governors are in the same situation and they should be given clearances or access, not clearances, but access based on their positions. 2016 we were sharing information with cleared individuals in the governors offices, assuming it would get to the election officials. in some states it did. some it didn't. we realized we needed to make sure those independent offices had their own ability to get access to sensitive info when necessary. sec. kahangama: these days, governors have homeland security advisors at the state level and we also administer clearances but we work in concert with fbi, who has 54 field offices across the country, so we can get

individuals in secure rooms, so we work with them to put them in local fbi offices, secure comms, and then we are able to deliver information from d.c. to where they are. suzanne: thank you so much, with all you have on your plate, to take the time and educate us about the threats and the great work being done to address threats and help americans have confidence in legitimacy of that process and the outcome. best of luck to you as you continue to work. sec. kahangama: thank you for having me. look forward to further discussions. we will have a good election season. suzanne: thank you. [applause]

>> live from sparrows point, maryland. we will have live coverage on the bridge collapse. we are talking about yemen for the next half hour with timothy lenderking, u.s. special envoy for yemen, formerly deputy assistant secretary of state for arabian gulf affairs in the near east bureau. buckham to the program. -- welcome to the program. what does it mean to be a special envoy? how is that different from an ambassador?

guest: usually, the special envoy is a washington-based position. having been announced by the president in february of 2021, you get a big charge out of being

>> that's been a falsehood from

day one where the houthis have tried to justify their actions. they've sought to attack israel but they've attacked 50 ships and the vast majority have no connection with israel. that's why the houthis behavior has been indiscriminate and reckless. it is why you drew the terrorist designation back on them. they killed three civilians. these are vital waterways for yemen's fishing, for tourism, for internet cables and global

commerce. the u.s. felt we had to act to restore the principle of freedom of navigation and allow commerce to go which is affecting the world economy. host: we will take your calls for our guest on the lines by party, (202)-748-8000 for democrats. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. (202)-748-8002 for independents. you can text us at (202)-748-8003. what is iran getting from supporting the houthis? guest: low cost, high benefit. houthis have steamroller did through yemen, took control of 80% of the population.

they do not rule by popularity. they rule through ruthless behavior. it's repugnant. they sponsor summer camps in which they indoctrinate young yemenese into a climate of total intolerance and learning how to handle weapons at a young age. this is something the yemeni people reject about the houthis. host: the u.s. response to those attacks on ships. last year, a subcommittee found, held a hearing on the attacks. here is tim kaine questioning the biden administration's legal authority to strike at those targets. >> i have grave skepticism about

what we are doing. the legal authorities, the absence of true, shared responsibility with nations whose ships are being attacked by the houthis. why should the u.s. and u.k. be shouldering the burden of protecting other nations ships? i have skepticism about the effectiveness of this operation. on legal authority, we can see there is no congressional authorization for hostilities. the definition has clearly been met when we are talking about 200 attacks on houthis. this is hostility. there is no congressional authorization for them. to claim this is covered by article ii self-defense, that

means you can defend u.s. military assets, u.s. personnel and probably u.s. commercial ships. the defense of other nations commercial ships, it's not even close, that's not self-defense under article ii. host: senator kaine talked about a couple things. let's talk about legal authority. guest: the president felt he has authority to do so. there is active engagement with congress. i was at that hearing testifying in front of senator kaine, who i have respect for. the president felt we have the authority to do this. the administration, myself, we take the engagement with congress seriously. that contact has been regular. host: he talked about effectiveness of the u.s. response. this has been going since november.

doesn't look like we have deterred the attacks. doesn't look like we have disabled their ability to attack. what is the endgame? guest: the military strikes have been effective. the president set a specific parameter that u.s. and coalition partners -- senator kaine's right to say there is responsibility on the region. bahrain is participating in a strike coalition along with seven other countries. we have active engagement with that coalition to maintain and we have a maritime based force which has 40 countries participating. there is burden sharing happening. if you look at the military strikes, we are hitting those targets, almost no civilian casualties. very effective. it's true the houthis have

continued to attack. you have to have the terrorism designation which cramps houthis financing and the diplomatic piece. it is why amount in the region every few weeks talking to the saudi's and the key regional partners whose engagement and commitment will be necessary to deescalate this. host: you reject the idea this is in response to the war in gaza and that this is somehow trying to help the people of gaza but what does bringing an end to that conflict -- wouldn't that also bring an end to the attacks on commercial ships. guest: i believe it would. the work the u.s. is doing actively, that everyone is doing to promote that cease fire is

very critical to a number of other regional crises but certainly this will de-escalate. houthis have committed to de-escalating when there is a cease-fire in gaza. we have other actors telling us that they will do this. host: in the u.n., the u.s. abstained from that vote to call for a cease-fire. guest: at the end of the day if you look at our actions, israeli delegation coming to town next week to talk to us about hostage release -- the united states position is very clear. to reach a cease-fire in gaza. host: we will go to calls now. we will start with david. caller: good morning.

i will pull a little history in. the muslim religion has been divided -- that goes all the way back to the moors,. the u.s. come in and they got right in the middle of this disagreement and they put the thumb on the scale and they destroyed iran's democracy. that is where we are with iran right now. they are still mad at us. we went over there destroying their democracy. and then we put a shah in there. when the shah got kicked out, we said bring the shah to the united states. they went and raided the embassy. move forward more. we made a good-faith agreement with them about the nuclear

program. and we had it working. we could talk. we had ways to deal with it. well, our last previous president come in and destroyed it. we have been in this conflict for a long time. and it's our government, our political parties, that's causing this whole mess over there. but that's up to them, you know? we can only talk about this. we have got to stop splitting the middle east in half. host: what do you think, tim? guest: i appreciate the call very much. i think the united states is in fact -- there is a painful history between the united states and iran, and that does need to be resolved. i think the united states is very firmly right now trying to push for peace in the middle east on all of these different conflicts, other we are talking about gaza, talking about our commitment to a two state

solution for israelis and palestinians, the red sea crisis, stability in iraq, lebanon -- we are engaged in a full-court press, i think, to try to de-escalate all of these crises. i don't think, honestly, that these crises are going to de-escalate without strong u.s. engagement, so i stand very firmly behind the administration and the diplomatic efforts we are engaging in right now. host: max in boulder, colorado, independent line. good morning. caller: how are you doing? david kind of -- i want to extend on david's argument. the reason i called was about the saudi arabia war against yemen. and the united states' role in that. we have been playing such partners with saudi arabia because of their oil for such a long time. we have messed up the whole middle east.

if you can recall, i remember it was hillary clinton who was secretary of state when we were selling weapons to saudi arabia, so they could bomb yemen into the stone age. what happened was, yemen got bombed into the stone age, and the houthi terrorists move into areas where people are desperate and hopeless. of course, they come in and offer some help, because nobody else was going to help them. the same thing happened in gaza. the palestinians are desperate and hopeless for years and years, especially with the blockade. hamas comes in and says we will help you. we are on your side. nobody ends up on the palestinian side or the yemen side. you have got these terrorist organizations that set in. israel appreciated hamas being in gaza, right? we all know that israel

supported hamas leading to october 7, and now we are in the position we are in now. i would like a conversation about the united states and how we put people in such despair and hopelessness that caused all of this stuff going on in the middle east. i hope you have some comments about that. thank you. guest: first of all, thank you for feeling the pain of the yemeni people. i do as well. i think that is incredibly important for the yemeni people to know that there are americans who have some appreciation for what they have gone through, and the terrible conflict that has existed for the last eight years. and there is a lot of blame to go around. i think we are trying to look ahead. we are trying to understand that pain, also drive forward. i mentioned earlier the truth -- the truce we have been able to achieve in april of 2022. yemen has had the longest period of stability inside the country that it has since the civil war began eight or nine years ago. that has meant that the

commercial flights from the airport have been able to restart for the first time since 2016. read those stories about the yemenis who stand in line to get on those planes to go get medical care. it really is powerful stuff. the yemenis having the opportunity to move about their country more, and to bring more humanitarian supplies -- has been an improvement in the lives of yemeni people as a result of the truce. the point is, it is not enough. we have to end the war definitively, and that's why our goals in yemen remain a durable cease-fire and yemeni-yemeni political negotiation that will allow yemenis to decide the future of their country -- our -- how resources are used, how the country is governed, and what the united states and the international community support. those are our key goals now, so thank you. host: in virginia, the line for independents. caller: thank you for taking my call.

i want to add on what the previous caller explained. i see our support for israel since october 7. that was just support. now israel is going overboard, as president biden mentioned, with what is done in gaza. yemenis, houthis, all they ask is a cease-fire in palestine, in gaza, and they will stop their actions. now that we ask israel to do a cease-fire in the last u.n. resolution, and they are not listening to us, why are we bombing houthis? they are the same, asking a cease-fire and humanitarian help for the people of gaza and palestinians.

they are asking the same thing we ask. in a way, our words and our actions contradict. we want cease-fire for gaza, but people who are giving israel a hard time, pushing for a cease-fire, we are acting against them. it is a contradiction that puzzles me a lot. thank you so much. i will just wait for your response. guest: thank you so much. i have a couple of reactions to that. first of all, i think we have to be very clear we are not bombing the houthis, right? we are bombing their military capability. we are not bombing the people of yemen or the houthi people. we are bombing and destroying that capability that they are using to attack ships from the red sea.

the second point is, which has been condemned by every country except for the iranians, in terms of the attacks on the red sea -- they are not justified. i think that gets to the critical point here. one can be pro-palestinian and very supportive of palestinian rights, but also not condone or accept what the houthis are doing as an acceptable response to that, because by attacking ships in the red sea, ships and individuals and civilians that have nothing to do with the palestinian cause of the conflict in gaza, killing those mariners, triggering that oil slick, sinking ships, affecting commerce and also the ability to bring medicine and fuel to get to people around the world who need those supplies -- in fact, it is a falsehood. what the houthis are doing created more problems for the palestinians. they are in no way affecting israel's behavior.

what they are doing has been a failure in that sense. i think we need to delink gaza and the terrible situation there from what the houthis are doing in the red sea. it is not justified. it is not acceptable. i think more and more voices in the region are rising up to condemn what the houthis are doing. host: what have the houthis gained from this campaign in the red sea? guest: i think because of the gaza situation, the houthis have ridden a crest, a wave of popularity they did not have, up to october 7. the houthis were struggling. i mentioned this truce. the yemeni people were asking the houthis -- we have a truce now. where are the jobs? where is the food? where is our economy to buy the food that is available in the country? the houthis have no answer for these questions. they do not govern. what they are good at is shooting, is military action.

and i think what the international community needs to do is understand that in order for yemen to be a stable country, the houthis have to move away from using military means to solve every issue, and turn toward governance, and be part of a dialogue to have with the other yemeni parties, who very fiercely and fervently want this war over. they want to be able to govern and make key decisions about their country. host: linda is on the line for democrats from new haven, missouri. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to ask -- you are listed as a u.s. special envoy for yemen. richard grenell, who was in the trump administration, is over in belarus, meeting with third world dictators and things, laying the groundwork for donald

trump's next presidency, and establishing and actually undermining our current president's ability to do his work. so richard grenell is over there as trump's special envoy, which he has no legitimate right to be doing, and undermining working with belarus, working with third world dictators, assuring them that when trump gets back into office, all their wishes will culminate in trump's third world outlook on the united states. what are your feelings about richard grenell and the role he is playing over there? guest: thank you. i have seen those reports, and i pay attention to things in the

foreign policy realm. the difference between us is that i am appointed by the

announcer: the francis scott key bridge in baltimore collapsed into the plus, river tuesday after being hit by a cargo ship. we will get the latest on the recovery and repair efforts. reports are this afternoon that a huge crane is moving into physician to untangle the bridge from the ship. maryland governor wes moore po tell us more in a briefing that is expected to start soon and we will have it live for your on

c-span. -- we will have it live for you here on c-span.