used to be also pretty large. we still have nypd barricades and nypd stationed outside of our campus, but those barricades have a lot of caution tape, a lot of police tape, and we have not seen as much outside protest activity. rather right now, it is the mcat

men still there, and more so what they are doing, they are continuing their typical programming, which looks like a lot of things -- certain briefings of their own, announcements, activities, teaching, and other things. in terms of protest activity outside, that has gone down quite a bit. host: we have heard a lot about concerns of anti-semitism and threats to student safety. how valid are those concerns, how present are these issues? guest: they are certainly very present for a segment of our community. we have done a lot of reporting in an attempt to unpack it and delve into that. we did a significant report when one of our campus rabbis had advised a contagion of hundreds of jewish students to essentially stay home, don't come to campus, as a result of the ongoing events. we were able to report on some incidents that happened on and off campus in regards to violent rhetoric and other things that

were said or acted upon regarding jewish and pro-israel students. i think those incidents have been, in some regards, severe and also important to note, but also what we really try to make the differentiation in our reporting is exactly who those actors are, who are we holding accountable, and who are we discussing when regarding these incidents and safety, but also a lot of them have not spurred necessarily from the encampment itself or within the in camera, although some have. it is a very complicated issue in the sense that there are a lot of jewish students also involved in the mcat meant. there is such a diversity of identities represented in both pro-palestinian and pro-israel activism on our campus. what we are really most concerned with is not overgeneralizing when we are reporting on these incidents and when we are reporting on the protests and other things, and

not attempt to save all protesters acted this way, all protesters have some sort of motive that derives from hate. i do not believe it to be the case at all. i do believe there have been one-off incidents. we have been able to report on that very extensively. jewish students have told us, some are feeling unsafe. some are feeling not welcomed. others are feeling they have community in this encampment. both of those things can be true at the same time, as long as we make the important distinction that allows that to make the case. host: so you have commencement scheduled may 15. is that still on, and what else are you looking for as you follow the story of the days ahead? guest: our commencement is still on. there has been no public information or announcement regarding a cancellation. it is, to our knowledge, especially in these campus updates we have been receiving quite regularly from the office

of the president, very much saying let's get to a resolution before commencement. they really want to move forward and that this can be resolved before then. this data our last day of class is this coming monday. then it becomes finals week. that is the biggest thing we are heading into right now. a lot of students will be entering their finals period, of course professors, then we will enter into graduation season. although our commencement is may 15, a lot of events start earlier. there are graduations per school scheduled before and after than. we are looking a lot at that as well as currently that lawn the mcat is occupying is the site of where usually there is construction on that long. usually, we use -- a lot of the exterior campus on campus on the lawns, different fields, to construct bleachers and

different screens so the commencement can be viewed. even if this is resolved by commencement, a lot of the questions is where how much construction has been delayed for the university, what would that look like for the university, what is the timeline, the costs? it is not only commencement itself but the literal construction that goes on behind commencement. typically, in other years i've been on campus, scaffolding on campus has been a lot during this time, but that has been largely postponed. host: you just mentioned it. you are a student, and you mentioned finals is coming up. what has been this story for you, especially as you are headed into your own finals, i imagine? guest: yeah, it has been a huge undertaking for our newsroom, for our staff. it, of course, we have been covering this since october 7. i've been an editor in terms -- in a leadership position since

october 7, but in a lot of regards, everything unfolded, we couldn't have imagined the sheer scale and gravity of this. a lot of these past few days, we have been working 24/7, working through the night. there are updates through the night. there is so much to be constantly following up on. and especially for myself, this has become my main focus and unfortunately my academic have become sidelined. to catch up with this story and lead a staff of people who not only are covering this but also our students as well and need emotional support and also are going into finals. there are so many factors here. so for myself, what really has been motivating me is the sheer importance of the storyline and how much i know people are relying on "spectator" to get the most thorough information

about what is going on on campus, especially at a time when press access to our campus is very limited. some of the people who can come onto our campus are students, people with ids. they have time frames, at 2:00 to 4:00. from 2:00 to 4:00 is when the press can come, and that is not suitable in terms of capturing the entire moment. and we are there from morning, when a lot of people in the encampment wake up to the middle of the night. we have been able to see all parts of it. that is really what has been motivating me. catching up with finals, that is a big question for me to deal with still in terms of seeking likely leniency and ways in which i can receive support for my professors and other peers. but it feels so pressing and needed. post: thank you for the work you are doing. isabella ramirez, the editor and

president of the "potato" newspaper. that is columbiaspectator.com. thank you so much, isabella. now we will rejoin andrew, andrew seligsohn. thank you so much for coming back with us. are you ready to take a couple more questions from our callers? guest: absolutely. host: actually come up before we get to the callers, want to your response from what you heard from isabella about what is going on on campus. guest: the first thing i have to say is how great it would be if every community in america had a journalist like isabella who was covering important stories. it is so valuable to have great student journalism on campuses, and it is just a reminder of how important local journalism in general is. i think what she told us kind of illustrates why it is so important not to try to make some national policy about what

should be happening on these campuses. the situations are quite different in different places. they are very complex. there are certainly individuals expressing anti-semitic views. there are some individuals taking illegitimate, legal action against jewish students and others. that is all true. also, there are many, many thousands of people expressing views in a peaceful and legitimate way, and it is hard to sort through all of that. even if you are right there. it is impossible from a difference. that is why we should not be trying to pressure campuses to do one particular thing in every case. it is also true, as isabella was saying, that columbia wants to hold a commencement ceremony. that requires spaces to be used in particular ways and preparations. when it comes to time, place, manner restrictions, there may be reasons why the campus says we need to change what is happening in a way that is not about shutting down the voices of people because we disagree with them but is about ensuring

the operation of the campus for all students and faculty and others who rely on it, and those are complex and difficult decisions. one of the things it also made me think about is all of this is happening against a broader backdrop of efforts to weaken higher education generally. surgeons in many states on what can be taught and discussed on campus, efforts to paint higher education as not valuable for students when, in fact there is ample evidence it remains, perhaps even more valuable than ever for students entering the employment landscape. i think -- one thing we have learned from conservative thinking over the is is is since people have spent centuries building up, we should be very, very cautious about tearing them down and weakening them. this is part of that. we are seeing chaos sown on campuses across the country in part because of external pressure, and we really ought to

be cautious about that kind of carelessness with these visitations to have available over so long. they can be critiqued, they can be improved, they should be improved -- of these as additions are far from perfect. but they also are immensely valuable for our economy, for addressing health challenges, all the research that comes out of universities, all the teaching to our future workforce. that is part of what is going on here, not taking the appropriate care with very important public and private institutions. host: let's now hear from susan in pennsylvania, who is a supporter of the protests. go ahead. caller: hi. i do not have a question, i just have a comment. when i was in the early 1970's, i was going to college in new haven, and there was a lot of demonstrations, protests against the vietnam war. half my college professors, they were in and out of jail while i

was there. they were not camping or doing anything, it was mostly cops that were violent. that summer, i went to new york city with friends walking through central park. i was just walking and i got clubbed in the stomach just walking through this area where people were demonstrating. so i still think it's valuable, but, you know, i don't have any questions. it is just kind of different now with the encampment and stuff. host: andrew, how would you compare these protests to some of the protests of the past, like the ones susan was talking about? guest: well, i saw some protests at certain points and there's others i cannot remember. i think there are a number of differences. one is that we are in a period

in the u.s. of heightened polarization. we have seen increases in political violence in the united states over the last seven, eight years. we had seen way before october 7 significant increases in antisemitic actions and other kinds of hate crimes in recent years. so i think the level of tension and society is extremely high. it was obviously quite high in the 1960's for different reasons and in different ways, but for example, if you compare it to the anti-apartheid protests in the 1980's, that was a period of much less conflict overall, and so i think it was much easier for university administrators for the most part to accept the idea that protest was an ok thing and it did not always bring with it fears of tremendous violence. i don't think that was how those protests were perceived. i think the other thing is just this issue is more divisive in america than some of those issues, so i think americans

generally opposed apartheid even if they had different views about how the united states might help to end it, but people have very different substantive views about the war that is going on now, about the role of israel, in the middle east, so it's not just about what are the best means to achieve some end that we mostly agree about. i think people support very different ends. this is one of the issues, that we are hearing views that range from wanting a cease-fire to end the violence that is happening now in gaza to other people definitely expressing the view that israel should be eliminated, and it is understandable why people react extremely strongly to the suggestion that a country that has provided a haven for a people that's been persecuted over millennia should be eliminated. so some of these views are quite upsetting for people to hear and one of the things about living in a democracy is we will

sometimes hear views that are upsetting to us. and again, in recent years, conservative critics of the academy have essentially said you need to be more open -- your students need to sometimes hear things that don't make us comfortable, and i think this is one of those moments when institutions have to focus on protecting the space for conflict that is not violent and intimidating to people but is part of what a democracy entails. host: let's hear from jerry in new jersey, who opposes the protests. good morning. caller: good morning. i have some questions. when i was watching the protesters, i saw that they had hamas shirts on with hamas terrorist leaders faces on them. i hear them saying gas the jews, i am hamas, death to america,

from the river to the sea, zionists should all die. i don't think that is free speech. isn't that hate speech? i mean, the jews are scared to death -- host: we will let you go to answer the question. guest: i want to acknowledge there are absolutely things being said at some of these protests that are, again, from my personal perspective, indefensible and important. -- and abhorrent. different campuses have standards of their own in the first amendment. so in some cases there are guidelines for what kinds of speech are acceptable that are different from what the first amendment protects. on some campuses, it may be the case like speed -- the case that speech like the caller is referencing would cross the line and justify administrative action to curtail them, but on a

public campus or more generally in our society, most of the things that the caller was describing are things that we have to tolerate under the law even if we find them repellent. and i think in many cases they are. we still have to tolerate it and we have to meet it with better arguments, with better information, and that is again, an uncomfortable, unpleasant situation to be in. some private universities may have consistent guidelines that are different from that, and if they do, they are permitted to enforce those. host: we have an example in the columbia spectator on the front page of their website. there was a story about a student band from campus following a zionists don't deserve to live remark. the story reading that the student, who is a member of colonial university -- of columbia university, was banned from campus friday evening, according to a spokesperson, after a video resurfaced thursday of the student saying zionists don't deserve to live

and be grateful that i'm not just going out and murdering zionists. they wrote an apology for the video friday, which was posted to the group's instagram and then the personal account of that student. so that's an example of what you are talking about of the university responding and having a hard line there. host: yeah. and again, a private university -- again, as long as they apply the standards consistently regardless of what your particular perspective is, then they can have guidelines that are different from what are general first amendment protections. i think many of these institutions are doing the best they can or were doing the best they could under difficult circumstances, and then felt the pressure to go far in one direction because they did not want to be singled out by elected officials. and again, i think that has led to an escalation of the levels of conflict.

it's created a greater risk of violent conflict. because we know, whatever the intentions of individual police officers, when you have police trying to end a protest, it puts protesters and police officers at risk, so i think there's a lot that's been -- a lot of consequences to a heightened tension that has been caused by interference from elected officials. host: let's see if we can get a couple more callers. anne is in easton, maryland and is a retired administrator. where did you work? caller: i was a purdue university faculty member with two degrees. if you know anything about the midwest, anyway. i want to ask -- and i'm going to make a comment, ask my question, make a bunch of comments, and he can answer the question. the question is has that person been falling anything that was happening at indiana

university-bloomington? an -- it has a set-aside area for protests. it is a 20 acre place called dunn meadow. it happens that across the street is a shabat. there was a demonstration and indiana university has procedures. they are publicized. everybody knows what they are. and there was a demonstration as it was allowed from 11:00 to 4:00. and all through that time, it was announced that, at 4:00, they would have to clear out. and those that did not were taken by motorcoach, indiana university motorcoach, to the fieldhouse. they were processed. there was a reason -- and those with a reason to go to court were immediately taken to the courthouse and processed. the police were the indiana university police and state police, so the town police were not involved. host: i do want to give andrew

some time to respond. go ahead. guest: i will say i don't know the details of this situation at indiana university. i want to be clear about that. i would say there's a couple different issues that are raised. i think part of what the caller is describing is a situation where this is a public university, has clear guidelines for the time, place and manner of expression, and they have enforced those. one question is are they doing that in a way that's consistent and, you know, neutral with respect to the content of the expression? i don't of the answers to any of those questions in that case. i would say there's also a legitimate question about whether those guidelines themselves are created in a way that's wise, and i think part of the wisdom in such guidelines is that they allow the maximum level of expression that is consistent with the operation of the institution. now that's not a thing you want to change on the fly.

whatever guidelines you enter a situation with you want to stick with. but i think we should accept the fact that colleges and universities are the kinds of places where lots of expression should be permitted, where differing viewpoints should confront each other, and so, you know, some universities in the past, when they have created guidelines for the time, place and manner of expression, have limited it to small physical areas far from the center of campus. that may be consistent with the law but i don't think it's a great idea. i don't i guess consistent with the educational mission and open debate mission of institutions. host: if you are interested in learning more about those protests at the university of indiana at bloomington, the indiana daily student, more student journalism, is covering that. they had on the front page of their website a story that 33 pro-palestinian protesters were arrested at dunn meadow

encampment on thursday and have live updates on their website if you want to follow that particular campus protest. now let's go to carol in texas, who supports the protests. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just have a question for andrew but i want to make a comment before the question and that is, you know, the israeli-palestinian conflict has been going on for so long that there are actually college courses that teach about the conflict. i have one of their textbooks from one of their courses at berkeley. and they had the oslo accords 30 years ago. so it's been going on a long time. and i just think it's a difficult thing to watch for so long, and now we have, you know, what appears to be almost genocide, gazan people and the

famine on the -- host: so what is your question on this? caller: andrew is jewish. he has a dog in this fight. there's a lot of anti-semitism being thrown around. you have a lot of palestinians over in gaza being killed. i am just like, what do you think is going to end up being the solution? host: let's let andrew respond to that. guest: yeah. i certainly wish i knew and i will say that one of the things that's been so difficult about watching all this unfold in the u.s. is that it seems like any solutions that many of us had believed were possible, they feel like they are vanishing as possibilities. so before october 7, you know, i think many people who believed that a two-state solution where palestinians were given, you know, control and sovereignty over some of the land and israel

maintains its over some of the land and they could live side-by-side, i think many of us had hoped that was still somehow an achievable goal. october 7 made it unimaginable that that would happen anytime soon and certainly the response of the israeli government sense, you know, it's very difficult to picture how they could possibly happen at this point. i think this is one of the difficulties, is that for people of goodwill who both believe that what happened on october 7 was abhorrent and unacceptable and also believe that indiscriminate killing of people in gaza is not a solution to anything and is itself unacceptable, it's very difficult to know what position to take for the long-term. i think many people want the violence to end now because it's the only hope of building toward a solution, but i certainly have no expertise on this context, and no particular -- yeah. i'm just a citizen who is deeply concerned about it from a number of perspectives. and i believe that, you know,

here in the u.s., one of the most important things we can do is try to live in a way that is consistent with our own stated values. for me, that means modeling what a democracy and a civil society look like, and doing that even when it's extremely difficult. host: tom is in richmond hill, new york, and as an administrator. go ahead, tom. caller: good morning. yes, i am an administrator at a college in new york city. my question to your guest's there have been a lot of published reports that a lot of these protesters are under the pay of outside groups. so they should be perceived as agitators. to what degree does that compromise the authenticity of something that's been described as a student protest? thank you. guest: so that is again something where the facts of that i cannot speak to it all. i will say this. that seems to me a somewhat

dangerous road to go down in the sense that, you know, many students have jobs working for political organizations of different kinds. they might be employed by political campaigns to organize students on their campuses. they might be employed by advocacy organizations in part-time roles. and i have known many students who have done that. i myself had a paid position for a labor union when i was a graduate student. and so i think identifying who is being paid by whom and trying to sort that out, who is a legitimate student and who is somehow an outsider posing as a student, that feels to me like a dangerous road to go down. if people are enrolled students at an institution, they are students at that institution, and i think the institution needs to treat them accordingly. if people are not students at the institution, it is reasonable for them to have rules and guidelines about who

may be on campus when -- and all institutions have some rules like that for different purposes. as long as they are applied consistently and the goal is not to shut down a particular one if you that -- a particular point of view, that's an acceptable administrative role, but i think it would be dangerous to try to tag some people as outside agitators because they might have an employment relationship to an organization. that's part of learning, is having experiences working on -- whether it's at a company in an industry you're interested in learning more about or a political organization on a cause you care about. host: let's get one more call her we have to let you go. mike is in oak grove, missouri and opposes the protests. what is your question? caller: thank you very much. my question is just on free speech. and i would like to ask your guest a question and then tell

him why i'm asking the question. host: ok. caller: my question is, is there a difference between vulgar speech and free speech? host: where you going to tell us why you wanted ask that? caller: i would like to hear the answer, but the reason why is because i was driving down the road the other day, and some people at the end of their driveway had a flag hanging right next -- host: not quite. but go ahead. guest: i think most courts in the united states have said that even speech that is vulgar is protected by the first amendment. you know, there's some exceptions. there's a concept called fighting words in the law, where if you are saying something that will trigger someone to punch you in the face and you are doing it on purpose, you know, that is not protected speech,

but as a general manner -- matter, even ways of communicating that are vulgar are protected. we can decide what is appropriate for us to do, what is conducive to the kind of immunity and share discussion -- of community and shared discussion we want to be part of. we can maybe callout people communicating in ways that are may be destructive of the community. and people might care and they might not and that is the reality of living in a free society. i think it is the case for a lot of reasons, including the conduct of some very prominent public officials in recent years, those standards have shifted in ways that i don't think are very helpful for the country, but it is where we are for the moment and i think the question is what can we as citizens do to improve the quality of the discourse around us and to accept the fact that people can express themselves however they want, but to try to encourage an environment -- and one thing i want to say is there's some great organizations

working on campuses to try to do exactly this, improve the quality of public discourse, help students who disagree do it in better ways. there's an organization called braver angels doing work on campuses. there's an effort called bridge usa focused on this. there are many such organizations. and i think that's really important, but in the meantime, there are people who express themselves in ways we don't love and i think we just kind of have to try to envision how we get past that. host: we will have to end it there. andrew seligsohn is the president of public agenda. thank you for your time and sharing your expertise. guest: thank you very much. host: later on washington journal, we will hear from author and journalist ray suarez, it will be here to discuss his podcast "on shifting ground with ray suarez" in his book, we are home, becoming american in the 21st century, an oral history. next, more calls and comments with your top news story of the

week. the phone numbers are on your screen. you can start calling in now. we will be right back. ♪ >> they say i am over the hill. don lehman would say that's a man in his prime. >> watch c-span's coverage of the annual white house correspondents dinner live tonight with saturday weekend update cohost colin jost as featured entertainer and president biden who is expected to give remarks. our coverage begins at 5 p.m. eastern on c-span.org an c-span now as journalists and celebrities walk the red carpet into the event. at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span, sights and sounds from inside the ballroom before the festivities begin. watch the white house correspondents dinner live tonight on the c-span networks.

>> sunday on q&a, the author of my two lives talks about surviving nazi germany as a half jewish member of the hitler youth, the steps taken to conceal his identity, and the day his jewish mother was arrested by the gestapo. >> as we got out of the subway, which was around the corner from where my mother lived, i saw all kind of gestapo and ss cops in front of the building. this was a large building. there were many families in there. and my brother and i decided that rather than going in and going there with all these ss and gestapo people, we waited on the corner and watched it from there, and we decided to ask her mother as to why these cops were

there and what the gestapo was doing there. we would go home and ask our mother. well, after a while, to our surprise, it was my mother they were bringing out of the building to one of the gestapo cars, and they took her away. >> jack wertzel with his book my two lives sunday night at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a and all of our podcasts on our free c-span now app. >> the house will be in order. >> this year, c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979, we have been your primary source for capitol hill, providing balanced, unfiltered coverage of government, taking you to where the policies are debated and decided with the support of america's cable companies.

c-span, 40 five years and counting, powered by cable. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back. we are looking for your top news story of the week. our number for republicans, (202) 748-8001. for democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents can call in at (202) 748-8002. before we get to your calls, i want to flagged that this evening, starting at 8 p.m. eastern, we will have coverage of the white house correspondents dinner here on c-span. our live coverage from inside the ballroom starts at 8 p.m. eastern. you can also watch it at c-span.org or on our free mobile video app, c-span now. and that white house correspondents association annual dinner is going to be posted by saturday night live weekend update coanchor collin jost as the featured entertainer.

we are also expected to hear from president joe biden. and here is a portion of president obama's speech at his final white house correspondents dinner in 2016. [video clip] >> i want to close my final white house correspondents dinner by saying thank you. i'm very proud of what you have done. it's been an honor and a privilege to work side-by-side. you are here to strengthen our democracy. and with that, i just have two more words to say. obama out. [applause] host: the infamous mic dropped moment. let's hear your top news story of the week. charlie is in roslyn heights,

new york on our line for independents. good morning, charlie. what is your top news story? caller: yeah, hi. there is something you just did about palestine. i don't think he really touched on the subject. there is a genocide going on. they are dropping 2000-pound bombs on babies, on palestinian babies. that whole idea was just glossed over on that last segment. i support the protesters against israel. israel has no right to exist. it's a zionist country. zionism is a philosophy of fascism. host: we do want to say we were focusing that segment on the campus protests and the free speech issues around it. we have had quite a few segments talking about the conflict itself, and if you go on our website, you can find many of those on washington journal. caller: ok, ok. if you would just let me talk on -- if you want free speech, let me have some free speech, please. i mean, there's a genocide going

on. this has never happened in my lifetime. i lived pretty long. i support these protesters. and israel should not be a zionist state. israel is an illegal state. host: ok. rick in crawfordsville, indiana on our line for republicans. and, rick, go ahead. caller: good morning, ma'am. host: good morning. caller: yeah. i just want to make -- something that puzzles me, like back in world war ii and stuff and the free speech. i mean, i am american. i am just looking at i'm looking to this day about what's going on with the protests and sending the jews back and stuff and what democrats are doing, you know, like handing pakistan millions

-- billions of dollars and stuff, and now, it's all in the footsteps -- democrats are following the footsteps as adolf hitler did. it is really something. how they do that. i mean -- host: ok. let's hear from lucretia in cocoa, florida honor line for democrats. go ahead, lucretia. caller: good morning. nice to see you again. when i saw those protests with the military and there, my first thought was four dead in ohio. i don't know if anybody remembers that. that was the protests where four kids students got killed by the national guard. and a lot of people -- it's like don't trust everybody -- anybody over 30. now it's like don't trust anybody under 25. that's my top story. are we going to kill our

students again? thank you. host: troy is in valdosta, georgia on our line for independents. go ahead, troy. caller: i have been following the story of the protesters this week. excuse me. i'm 60 years old. i don't remember a lot of the 1960's protests. of course, i have seen the archival footage, and it looks to me as if the protesters currently are being handled a little more gently than they were in the 1960's is my first take away from it. the response is not as violent by the authorities. but i'm concerned when i hear the jewish students express their feelings of insecurity on campus. i'm a librarian. i have worked on college campuses and i really don't like the idea of students feeling unsafe and threatened physically, so i'm kind of at odds here of what the response should be.

i don't want to see anything like the previous caller mentioned, the kent state tragedy. host: thank you. vivian is in collierville, tennessee honor line for democrats. go ahead, vivian. caller: good morning. i would like to say some quick comments. first, how are you today? host: i'm good. caller: thank you. one thing i was looking at this week. what are we saying to our young men that you can get away with hurting a woman, raping a woman? that's what i would like to know. what message are the republicans sending to us? then they say about abortion with the rape that's going on. i had a family member who was raped and i was raped by a white man in 1968. they did not do anything about it. it was down in mississippi. went to visit a relative. when we got ready to go down

there for the trial, they told us don't come. host: awful to hear, vivian, but can you bring it back to what you were mentioning for this week? caller: yes, i will, but i wanted to get that point out too. what trump is doing, it's wrong. and our supreme court, i don't understand. we have two women on the supreme court looking thisi don't under, barrett on there. it is proven in republican courts. it was proved in their courts. since he is an old rich white man, as he claims, he thinks he can get away with the stuff they used to do to people in the 1960's. america, wake up. he is trying to do us like ex-president and -- he's trying to do us like putin and be a

dictator. caller: yes, ma'am. i am a vietnam veteran. the uncovering of graves. i compare that to lieutenant kelly when they had the massacre and discover the graves with 30 times that much. he should be held for war crimes. that's it. host: thank you, sammy. john in farmington, missouri. go ahead, john. can you turn down the volume on your tv and give us your top news story of the week, john? caller: yes. host: great. what is your top news story? caller: it is about the college protesters. host: what do you think? caller: the last guest said that he didn't approve of elected

officials and outside authorities getting involved in it. people have to remember that not too long ago if elected officials and outside authorities didn't get involved on school campuses in high schools there wouldn't be one black student going to school with white kids today. people need to remember this and let the authorities stop what is going on before there is real trouble like the man previously said about how rough it was in the 1960's with fire hosing the blacks and everything. it is going to end up like this. that is my opinion. host: harry from georgia on the line for independents. caller: thank you for taking my call today. i want to talk about columbia and all of the unrest that they're having on campus. it seems like to me it is more of the administration's fault

they moved everyone out and all of a sudden they moved back in. it is like sticking a finger in the administration's eye. but i don't understand is the administration and educators are supposed to be the smart ones. they are supposed to know more thanhe students. all of a sudden, they are going to negotiate with students i think what they need to do is let the students know, if you are caught where you are not supposed to be you will be expelled from school. this would be over almost instantaneously. regarding the person that you talked about that was banned from campus, two days after he was banned he was seen greeting aoc where the students were. they didn't ban him. he is still there. until they do what they are supposed to do they will have this continuous rioting. you have 1500 to 2000 students.

the rest are over the age of 30 in there with all of the campers. then you have tens of thousands of students who can't go to class, can't go to graduation ceremonies. it's just absolutely insane that they let the inmates run the asylum. host: bob in mount airy, maryland on the line for independents. caller: good morning, good morning. it is real simple. i will read something here. if anyone would listen, it is right here. it is my people who are called by my name who will humble themselves and pray and seek my faith and turn their wicked ways that i will hear from heaven -- host: i hear you reading bible verses. can you bring it to what

your point is? caller: if everyone would turn unto what god, ok, and our wicked ways would disappear. that is what he is waiting for. if we want to end -- you know what the end is, right? a nuclear war. that is where we are headed if we do not change our ways. everybody needs to change their ways and pray and help each other. i have a dog, ok, that has every color of everybody in the world. you know why i got this dog? because everybody needs to get along. it is a unity dog. host: jim in idaho on the line for republicans. what is your top news story? caller: yes, the president keeps spending money and he has an

empty bank account. two, where is the common sense. it used to be if you didn't want a baby you kept your close on -- clothing on, you took birth control, if you didn't want a baby at all you got your tubes tied. and nobody needs a gun. the gun buyers should have to jump through all the loopholes we jump through. i agreed with one condition, you get charged for the gun killing the child. she didn't like that at all. host: jesse in rosedale, maryland. go ahead, jesse. caller: good morning. a question and a comment. how come every time someone

tries to defend trump they wind up needing lawyers here? the man must be bad news is what i'm trying to say. host: eva in daly city, california on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. my concern is the supreme court's way of doing things. if they really put a dictatorship on, we are losing the right to protest, to speak, to control our bodies. i came to this country in 1968 after a dictatorship. i know what dictatorship means. i spoke that if i go hungry -- they are going to throw me in prison. thank you, eva. host: kevin in baltimore,

maryland on the line for independents. go ahead, kevin. caller: my top news story is the campus protests. i think it is kind of crazy hearing people say that they are violent and threatening against jewish students. i watched a livestream on twitch where he was in one of the encampments. just nice people environment. i think the reason that scientists feel unsafe on-campus is because their ideology is being challenged, not because they are being attacked. their ideology his of occupation and actual violence. the actual violence is the idf hyped video where they celebrated the controlled demolition of a college campus. thank you. host: on the line for independents, go ahead, dave. good morning. caller: good morning. what i would like to present is our disparity at our

understanding of two things we are conflicted about. one, the meaning of peace. what does it mean? what is the evaluation of it? what are the consequences of disturbing it among nations or people? two, the valuation that i see as wrong, is we have to lean towards our governors of every state to satisfy the masses of people, the types of resolutions they come up with. the data shows that they are a valuable and reasonable person to run for our united states presidency. that is when we start getting into problems of conflicting.

i know what my webster dictionary says on what piece i -- peace is, and i hope it spreads throughout our nation among us. thank you. host: knoxville, tennessee on the line for independents. good morning, barbie. caller: my top story of the week is one that no one has mentioned. the debate that trump keeps saying he wants biden to have. i think it is going to be a great debate. i think biden is going to surprise him and i hope he's ready. that was my top story. the other is about the protest. host: i will come back to you but i want to follow up on the debate point. c-span was one of the news organizations calling for both presidential candidates to commit to doing that. biden has said that he welcomes a presidential debate after hedging on trump's conduct. president biden says he is

planning to debate former president trump this election cycle during a radio interview friday with howard stern. tv network and organizations, including c-span, have pushed to get the candidate to commit to a general election debate. let's set it up, trump's -- trump campaign manager immediately responded. biden said i don't know when but i'm happy to debate him. thank you for bringing up that story. go ahead. caller: i grew up in the 60's, so 68 was wild. i think the students have a right to protest. i think technology and everything has gotten so broad, the internet, it is a little more dangerous. so, i don't know. i think they have a right to protest, but they really need to be careful in how they express

themselves. i think that is all i got to say. host: carlo in alexandria, virginia on the line for independent -- carl in alexandria, virginia on the line for independents. caller: concerning gaza if i could give you online news references. unz.com, unz is a tremendous journalist, jewish himself but pronounced the concept of jewish super mrs. in. -- jewish supremacism. taking the lead into announcing gaza atrocities by former c.i.a. officer. also, israeli assassinations and public scrutiny. i highly recommend those articles. my question for you in the context of this is, are we using threatening language by using the word protest which comes from the protestant concept of

denouncing reformed christianity? why not a redress of grievances? if we would peaably assemble and petition however loudly, per faly -- profane late, there is nothing wrong with any -- the hate crime is the atrocities. let's get back to petitioning and redress of grievances. host: gregory in silver spring, maryland on the line for republicans. what is your top new story, gregory? caller: i have been wondering about foreign lobbyists. i wanted to know why is aipac not a foreign lobby? they normally promote israeli issues. it is a general rule.

if someone wants to promote a russian issue they would have to register that. why is aipac not registered? i need to know that, because this is very good for republicans. they are going to devote 100 million dollars to unseat several democrats. next time it could be someone else doing it to republicans. host: thank you so much, gregory, for your call, and for everyone else who called in this segment. next we will have ray suarez here to discuss his podcast on shifting ground with ray suarez and his book we are home: becoming american in the 21st century an oral history. we will be right back. ♪

>> you say i am over the hill. tom would say that is a man in his prime. >> watch the correspondents dinner with a featured entertainer and president biden to give remarks. coverage begins at 5:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.org and c-span now as journalists and celebrities walk the weighted carpet. then -- walk the red carpet. then, sights and sounds from within the ballroom before this committee's begin. watch the white house correspondents dinner live tonight on the c-span network. >> book tv, every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors

discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 9:00 p.m. eastern, the author of "family unfriendly" argues modern parenting is producing children with record rates of anxiety, depression, and loneliness and believes the more old-fashioned approach is needed. then on afterwords, susan page recounts the life and career of bart -- of barbara walters in "the rule breaker." watch book tv every sunday on c-span two and find a full schedule in your program guide or watch online anytime at a booktv.org. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what's happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings from the u.s. congress, white house events,

the court, campaign, and more from the world of politics at your fingertips. you can stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and by scheduling information for c-span, tv networks, and c-span radio, plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. scan the qr code to download it for free today or visit c-span.org/c-spannow. your front row seat to washington anytime anywhere. [gavel falls] >> the house will be in order. >> celebrating 45 years of governing congress like no other. since 1979, we have been your primary source for capitol hill, providing balanced unfiltered view of government, taking you where the policy is debated and decided with the support of america's cable company.

c-span, 45 years and counting, powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. we are joined by ray suarez to talk about his podcast, . with ray suarez -- his podcast on shifting ground with ray suarez, as well as his book. welcome to the program. guest: it is great to be with you. host: talk about on shifting ground, what you discuss and how you choose what to focus on. guest: well, mainly in a foreign affairs-based program looking at problems around the world, challenges around the world, events around the world, and particularly the american connection to those places rather than just picking them out of thin air. we come from the premise that the united states is heavily involved in the affairs of the world. there are a lot of things being done in your name, citizen.

this is what we are up to. host: a lot of your episodes have focused on the israeli-palestinian conflict, including a few weeks ago an episode focused on whether or not the u.s.-israel relationship might be in trouble. how have these recent developments, including the successful cooperation with recent iranian attacks and passage of financial foreign aid for israel, how do you think that has affected the u.s. relationship or shifted the ground, shall we say? guest: this has been a turbulent and challenging time for american policymakers, because this is a historic relationship. the united states was one of the first countries to recognize the existence of the state of israel when it was proclaimed in 1948, and has given aid, official and unofficial, to the development and construction of the country ever since.

in foreign policy, what is the old trueism? a true friend tells you when you are making a mistake. it is tougher joe biden who has been in washington for a long time, who cut his teeth on american-israeli policy, and was deeply involved as a senator in foreign affairs, to recalibrate how he talks to israel, how he talks about israel, how he talks to israeli leaders. he is in a bind right now. as is more broadly speaking the united states. host: when you're having conversations about the u.s.-israel eat relationship -- u.s.-israel ration -- relationship, how to approach that as it is such a divisive topic? guest: it is one of the hardest topics to broach period.

this is realistically a long-term ally, an unusually close military and strategic ally because of its location in the world. to israel there is an emotional link not only because of the presence of a large number of american jews who love the country from afar, but also because of the love proclaimed for israel by a growing number of american christians. i was last in israel during a tense time. the only american tourists that you could see where people from the bible belt in tour buses to see the holy sites around jerusalem. this is a real, ongoing, close relationship. that is also complicated by the fact that for decades the united states has pressed israelis to foster the creation of a

self-covering -- self-governing palestinian territory. the united states has taken israeli assurances that it was doing that at face value and never really pressed very hard to see that project moved forward. here we are 30 years after all is well and nothing has been done to create a palestinian entity. so, when the united states wades into this conflict, how does it talk to its friends? it is very emotional in addition to being factual. host: on your show you have tried to capture the muslim and arab american perspective. who have you interviewed and what have you heard from that perspective? guest: leaders of muslim

american organizations, leaders of palestinian civic organizations. we talked about domestic politics as we inched closer to the fall elections. in the last couple of cycles muslim americans, particularly those from the middle east and north africa, have voted heavily for democratic candidates because they perceive hostility towards islam from the republican party and republican leaders in the post-9/11 period. has that alliance been broken? that is one thing i was pressing these guests on. in michigan where they counseled michigan primary voters to voted noncommitted in the democratic primary, are you taking a risk? the republican, presumed republican nominee donald trump, is going to be even tougher on the palestinians, or so he says, than joe biden is or has been.

what do you do to register your unhappiness with the democrats and with joe biden? are you helping to create a situation that helps donald trump? in a state like michigan where there are a lot of arab american and muslim american voters, sque ak in as he did in 2016 and maybe tip the election? host: aid to ukraine was approved in the same package of bills that biden signed that included aid to israel. ukraine is also an issue that has divided voters and congress. you periodically interview regular voters for their views on foreign policy. how do they explain the fatigue they are feeling about international affairs and america's involvement abroad, particularly in a place like ukraine? guest: ukraine is a perfect example of how our distance from these world hotspots can sometimes obscure our vision.

how could we imagine that this would be wrapped up quickly? i think the tenor of the reporting coming out of ukraine after the ukrainians got organized, got european and north american aid, and started to fight back was that they would push the russians out and that will be that. the russians have been dug in since 2014. americans get fatigued, impatient, and want it to be over already pretty fast. even looking at our own recent experience in iraq and afghanistan, where we were there for years. we want this outgunned, outmanned, smaller country to beat one of the world's last superpowers. the impatience is a product of our lack of involvement directly. no americans are fighting in ukraine. host: we will have special

regional phone lines in this case. eastern time zone, (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. i forgot to mention central time zones, the same line for eastern. (202) 748-8000. if you would like to text us, that is (202) 748-8002. -- that is (202) 748-8003. we had to and elsewhere, news headlines focus on israel and ukraine these days, what other issues in world affairs and foreign policy do you think we should be paying closer attention to? caller: the -- guest: the world's problems are visiting themselves on the united states in the southern border that's coming from cuba, from ukraine even, venezuela, china. people are trying to make their way into the united states from around the world.

this is not just an american problem. it is a sign of critical meltdown in a lot of places and a sign that the world is on the move. tens of millions of people are refugees, internally and internationally displaced. the idea that the united states would float on the ocean and not have to deal with this was naive . now we are having to deal with it, but it is being politicized in a way that's not helping the problem.but it is certainly an international crisis point. host: that is a perfect segue to your new book, we are home: becoming america in the 21st century, an oral history. that is similar to the quest of many of these people who want to become american. what made you want to write this and why now? guest: i've been covering immigration for 35 years. at the borders, with canada and

mexico, in reception centers and refugee camps. i have covered immigration for a long time. in this latest iteration of the national debate, i felt immigrants themselves were being talked about more than they were being talked to. i thought that there was a gap in the way that we were thinking about immigration, thinking about the history of immigration, and i tried to slide this book into that spot on the shelf. hopefully it adds something to the national conversation. it is deeply felt and i think eye-opening in the way that immigrants tell us about their experiences in getting over in america. what it is like. what it is like to come here. what it is like to get established for the gratitude that they feel towards this country, which is something they are accused of not feeling. i thought, this isn't like the

immigrants that i've covered, talked to, and profiled over the years. let me go out with my recorder and my pad and hear what they have to say. they feel tremendous gratitude and they come here knowing they will have to work hard. and they do. host: give us a sense of the voices you include in the book. guest: one of them is a new recently-elected congressman from michigan who comes from southern india, who came to the united states as a student, and lost many businesses. a millionaire many times over. in his mid-60's he sold out his last company and thought, i will get into politics. in his late 60's he is a freshman congressman and thrilled. he cannot believe his american journey and how his american dream has worked out. a fellow named samir from an

indian ocean city in kenya. he is not a cap black canyon. he is from the old arabian peninsula community that runs all the way up and down the african indian ocean coast. he has lived this amazing forest gump life in the united states. he came accidentally with the diversity visa and he has built in american life. he said, you could have dropped me anywhere in the world from activity and i probably would've done all right, but no place is like america. host: let's hear from our callers. tom in fort myers, florida. good morning, tom. caller: good morning. good morning, ray. i am a long time fan. we are probably the same age. you were probably older than me when i watched you on tv, but we might be the same age. you mentioned the oslo accords. guest: let's refer to ourselves

as "mature." caller:[laughter] thank you. let's talk about the book. i haven't read it. i look forward to reading it. the previous guest said something about in regards to the college thing how important it was to keep our institutions intact, what we have built up over the years, these great american institutions. when i was younger i probably wouldn't be saying something like this, but in our corporate and educational world, our government, our military, things that we've done well over time. it is worth maintaining. especially at a time like this when we have an immigrant surge. i think it is safe to say to call that in this country. whether you like it or not or feel like it or not, there are a lot of new americans coming in. i feel like we have to preserve that.

that is what we have to present to them, these institutions. i will throw in our ex-president , i won't mention his name, but they want to tear down the rule of law and things that are truly american exceptionalism. and they are very cavalier about doing that. i think it's a mistake. when they come here, they might be thinking -- host: let's let ray. guest: the most recent era of immigration, the post-1965 world when we wrote immigration laws, we moved from a country where the average immigrant was much older than the median age american to where they are younger. the immigrants to the united states are more heavily concentrated in their childbearing workforce years. they have a higher level of workforce participation then native-born americans and an

increasingly higher level of education. the most educated immigrants of all. the most likely to have masters degrees and phd's are nigerians. the former president refer to them as not wanting to go back to their huts. it shows the disconnect between who today's immigrants really are, what they accomplish in the united states, and the way we think about a lot of places in the world unfortunately. the united states has benefited ritually from ambitious, hustling people wanting to come here from the rest of the world. we should be very careful if we are going to tinker with that. host: we are taking your calls and questions for ray. eastern and central time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain and pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. if you want to text, (202) 748-8003. we have a note on x from steve

who says, congrats on the new book. i never tire of immigration stories. i taught advanced esl at community college for 20 years. every semester they wrote a five paragraph essay describing their experience. a good writing practice for them and good reading. what are some of the other stories that stayed with you as you were writing this? guest: one young emergency medical technician from the houston fire department. now i think he is 31 or 32 years old. he was a daca kid who was brought across the border from mexico by his mother when he was seven years old. his is an accidental success. texas pre-daca law would have prevented him from getting higher education because they would have charged him international student rates to attend public school in texas. he wouldn't have been able

to get a drivers license. if you are going to be an emt you have to be able to drive. during the pandemic he thought about this a lot as he was going into apartment l things and extracting terribly sick people who had waited too long to call for medical help as their covid progressed because they were afraid that their immigration status would become an issue. he, spanish-speaking, would call them down, stabilize them, and get them out of very tough walk up places on a gurney. he thought about the essential work he was doing for society and hoped that america would recognize that and help him become a citizen of the country that he is now committed to. he knows no other place. host: rich in pennsylvania. good morning. what is your question? caller: thank you for taking my call. a longtime caller, first time listener. you know, i am looking at the

immigration situation today. you hear people today and they say we have to shut down the border. people are coming to this country because we are the greatest country in the world. they want to come here for opportunities that they don't see in other lands. because their government is oppressing them. my question, though, is also, i guess that i misunderstood what the topic was. you started on the israeli -palestinian-american relationships then went to immigration. i am kind of confused now. host: ray is a man of many talents. he has a podcast that covers foreign policy and we were discussing that at the beginning of the segment. he has released this past week this new book, we are home, which is about immigration. that is why we were talking

about both of those things. caller: do you think, ray, that our -- all of our problems in the middle east are related to the fact that we support israel? we are their biggest ally and they are ours in that area. it is a strategic area, but why? why do arab nations like iran -- they hate us. is it because we support israel? host: let's let ray respond. guest: look at where it is on the map. the eastern mediterranean flows into the suez canal, which goes into the red sea and indian ocean and cuts off having to go around the cape of good hope around the bottom of africa. it cuts thousands of miles off

the journey. it is a place where oil pipelines from southwest asia cross to the eastern mediterranean, cross to a new regional power-turkey. to the instability of the caucus region in the post-soviet era. it is a world pinch point. israel being there makes it more complicated. we have supported israel for the entire existence of the state of israel. our arab friends, the few of them that we still have in the region, know that. a short time ago, israel was quietly making new agreements with a lot of countries in the region, establishing new commercial and diplomatic ties. it looked like the area might finally be turning a corner. the leader of hamas did

something awful. and from his point of view, very strategic, by attacking israel just at a time when it would cause a cleavage in the arab world if israel retaliated. that is exactly what has happened. it is a very tough nut to crack for the new arab partners in israel in the region, israel itself, and israel's friends in the world. not only the united states, but germany, united kingdom, canada, and others. host: since richard brought us back to foreign policy and your podcast, on shifting ground with ray suarez, another story that doesn't get as much attention is china's tightening grip on hong kong. this came to international attention in 2019 when there were the pro-democracy protests. can you update us on what is

going on now? guest: a new security law was finally rammed through, further tightening mainland chinese control on the day-to-day life of hong kong. what can and cannot be said, what can be printed, what can you broadcasted. the chinese assured the united kingdom when britain left hong kong in the late 1990's that it would allow hong kong to keep it s system in place. the phrase was often heard, one country, two systems. it would take a hands-off attitude towards hong kong, which was a vital contributor to the regional economy. hong kong was a money spinner. hong kong had an economy that was a sizable fraction of the size of china's, which is hundreds of times the size. now, hong kong contributes only

a tiny percentage because china has grown so rich, so strong, so fast. china feels it can start to push hong kong around and move up the 50-your timeline. it has taken advantage of its power, influence, and control, and has reined in hong kong short of the 50-your timeline. host: there's a controversial national security law that has been enacted. you spoke with the sun of a media mogul who was imprisoned under this law. can you remind viewers who he is and what the chinese government said he did? guest: he was the publisher of an independent newspaper and he was arrested, tried, jailed, for various infractions of various laws. the chinese put in a lot of different laws controlling speech and freedom of the press. he is still awaiting final

disposition of some of his cases. the chinese have him locked away. his son, sebastian, who lives outside of hong kong now and feels that it's likely he can't return anytime soon, has gotten word that his father is being mistreated in captivity, but he can't bill himself and see him which is pretty sad. jim eli -- jimmy li had international lawyers taking his case who are pessimistic about the short-term prospects for liberty for jimmy and any moderation of china's continuing tightening grip on hong kong. host: we have an excerpt from your interview with sebastian and a member of li's legal team. let's listen to that. >> if you grew up in a

democratic country or understand what the democratic country has in your rights, i don't understand why you would want to be in a place that literally criminalizes that. i don't see why you would want to be in a place that locks people up for the beliefs of the free press. it had the freedoms that we all took for granted. within four years to five years, all of that is gone. >> jonathan? >> it is what you can't see. the loss is intangible but substantial. what you witnessed, young people, is not different than you would see in any major chinese city. what you don't see in those cities and no longer see in hong kong is a free press. you no longer see people actively publicly campaigning for democracy. you don't see the well over 1500

political prisoners in hong kong on the streets like you don't see the political prisoners in mainland china on the streets there. you don't see the brain drain that has occurred over the last two to four years. host: you were recently in hong kong. what did you see when you were there? guest: it is fascinating. i spent a fair amount of time in china. i taught at nyu-shanghai. shanghai is an amazing city. it feels much less restricted than mainland china to be in hong kong. two a hong konger, it feels more restricted than before the chinese began to tighten its grip. it is a matter of perspective. i went to church on good friday. i went to church on easter sunday. i realized that these were things that were really hard for a foreigner to do in china,

mainland china. i was glad to be able to do those things. a chinese woman who i spent social time with told me how much more free she feels when she is in hong kong compared to her day-to-day life on the chinese mainland in one of the major cities. it was a reminder that you are thinking, hey, there is no firewall, i can serve the internet and read international newspapers. you feel like hong kong is a more wide open place. really, people who are longtime rs there tell me that it is a shadow of what used to be before the chinese really started to make their presence known in a very substantial way. host: that's get back to your calls for ray suarez, author and journalist. eric in las vegas, nevada. caller: good morning to you both. i have a statement and question.

i have a friend in washington state named jesus. in the u.s. army. he is not a citizen and both are in fear that his wife will be deported. you serve this country and you are not an automatic citizen. that is my statement. my question is on u.s.-israeli relations. what could president biden do? if i am correct israel is a nuclear power. if they believe that they are getting pushed into the sea and they nuke iran? am i correct? are they a nuclear power? guest: the united states has been given by circumstance an

assignment that it didn't want or ask for to try to stay iran's hand from not getting further involved and stay israel's hand from not retaliating more aggressively, which is certainly instinct of the benjamin netanyahu government. this is a thankless job. let's make it clear that joe biden is not going to get any pats on the back. the demonstrators in the quads at columbia university and george washington university here in d.c., the university of texas are calling him genocide joe because they perceive that he aids the israelis in their war against hamas because the united states is a military supplier to the israeli defense forces. at the same time, any american government, any american president would feel very constrained from cutting the israelis off as a message to take it easy in gaza.

the united states through back channels has been delivering that message for months. back off. stop doing things that may kill large numbers of civilians. yet the united states government, and this is a bipartisan thing, would find it difficult to say, israel, we are not going to supply you in these efforts any longer. that puts the united states in the odd position of both building an emergency pier and trying to get emergency rations into civilians in gaza while at the same moment transporting military hardware to the israeli defense forces. it is a crazy situation. host: clifford in oceanside, california. go ahead. caller: good morning. i have a question for mr. suarez. the difference between the legal immigration and illegal

immigration, which feels to be joe biden's policy of allowing the illegal immigration to come in, whereas trump's remain in policy -- remain in mexico policy seemed to have worked and stopped the immigration that is now an open border practically. what is mr. suarez's idea? those who come in legally and take the time and go through the rigmarole, versus the illegal immigration which is under joe biden's policy that is happening now? host: let ray respond? guest: you are right. a huge number of people, an unprecedented number of people all at once, are not using the legal machinery. the dirty secret is, if you try to use the legal machinery it doesn't take three years, five

years, or seven years. it takes 10, 11, 12 years. if you want to do family reunification, it takes longer than it should because the design and operation of our system is now not working properly. there should be an emergency crisis-style response to the way that our immigration system is currently seized up. there is not. the chinese people, for example, were turning up at the border. they first tried to do it the legal way. then they go to third-party countries with the visa-free or visa-lite entry and make their way over land to the southern border. they try to do with the right way first. and when they are flummoxed with that, they try to do it the illegal way. a lot of the people who are being referred to as illegal

immigrants are turning up at the border and walking across into the arms of border guards. they are not trying to evade detection. not trying to misstate who they are. they come across with identification cards or passports -- a lot of people don't have passports in these countries, but they do have some forms of ids. they say here i am. life is absolutely unlivable in my country. one quarter of all of the citizens of venezuela have walked out of the country. more than 10% of the entire population of cuba has left the country. this is a world in crisis. borders are being crossed all over the world. rohinga going into bangladesh. syrians fleeing civil war going all over the mediterranean and

into jordan and western iraq. to think that the united states would not be implicated when there are tens of millions of people displaced around the world is unrealistic. but it is in somebody's interest to not respond to this the way that it should be responded to as part of a world in crisis. did we think that every venezuelan was going to go to columbia and stay there? every cuban would take a visa-free one-way flight to nicaragua and stay there? they are heading to the place where there is work, opportunity, money to be made. you can either treat these people as the desperate human beings they are or as things. that is what some of our policymakers have done, treated them as things, as objects. host: tim in arkansas. good morning. what is your question for ray? caller: good morning, ray.

yes, we have -- we had a constitution in this country, we had laws in this country. the five days before barack's election, he "we are five days away from fundamentally changing the country." so, we fundamentally changed the country. now our laws don't matter. we praise illegals because they have a hard life story. we took -- sorry. the citizenship in this country is devalued when you place non-citizens higher. this is just one of the issues. all of these issues can be

traced back to democratic policies starting with obama trying to deal with iran by handing them cash. guest: let me ask a quick trivia question. who deported more people from the united states, barack obama or donald trump? caller: barack's protege joe -- guest: who deported more people? donald trump's or barack obama's administration? caller: barack is the one that put people in cages, yes. guest: you are trying to deflect. barack obama and also joe biden has deported large numbers of people but it doesn't get accurately reported often. large numbers of people are being turned back.

large numbers of people are being deported. this idea that you take -- you cherry pick one phrase "fundamentally change the country" -- has your life fundamentally changed since the january 2009 inauguration of barack obama? maybe it has. i don't know. host: we will try to get in more colors before we let you go. richard in hemet, california. caller: i wanted a side note on the immigration thing. all of the countries that you mentioned that are fleeing their countries, most of them have -- the united states is responsible for military actions. i will move on to the palestinians. our lack of action. it shows how much the israel lobby has a stranglehold on our political system. the colleges are standing up because our government won't

speak to israel and tell them to stop. we were the only country to block sanctions for israel the other day. it shows that israel owns our government, and we do what israel wants. guest: well, i think what you are discounting is there is american sentiment, or has been over the last 70 years, that is an important ingredient in that policy. it is not just some shadowy foreign influencers, the israel lobby, and trying to externalize it. americans, in their vast majorities, supported the safety and security of the state of israel. trying to put it all on the is really lobby leads us to some ugly places that make me uncomfortable. i understand the point that you are making. the united states has been a

shield and guarantor in the united nations, using its veto power. china and russia uses its veto power quite often, too. it is part of the way the united nations was designed. but i understand your point. host: the last caller for today is rafael in gaithersburg, maryland. caller: this is rafael from gaithersburg. thank you for all of this. i am an immigrant. i came to the united states when i was 33, i'm now 46. i had a college degree. i worked my way. i am a chief for a whole organization. i'm just trying to say that i feel there is a lot of ignorance of people actually not understanding what it takes for an immigrant coming across the border or coming legally, however they come, to be able to

take someone's job. there is this fear that the more people that come in they will take people's jobs. i'm not sure americans -- we allow this migration of talent from all over the world. the united states has built this economy and made it the greatest nation on earth. i served in the military for 12 years. i just retired. host: we are just about out of time/ i will let ray have the last word. guest: rafael is an example of someone who has come here and made a solid contribution, serving 12 years in the military. something that a lot of people who are not sure how they feel about high levels in the event duration -- high levels of immigration are thinking of when they form their opinion. rafael, thank you for your

service and making a solid contribution as an american. host: thank you for making a solid contribution to our show. ray suarez, the host of the podcast on shifting ground with ray suarez and the author of we are home: becoming american in the 21st century, an oral history. thank you for being here today. before we let you go, i want to remind everyone that the white house correspondents dinner is happening tonight and you can watch that coverage from inside of the ballroom starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. you can also watch live at c-span.org or o the free c-span now video app. that is all the time we have for "washington journal." thank you to everyone who called in and we will be back tomorrow with another addition at 7:00 a.m. eastern. have a great day. ♪

♪ host: good morning, it is saturday, april 27, 2024.