Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal 07252022  CSPAN  July 25, 2022 6:59am-10:03am EDT

6:59 am
app. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more including charter communications. >> broadbent is a force for empowerment. that's why charter has invested billions, building infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications support c-span is a public service along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> this morning on "washington journal," we will discuss the major events in congress. in the brookings institution governance studies senior fellows on her effort to change
7:00 am
the way electoral votes are counted after presidential election and we will preview the week ahead at the white house with the washington examiner reporter. join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook comments, text messages and tweets. "washington journal" is next. host: this is the "washington journal" four july 25. do you think president trump should take on another run for the oval office in 2024? here's how you can reach out to us --
7:01 am
this is from newsweek -- 1/3 of republican somewhat agreed with the statement that president trump should not run for this president again in 2024.
7:02 am
host: another run for president trump, 57% of our island republicans hope that the president decides to run for president in 2024, adding another $.33 does not. this recent polling shows that the detroit poll in conjunction with them asking likely republican primary voters if they would support the president decides to run and how he would bear against ron desantis of florida, 54% of republican primary voters supporting
7:03 am
president trump running for reelection. 40 percent of voters strongly supporting a reelection bid well 15% somewhat supporting his running for office. those are just some of the surveys. another taking place at an event in turning point usa over the weekend for conservatives and that was a survey. we will show you the results of that with the president also spoke at the event and alluded to his political future. here's a bit of that from last week. [video clip] >> if i announce -- pronounced my beliefs, need to stay silent and stayed home and took it easy, announced that i was not owing to run any longer for political office, the persecution of donald trump would immediately stop, you know that, right? they would go on to the next victim. but that's not what i do, i can't do that. i can't do that.
7:04 am
can't do that, can't do that. because i love this country and i love you, i love you. there has never been anything like this in history. look at this crowd. with two days notice, look at this crowd. outside, the place was packed with people trying to get in. but you got the seat, congratulations. but they are coming after me because i am standing up for you. host: it was a turning point usa event where those young conservatives filled out wrong -- straw full of president trump and other names when it comes to a lunch for office. the post picking up the story saying that those in attendance overwhelmingly chose the former president and if he's launching
7:05 am
a reelection bid in 2020 four, 17% less the attendees at the event chose with no one else coming close, chris christie at 1% followed by mike pompeo, 0.5%, ted cruz, nikki haley, and the former vice president, mike pence, finishing with 0.3 percent. that's the results of the survey. again, for you republicans in the audience, if the president -- you think trunk should take another run at office? eastern and central town zones, -- time zones, (202) 748-8000. pacific and mountain, (202) 748-8001. mike pence -- mike pence will be part of an event at the heritage foundation at 5:00 this afternoon if you can see that on
7:06 am
c-span, c-span now, our app, or c-span upward. the former vice president, mike pence, and also a story that president trump is expected to address an event later on on tuesday here in washington, d.c.. steven in california starts us off on whether president trump should take another run for office in 2024. go ahead. caller: if president trump were to get nominated, i surely without a doubt would vote for him. so, he has done some things that i don't like but he has done a lot of good for this country. however, i hope that he doesn't
7:07 am
run. because i don't think, let me put it this way. i think he has lost maybe 10% to 15% of the republican party and i think that's too high of a loss to gain the victory in a presidential race. i would like to see ron desantis run. and if he doesn't run i think we are in a world of hurt. we have got to gain the, the presidency to stop this, this socialist distraction. host: when you say the president lost 10% to 50% of support, what do you attribute that to? caller: i think that the hearings, the hearings, how,
7:08 am
they are unfair, but the democrats have presented a good case. but not an accurate case. host: meaning what? caller: meaning that that is not the whole story. when the republicans get control of the house, we will see a complete investigation. we will force nancy pelosi to testify, bowser to testify, the washington dc mayor. we would get to the bottom of the police that waived, literally waived the protesters into the capitol building. there's a lot more to be discovered.
7:09 am
host: steve there is in san jose starting us off on this idea of the president taking another run at the office. steve saying he's of both minds there. (202) 748-8000 four eastern and central, (202) 748-8001 four mountain and pacific. he mentioned those hearings that you can see and you have problem see them over the last several months. you can also find them on our website. one of those members of the committee, a republican from illinois, it adam kinzinger talking about the hearings but also talking about what he thought the impact they were having was on this orders of president trump. here's a bit of him from abc yesterday. [video clip] are you seeing any evidence that what you are recovering -- uncovering in these committees is impacting republicans in the house or republican voters generally?
7:10 am
>> on the house, i don't know, i ceased to be amazed how much they are willing to accept not say anything. in terms of republicans in general you have the bulk of republican voters and this doesn't appear to be having a ton of impact. maybe people are shifting more towards a potential, ron desantis, trumpism isn't diane, even though trump is becoming irrelevant. i am hearing a lot of anecdotal stuff from people around the edges that were hard-core with trump can't stand him now. it's enough to make a bit of a difference within primary but on the bigger term, it's denying anywhere in your 50% of the american voters willing to basically go along with something like a coup on january 6. i think that long term i still believe it is going to be hard to find someone who will admit they were ever a trump supporter in that's where the impact comes
7:11 am
in your history. host: again, rachel republicans only in this hour. reggie is up the. -- again, republicans only in this hour. reggie is up next. caller: i would not support trump if he ran in 2024. i'm sorry to say that but i'm happy to say that. any man who would construct, you know, a fake two and those people in his mind trust, the good people. and i didn't even believe him in 16 when he campaigned about mexico. being that, i am a republican and as everyone knows, i have worked in elections.
7:12 am
i have also worked as an election poll worker on election day and i have never seen these unscrupulous acts, to let everyone know. host: who did you vote for in 2016 identifying as a republican? caller: i actually voted for hillary. i'm ashamed to say i voted for hillary because she didn't campaign in the state of wisconsin. she thought she had the election easy. she didn't bring the votes. host: do you think that president trump can gain another nomination if he decides to run again? caller: i think there's no one there. desantis doesn't have enough. sees me, trump has enough people to maybe push him over unless
7:13 am
the doj arrest him. host: ok, that is reggie in ohio, calling up. we will hear next from steve in sun city, california. you are. caller: it will come down to the state of the economy versus the impact of the elite liberal media wanting the democrats to win. that's what it comes down to, the state of the economy. from a republican standpoint, a lot of these people have this characterization of trump totally wrong. they hate trump, ok? 24/7, they hated. they hate all republicans, they want the democrats to win. they are still denying the fact that the elite liberal media does not like republicans. host: so, why exactly would you support another run for president? caller: president trump?
7:14 am
regardless of how you feel about him, he's very competent for the job. he's great at the job. no matter how you feel about it. the best way to win these elections if you are a conservative is to filter the opposite of the elite liberal media. host: when you say he's great at the job, what do you mean by that? caller: he's extremely good. very competent. energy independent for the first time in 75 years. now, now, now look at us. biden is over there calling america racists while he's begging the saudi's for, for oil. we were energy independent under trump. gas was $2.50 a gallon. the liberals think government should be in charge of our asp -- all aspects of life. that's the predicate.
7:15 am
that's exactly what it is. it's what they want, ok? host: all right, we will hear from linda in pennsylvania, next. caller: yes, pennsylvania, hi, first then caller, i listen on my way to work. i am a supporter of president trump, i voted for him in 2016 and 2020. i think that there is so much hatred against this man, no matter what he does good, they spin everything in get bad. like the caller said, we were energy independent. he tried to disband nato, like people said. and he was trying to get them to pay their fair share. he looked out for america, you know? these people were not pitching in. we had a nice, secure border, we want immigration. we want people to come in. i'm very torn though about whether i want him to run again.
7:16 am
i would support him if he did but my concern is that the media and the democrats have, he lives in their head. i mean he's not even president anymore and they can't even stop talking about him. trying to go after him. everything that came out, everything he said was true. you know, the russia, russia, russia thing, it came out that that was all untrue. paid for by hillary and the democrats. all of these things came out after the fact. the hunter biden laptop. there's so much corruption, i can't understand. that's why i'm torn about him running again. host: a previous caller said that the january 6 hearings may have an impact on the ability to garner support among republicans. do you think that might be the case? caller: it's possible.
7:17 am
i refuse to watch any of it because it is completely one-sided. there's a whole other side of the story not being told and it's very unfair. i did see some video of police, you know, letting people in the door. they opened up the gates. i don't agree that these people should have gone in there. i don't agree with what happened, i think it was wrong. he called for the national guard and they did to them. it seems like a set up. -- didn't give it to him. it seems like a set up. host: republicans in this hour, (202) 748-8000 for those of you needs central time zones, (202) 748-8001 and the mountain and pacific time zones. politico reports how congressional republican leaders are taking a look at another term for president. a story from a couple of days ago where leaders have apparently no apparent plan to
7:18 am
keep him from a third presidential run, some are encouraging it. "i support him running in 2024," according to the number three house republican, endorsing him over other gop candidates for the white house. of the 12 leaders in both chambers that we interviewed for this dori, -- that politico interviewed for this story, while republicans are not endorsing early, they are prepared to adopt the same playbook in 2016 for a crowded presidential primary field to sort itself out with minimal interference in the wrinkle of course is the same conditions allowed him to defeat that field of more than one dozen challengers and he is no longer he was in 2015 with a record as president including two impeachments and a congressional investigation. that is from politico, taking a look at those on capitol hill and their support for the former
7:19 am
president should he decide to run again. stephanie, north carolina, hello. jeff caller: hello, -- jeff, hello? caller: thank you for taking my call. good morning. i have a couple of things to address on this situation that basically, this whole january 6 situation was very much an embarrassment to the nation. it was outright display on ex-president trump defining the denouncement of the election. a true and fair election. to have so many people just jump on this propaganda as fake news, anything that would ever be addressed was incorrect.
7:20 am
his administration from multiple people were indicted on some type of legal aspects within the criminal system. on top of everything, the tragedy that took place there. everyone witnessed that. i believe i saw the same thing in the united states like everybody else. that was just unbelievable what was taking place. this man, night you got x vice president in the administration that witnessed a close proximity to that event with this man. host: we are asking if you would support another run for president if he decided to run again, what would you think? caller: what he's saying and we are still talking about january 6 like it never happened. no apologies. not to the family, to america. host: would you support him if he decided to run again? caller: absolutely not.
7:21 am
he cannot be trusted. trump and not be trusted. it's clear he's going to say a lie, anything to prevent the truth from coming out where people dispute what he is trying to make again the point that the election was rigged. all the ballots in the different states, you know, not in their right order for his election to happen. being denied. host: let's hear from eddie in georgia, go ahead. caller: yes, sir. how you doing, how you doing? trump running again? i'm a blind man, right? i sit here and watch and hear trump speeches. he's not making no point of how you going to help the american people. when he was in office, my,
7:22 am
everybody said their life was good. my life wasn't good with him in office. his policy wasn't good to me. you know? i voted. i voted for them, but i thought he was going to make a change. he didn't make no change for nobody. the only thing he did was all about him. and then when, you know, the billionaires, the gas prices high, the food is high, he's not going to know none of that. nothing ain't going to change. everything's going to be as high as our mortgage and our -- host: what did you expect the president to do and change for you if you voted for him? caller: i wanted him to act like, to act like a man instead of like some dictator.
7:23 am
like a baby. talking about, the only thing i hear him talk about is that people or what the people doing, you know, his politics eight helping nobody. host: why did you support him in the first place? caller: i supported him because hillary, i knew, america wasn't ready for a woman president. so, and nobody else was, you know kind of in the move of women running to be trump. so i thought i would give him a try. host: ok, let's hear from janet in san diego. next up. good morning. caller: it's unbelievable, these
7:24 am
comments sometimes. i don't understand how anybody can believe anything that comes out of the mouths of any of those commentators on cnn or msnbc when everything they have ever said has been wrong. wrong about russia, wrong about hillary's 99% win over trump, etc.. i would 1000% support trump and if anybody says that man didn't make a difference in office is delusional and in the twilight zone. host: why exactly would you support him again? caller: everything that man said he would do, he did. he built the wall. with republicans and democrats standing in his way. the people that need to go are mccarthy, mcconnell, cheney and
7:25 am
the establishment. we don't really have anybody to stand up for the american people except for donald trump. he's the only one really fighting the american people. the rest of them are buddies. they have been in politics for so long, they stand by each other in trump is an outsider. even though most of the old cronies in the republican party do not stand with trump, they simply want power. it's not about the people. as far as the democratic party and that january 6 thing going on, that's nothing but propaganda from beginning and. how in the world does a president grabbed the steering wheel of a car? i've never seen a president writing in the front seat of a car ever in a limo? how does that happen? host: many of you addressing
7:26 am
those hearings from january 6. some of you relating those to the idea that that could impact another run for the president. by the way, when it comes to numbers, the primetime hearing last week, 17 point 6 million people watched the hearing, reaching more people than several of the other hearings that took place in the daytime. the number however, down from those who saw the first primetime hearing on june the ninth. the washington times has that story this morning. your thoughts on whether or not the president should take another run for office work. take the part of the country that best represents you, send us a text you wish. you always post regardless of your positioning on this if you'd like. florida, st. petersburg, how. howell, florida, hello. caller: yeah, hello. here i am.
7:27 am
no, i don't want trump to run again. that would be four more years of going after this man. the second test president since ronald reagan. i would rather just have him play golf every day, let ron desantis run, believe me, they could get nothing on mr. desantis. they could try to they are blue in the face and never get anything on that man, he's so straight up and straightforward. just let mr. trump golf and advise governor desantis. host: why the concern that in your words people would go after him in terms of a second run at office if you decided to do that? caller: well, because i had for years, four years wishing i had, only four years of just negativity every day from the press to people in
7:28 am
congress. it was just disgusting and it's still going on to this day. like i was saying about january 6. i came home from golf and my wife had been said it was on all morning and i looked and i says oh my god, all you are doing is giving ammunition to the democrats and that's exactly what it turned out to be. host: thoughts from florida this morning about that potential for a second term. axios picking up a story about some changes the president would make if he were to win another term in office. his top allies are preparing to radically reshape the federal government if he's reelected, purging potentially thousands of civil servants and feeling career posts with loyalists to him. it could well go beyond can --
7:29 am
typical conservative targets likely internal revenue service. trump's allies are looking to strip layers at the justice department, including the fbi, reaching to national security, intelligence, the state department, the pentagon, the president saying that during his presidency trump complained and argued that the heart of the plan was derived from executive order schedule f, designed in secret 13 b days for the 2020 election. more there from about policy decisions from the president if he should run again and win office. miami, florida, ted is next, hello. caller: yes, hello, i didn't vote for him and 16, i didn't vote for him in 2020, and i didn't vote for him in 20 --
7:30 am
don't want to vote for him in 2024. i don't want to go provide neither. he isn't actually making the difference i would like to see. if 47 can be different from these two people. i would like to know who that person is. trump, as far as him making the difference? he bullies too much. he tries to make things beyond what they should be. can he save america? he doesn't want to save, he just wants to run it. so no, i'm not voting for him or bidens. 47, please be as different from them as possible. iq. host: would that be governor -- thank you. with that be governor desantis if he decided to run? caller: no, it would be the speaker of the house, trump's speaker of the house, i would
7:31 am
vote for him if anything. 47 just needs to have -- mila -- host: you mean nancy pelosi? caller: no, the past speaker of the house. host: paul ryan? caller: yes, ryan, i would vote for ryan. is not the strength that makes a president. it does make humble that makes a president. trump doesn't have any of that. his strength helps but he doesn't have humble. biden has humble, but he doesn't have strength. if 47 can have a combination of the two? that would help more than anything. caller: -- host: willie, good
7:32 am
morning, you are next up. caller: can you hear me? listen, i'm sorry, can't stop this. yeah, i'm glad that you read the schedule there. because here is what is happening. host: you are fading in and out. you will have to improve your signal, can you do that? caller: can you hear me now? hello? host: go ahead. caller: i'm saying you've got a lot of saying they are republicans ok? that's not what they are. what we have going on, what we have going on, i [ringing] host: between the background noise and the fading in and out, give us a call again if ken. try to get through. try to see if you can situate your signal better. allen, arkansas, hello.
7:33 am
caller: good morning. do you have a twin brother, pedro? host: the point of the conversation is about president trump and running again. caller: sears they just wanted to compliment you on letting people talk for more than 15 seconds. i'm a conservative and i wanted to start the day, i'm going to call next month in the month before the election, to plead with president trump to run for speaker of the house so that when i think these impeachment things that are coming against the biden and the vice president, they can be restored to office. let me say i was watching
7:34 am
january 6 on c-span with greta covering the testimony that morning that was going to a deal lawfully the vote in congress. and this riot was allowed to take lace, a lot of them antifa folks, they know that, they interrupted the, the, the hearing for the vote. greta was covering it that morning. host: that's repeating history. let's go back to the question, why speaker of the house for president trump as opposed to president of the united states? caller: well, he can be restored to office that way. host: and so, as far as another run in 2020 or, besides speaker of the house, would you support that? caller: let me ask one quick question. host: would you support the president for another run in 24? caller: of course. but let me just ask you, that video on c-span is locked.
7:35 am
i've been trying to get it. you can go to january 6 and see greta, the video is blocked. host: ok, you will have to check the website for yourself. i don't answer questions on website concerns. minnesota, hello. caller: i also am a conservative. i have high hopes for president trump. i had a sign in my yard. i voted for him. but when he got into office, he always imbued. he did marvelous things. but then he would get on, on twitter and put out his tweets that negated everything. the media would concentrate on a tweet and instead of what he had done. he had done many good things.
7:36 am
but this whole business about january 6, right? he had no, because he could have known that all of these people who are extra liberal and asked run violent would come there. -- he had extra violent would come there. they knew that. i can see that his people didn't know that. host: so, that would impact your decision as far as a second term for them? caller: yes, i don't believe that with all the negativism of the media, that he would ever, ever get the votes of the independent.
7:37 am
i just feel that, you know, we should look for another candidate. personally, i like rand paul. i just feel that all we are ever going to hear from these january 6 hearings, they are so one-sided and anybody that watches it, i mean, they know. host: why rand paul? caller: i just like rand paul. he is a conservative, he's smart , and he stands up when he needs to, stands up for issues that he just doesn't -- he doesn't just tell the republican mine. i like him. host: that was alice giving her thoughts on rand paul.
7:38 am
you probably have other thoughts as well, if trump is your first choice, maybe ron desantis or someone else in the remaining time that we have, maybe 20 minutes or so, (202) 748-8000 for eastern and -- eastern and central, (202) 748-8001 for mountain inputs visit -- pacific. -- and pacific. from skippers, virginia, the president can run, this is a free country and just because democrats don't like him doesn't disqualify him. i will personally be voting for another candidate. john and parkfield says that he will not vote for him for a third time. some people texting this morning. that is an option as well if you want to do that, (202) 748-8003. janet is up next and plymouth. hello. caller: good morning. good morning from plymouth,
7:39 am
michigan. yes, i would support him if he ran again in 2024. i really am disappointed in many of my republican sisters and others who will buy into the obstruction that happened for president trump. before he ran, while he was president, after he was president and bought into this january 6 kangaroo court. it's intriguing, one of the callers brought up he should run for speaker. my preference would be that he run with this santos as his vice president. then he finishes his second term and then desantis runs and he has two terms. i think in that way we could get our country squared away again. i think that all honest people,
7:40 am
you know, i don't presume to say i'm honest all the time but if we face our fears and accepted that we can do this, do not be cowed by the media or by this can you break -- kangaroo court january 6 committee. the thing is, move forward in hope and prayer. i'm not a particularly religious person. however, i believe that if we stay on the path of a higher power to guide us through these horrible times that we are in right now, we can see the contrast. we all know that. even those -- host: that was janice in michigan, giving us her thoughts. we will continue on for i guess
7:41 am
the next 20 minutes or so. if you watch this program, you are familiar with the name kellyanne conway. she participated in a recent wall street journal podcast and she was interviewed about a potential run. here's a bit of her from that. [video clip] >> as far as trump 2024, i have had direct conversations with him and my advice to him privately and publicly is that if you wish is to be president in the u.s. again should have a cage match rematch against joe biden in offering binary policy and accomplishments from the trump white house to the biden white house. no more of this talking about the past. look to the future, develop a vision. that has to be weighed against any number of counterbalance facts. the biggest one in my view is if the people constantly investigating him, his family, and those around him are going to let up on the gas. that's a personal decision for
7:42 am
him. president trump is like the majority of americans, he said -- he sees the country heading towards economic decline, depression, peace is a nuclear capable iran with putin in ukraine and israel with a total lack of border security and an increase in crime and drugs. joe biden has his hand on the tiller with a rising inflation being the number one issue. frankly, it's not just a matter of americans being resilient and optimistic, hopeful about the future. it's many americans thinking it was so much better not that long ago and i want it back. if president trump can can -- channel that into a viable campaign for president, polls suggest beat biden or harris in the republican primary, he should do that, but a lot of
7:43 am
these independent voters are going to be talking about the 2020 election and want to talk about the future. host: he's expected to address a event on tuesday, the america first policy institute. no idea what the speech will contain as far as his future plans, but that is supposed to take place later this week and former vice president mike pence is set to address the heritage foundation today, later on this afternoon at 5:00 you are interested in hearing what mike pence has to say about the state of the world as he sees it, the state of america as he sees it, you can see it on c-span or sees and now, our app, or follow along on, featuring former vice president mike pence at 5:00 this afternoon. let's hear from heather in bel air, maryland. hello. caller: good morning. i would definitely support
7:44 am
president trump if you ran in 2024, however, i am open to other candidate. one of my favorites is mike pompeo. excuse me. [coughing. i would love to see him run. i really like him. i think he's super intelligent, has a ton of experience. he's a veteran, a businessman, a congressman, cia director. he's got a wealth of knowledge that we could definitely use. a strong president and i think you would be wonderful. i would actually like to see maybe mike pompeo and nikki haley on the ticket. host: ok. heather there, maryland. update on the health of the current president. the latest letter came out yesterday on the health of the president since he contracted covid last.
7:45 am
"the new york times" according to a letter released by his personal physician he was experiencing no shortness of breath or reduced oxygen levels and mainly had a sore throat as a result of immune response. dr. o'connor added that the president would continue to isolate but that he is responding to therapies as expected. that was "the new york times does quote boarding on the president's health. rick, good morning. hello. caller: i would definitely vote for trump again. you had two callers. one of them, saying let me tell you about stevie wonder, little story, he had a live call-in show and it was an activist radio station, force democrat. they have their voters vote for people like joe biden, maxine
7:46 am
waters and so forth and so on. now they are unhappy with the product they got from joe biden. ok? second, they can hear well, but they cannot see. you had another caller saying that joe biden was humble? anybody who says if you don't vote for me you are not black, is not humble. he's a weak president, not humble. host: can you expand on the reasons you would vote for trump if he ran again? caller: the reasons? he's done everything he said he would do. he does think things, not little things. he does big things. stays the course. the middle east, peace in the middle east. the abraham accords. the first act of alice johnson, releasing her from prison. this is why we love him and he
7:47 am
keeps his promises and he does for america first. america, first. host: nick, delray beach, florida. you are up. caller: that last caller from california, fantastic. california would be a beautiful place is that of the dump it is turning into if all of the people in california had that intelligence. as far as trump goes, when you consider open border, and nation , chinese fentanyl flooring -- flowing over the border in killing young people, the summer of 2020 riots, the foreign wars, the virus the chinese sent here to kill one million americans, force donald trump should run again in 2024. i mean, what is going on in the country now?
7:48 am
if anybody can name one thing in the country now that is better than it was when donald trump was in? i called c-span in the past. because of donald trump, i got a raise at work. a bonus at work because of his tax cuts and i get to keep more of my money each week because of his tax cuts. now, democrats and joe biden are saying that's not good enough. we want to take more of your money. why would i send more of my money to the government? so the can send it to virus labs overseas to hate various viruses? lastly, here's the question that c-span really should be asking. what is it that makes the political establishment and the media hate and fear donald trump so much? what criminal behavior?
7:49 am
is it that had rings that they run? what criminal enterprise are they conducting that they are so afraid of the hubble trump? i just mentioned it, the political elite, the political establishment, the media. they are the day that hate donald trump so much. all of these enterprises, including c-span, who get their marching orders -- host: wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, i will stop you there. you mentioned these amorphous entities. we get our marching orders from no one. who are these entities? caller: pelosi, schumer, the fbi, the cia. host: how do you relate to those charges? caller: they don't prosecute hunter biden for his crimes on videotape. how come, how come jeffrey f and just lay maxwell get arrested for a pedophilia ring that they
7:50 am
are running, but no one is interested in who was actually? host: how do they relate to the entities you just mentioned? caller: who makes the decision not to prosecute them? what are they afraid of? why won't they release the names? maybe the chinese will allow c-span to let out. host: again, we don't take marching orders from anyone, i will leave it there. james, ohio, your neck up. caller: i have to agree with most of the last callers. president trump is the best president have ever had. the comment from the blind man, i'm a blind man myself. the blind man that called in little bit, two different blind people seeing two different things in their fogginess, i guess. host: why exactly would you support the president for
7:51 am
another term? caller: because he has done everything right, sir. he has done everything right. and joe biden has done everything wrong. i believe that joe biden is going to be impeached at one time or another for all his badness. host: give me an example of president trump doing everything right. caller: well, overseas, the killing of terrorists, not giving into morals. the tax breaks and everything, he does everything right. joe biden, i think, deserves to be impeached for his mass at the border, for his lying, for his son's activities. thank you very much. host: it's a busy week of the world of economics as things progress. they say that this is the
7:52 am
busiest week of the year with investors saying the latest policy meeting at the federal reserve is set to take place this coming tuesday and wednesday, expected to raise interest rates another 75 asus points. the spotlight on thursday is the advanced gdp market participant looking at whether a recession is already underway and economists are expected to show annual growth of 0.5% last order according to estimates from bloomberg and they have comments on the stock market and how that performed as well. more of that to watch out for this week as the week progresses. let's go to judith, in michigan, first. hello, go ahead. caller: just going to answer the question. never, never, ever what ipo or trump again. he had better not try to run it all.
7:53 am
he claims to be a businessman. he is not a politician. if people remember, and i haven't even heard it over all these years since he was voted in, when he was campaigning in 2016, he revealed when he was vying for a position with hillary, he said his father had said that trump's never lose. never lose. they never lose. he has kept that in his brain and that's why he declared, why he -- host: why exactly not support him for 2024? caller: i can't stand him. i can't stand his personality. i can't stand his looks. i can't stand his gestures. i can't stand his policies. his proposals. i would never, ever vote for him. host: just to clarify, you are a republican?
7:54 am
caller: no, independent, now. i backed out of it. i did both him because i didn't want a lady in there. bible tells us a woman should never usurp authority over men. but of course that happens in lots of our churches in today's world. so, i voted for trump and when i saw his, how he was behaving in his personality i just couldn't, i couldn't go there. host: let's hear from jackie in north carolina. hello. caller: i would absolutely vote for president trump. to the previous caller, i don't know, what she can't stand, so i guess she likes of violence, crime, corruption? it's amazing to me how our fellow americans are so duped by all the lies. host: why would you support him specifically if he ran again? caller: i love him.
7:55 am
he's always here for the people. he shows up all the time. he's gone to all different communities and cultures. he always errors. during covid, all of the equipment that was needed, the ventilators and everything else he had transported around the world to other countries in need of it. he's the greatest, generous man ever. host: that is jackie in north carolina. let's hear from josh, josh and silver spring, maryland. hello. caller: how are you? host: good, thank you. caller: i would not vote for trump if he ran again. i with the other callers who can't stand him. i don't vote for used car salesman who sloganeering and sell lies all the time. january 6 just being icing on the cake considering what a piss
7:56 am
poor manager he was in office. i'm a dying breed of seeing -- wanting to see someone who is in the middle, moderate, just competent. the last string of presidents has been a series of incompetence when it comes to crises and things like that. with one last thought to leave this call, with regards to january 6, trump supporters showed up at the capital. not even during the civil war was the confederate flag in the capitol building and the trump supporters everyday confederate flag into the building last year. for someone like me, a rare republican in montgomery county maryland who also happens to be jewish, that is a sign of not welcome in trump land. host: to those hearings, one of the people on the sunday shows yesterday was one of the
7:57 am
committee members, adam schiff, talking about that hearing. you can see them all on c-span, talking about what the justice department should be doing in light of the hearings. here is part of what he had to say. [video clip] >> when all else failed, when these lines of effort to overturn the election failed, he made the decision to bring them up to the capital. when he learned that they were armed, his response was to take the magnetometers down. he wanted to march with the armed and dangerous mob in the capital. when he refused and was brought to the cafeteria in the white house, he wouldn't lift a finger as he watched on television police officers being beaten, couched, sprayed with chemicals in the most supreme dereliction of duty ever. and those public lines invoke various criminal laws and his conduct ought to be the subject of investigation.
7:58 am
>> well, we will see if the justice department darts one. on the things the committee laid out in the congressional forum, we still haven't seen a direct link substantiated between white house officials and militias, like the proud boys and the oath keepers that were a part of the violence that day. are you still trying to substantiate that? >> that remains an ongoing part of the investigation. we have shown some links between the president and key advisors, like roger stone and mike flynn and elements of these white nationalist groups but that component of our investigation continues and as is the case more broadly we will be presenting more information in the fall. but as we continue to ask about additional evidence, we really need to think about what we have demonstrated already. host: again, that's yesterday from the sunday shows.
7:59 am
one more call. stan, georgia, go ahead. caller: good morning. i'm enjoying your show. i would not for trump again because of his lack of honesty. his division of the people. his fawning to putin and encouraging his incursion into the ukraine. he misled us on how to deal with covid. i absolutely could not ever vote for him again. host: stand, there, georgia, finishing off the hour. she participation. later this evening, the former vice president mike pence at the heritage foundation. look for that in his statement on c-span, c-span now, however, and coming up congress is back this
8:00 am
week just shortly before they go out for break, up next to talk about what the agenda is, emily wilkins from bloomberg government, joining us next in the program and we will be joined by senior fellow molly reynolds about a bipartisan effort to change the way that electoral votes are counted after a presidential election. those conversations, coming up on "washington journal." ♪ >> live sunday, august 7 on in depth, larry elder will be our guest to talk about political correctness and racial politics. he is the author of several books including, "10 things you
8:01 am
cannot say in america." join in the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments and tweets. "in depth," sunday, august 7 at noon on c-span2. if you are enjoying book tv, sign up for our newsletter using the qr code on the screen. to see upcoming programs, discussions, book festivals and more, book tv every sunday on c-span2 or anytime online at book, television for serious readers. >> c-span's unfiltered coverage of the u.s. response to russia's invasion of ukraine, bringing you the latest from the president and other officials, the pentagon, and congress.
8:02 am
we have international perspectives from the united nations and statements from foreign leaders all on the c-span network, the free mobile app, and, our resource page where you can watch the latest videos on demand and follow tweets from journalists on the ground. go to >> c-span brings you an unfiltered view of government. our newsletter recaps the day for you from the halls of congress to daily press briefings to remarks from the president. scan the qr code to sign up for this email and stay up-to-date on every thing happening in washington. subscribe today using the qr code or visit to subscribe anytime. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now, emily wilkins who covers campaigns for
8:03 am
bloomberg government. good morning. guest: thanks for having me. host: how much time does congress have before they go on break? guest: if you are in the house, you have until friday. if you are in the senate, you have longer. they are hoping they will not be in for an additional week but there is a lot to get done and there is the potential that we could see the house stay later and even see the senate stay later if they need to get certain components done. they have the semiconductor bill. we will see that this week. there is potentially reconciliation if democrats can figure out what they are going to do, if they can craft legislation and start moving it through the process. those are the two big things but there are lots of smaller things that congress is looking to in the next few weeks. host: let's start with reconciliation. how much of that has to be repackaged because of senator manchin's decision not to support anything in it? guest: they are looking at two healthcare provisions.
8:04 am
one would extend medicare subsidies and the other with lower some drug crosses -- drug prices. democrats and republicans argue their case that it should be in reconciliation. not everything can be, but we are waiting for the parliamentarian to give her decision on that. that could happen as soon as today. it is a matter of writing the bill, getting a packaged. when we talk to democrats, there is a disappointment that they are not able to get more of what they wanted into this overall reconciliation package. at the same point, they feel like they have something they can run on, they can talk about it to voters, and it can help them for the election. host: remind people the scope that reconciliation was supposed to take before the actions of the last couple of weeks especially with senator manchin. guest: looking at trillions of dollars, pre-k, housing, climate provisions, tax provisions.
8:05 am
even recently they thought they would be able to get them in the bill and at the last minute you have senator manchin say we will not be able to do that. they were looking at a tax on the wealthiest americans. all of that is not going to be able to be included in the overall package. healthcare deals as well as measures that should help reduce some of the budget deficit. host: it gives them something to look forward to into august and november is one of the sites as well for campaigning on these issues. guest: absolutely. you have a number of americans who are joining healthcare during the pandemic and got to do so through some of these subsidies. if these subsidies expire, americans will see their insurance amounts go up right before the november election. that is something democrats are hoping to avoid. one of the reasons that a lot of them are looking to pass this bill. host: our guest is with thousand 28:30.
8:06 am
if you want to talk to her about the events in congress, you can call (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans. if you want to text questions, you can do so at (202) 748-8003. usually this time of year they are spending bills that have to be approved and usually they are never done in time. what is the status of those bills? guest: it is not looking good. we the -- we did see spending bills past the house and we heard from leaders that they were hoping to bring another three bill to the floor this week but that is not on the agenda right now. it does not seem poised to happen. a lot of these bills you have various positions -- various provisions and disagreements. there will be continuing resolutions where we continue government funding from what it has been. a lot of washington has gotten used to this at this point where
8:07 am
there is an effort to pass these bills but ultimately something more similar to what we currently have goes through and much letter than the deadline of september 30. if the government does not pass something by then, it could shut down and no one wants that in an election year. host: certain levels would stay frozen until they can change those? guest: that is the option that we are moving toward. host: we saw last week debate in the judiciary committee amongst -- about assault weapons ban. what is being proposed and what is the vote on this? guest: this would be a ban on assault weapons, not ones that are currently there. it has been a controversial issue. this bill has been introduced and introduced to previous congresses. this one is notable because you are seeing more lawmakers sign on this bill as cosponsors who you have not seen before. a lot of moderate democrats, some from rural areas, some of
8:08 am
them with difficult elections. you are at that point where leadership is pretty close to having the vote to go. ahead and pass this bill. you have democrats who have said absolutely not, we will not support this but you have the potential that some republicans might actually cross the aisle and vote for it and i am thinking of chris jacobs, the republican from new york. he is from buffalo. there was a mass shooting there and he said he would be in support of an assault weapons ban. the question comes down to timing. will they have the time to pass that? are they going to have the votes as well because right now, if this does pass, it will be by the narrowest of margins. host: talk about the democratic hesitancy. what is causing the pause? guest: thick about the democrats who said that they are a solid no. we know congers been jeered for men, these are lawmakers who are holding onto competitive districts and a lot of them say we know our districts.
8:09 am
they know the district in texas, in maine, that it is a culture of guns, what people expect, what they want, how they view things that makes this a difficult vote. we talk to folks who support their second amendment rights. they would say that they worry that an assault weapons ban will become a slippery slope with the government taking guns away and that has been a redline on what can and cannot be done. with the most recent mass shootings, an outcry for government to do something has led lawmakers to say i think it is time to start supporting a ban on assault weapons. host: if the vote did passed, what is the potential in the senate? if it is not going to pass, why make the effort? guest: those are good questions. i do not see a way that this bill can pass in the senate at all. 10 senate republicans would be a lot. all 50 democrats would be a lot on this bill.
8:10 am
there is a sense that we see mass shooting after mass shooting after mass shooting and there needs to be something. congress wants to show they are addressing this issue, that they are putting proposals forward. we have seen the house passed bills all the time that we know will never go anywhere in the senate. some of the time the idea is to put pressure on the senate, to say there is a will among the american people to do this. sometimes it is for the house to go, we did our job, we passed this bill. if you are unhappy, look at your senators. host: emily wilkins from bloomberg government joining us for this conversation. (202) 748-8000, democrats. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents (202) 748-8002. let's hear from john. you are first up for our guest. good morning. caller: can you hear me good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i had a question about the bills passed by the house.
8:11 am
abortion, gay marriage, and contraception. i was wondering in the senate, for those three bills, what do you think the likelihood of them getting 60 votes is? guest: for abortion and contraception, that is not likely to happen at all for this congress. if there was an abortion bill or a vote, it would be mostly about messaging, about seeing where people are. the same-sex marriage one is interesting. i want to say 33 republicans, somewhere around that number, voted to pass it and that was a lot more than people were expecting. especially when you look at how the votes have gone on other bills. there is the hope that the senate might be able to find 10 republicans to band together with 50 democrats and get the votes to clear it. then the issue goes back to timing. things take longer in the senate. you have to have all of these
8:12 am
procedural votes. it will not be passed by unanimous consent so it will take a while. at this point, that is the big impediment to pass the senate is there is not a lot of time left and there are so many other things that need to be done. host: you mentioned a couple of references to the chips bill. can you talk to viewers about that and what it does in china as far as how it addresses that? guest: this is about semi conductor manufacturing and having it in the u.s.. a lot of industries, automotive industry, the tech industry, these things were impacted recently because there has been impacted various industries around the gold -- around the globe from a lack of semi conductors. the need for manufacturing our own semiconductors and we should not be getting as many of them from other countries. this bill would put $52 toward semi conductor manufacturers coming to the us.
8:13 am
it would provide funding to the national science foundation as well as other research programs in the u.s.. this is something similar to reconciliation. we start off with a much bigger bill, particularly in the house with a lot of provisions that were much more directed at china and the u.s. relationship with china. we had trade provisions in there but all of that has been cut because we need to pass, congress feels they need to move things through quickly, that there is a limited amount of time and they need to get it through now. there has also been pressure from the national security industry. the commerce secretary has been on the hill as recently as last week telling lawmakers this needs to pass now. we have seen companies like intel planning on opening up a factory in ohio to produce some of these semiconductors and then they delayed some of the groundbreaking and said they were taking another look at their plan.
8:14 am
a lot of urgency, a lot of pressure. the senate will be taking a procedural vote today and it is expect it for final passage tomorrow wednesday. the house will take this up as soon as possible. they will be aiming to pass it on friday. host: on a gentle story, nancy pelosi has expressed interest in going to taiwan. why is she interested in going and what pushback is she getting? guest: she would be the first speaker to visit taiwan in over 25 years. it really sends a message as to what the u.s.-taiwan relationship is as well as the u.s.-beijing relationship. speaker pelosi has not formally said that the trip is happening but it has been reported. we have heard pushback from the biden administration saying that they do not think this is the right time for her to go, that they are worried about the optics. she had this trip planned for several months ago and got covid. for her, it would be a historic
8:15 am
trip. it would send a clear message to china. at the same point, the biden administration, they are very careful about how they handle their relationship with beijing and careful about how biden talks and when he talked to president xi jinping and they are hoping to have another conversation soon. how this trip might impact the white house and the plans for that. host: emily wilkins joining us for this conversation. gary in kentucky on the republican line, go ahead. caller: the promises and promises they cannot fulfill, what you just listed that they are trying to pass, they will not fulfill those. we need government that can fulfill the promises that they make. it is within the democratic party, it is your own party that
8:16 am
cannot agree on things. there is nobody holding them back. it is just their own party. republicans -- trump will not run again because the simple reason is he sees that mitch is on the side of the democrats and that hurts him. that is a big thing that democrats need to get over his trump. host: thank you. guest: i cannot speak to whether or not trump will run again but i can speak to the sentiment that there is frustration at this point within the democratic party about how they are working right now and how they are unable to compromise on so many things. some things like the chips bill would need 60 votes and republicans. reconciliation, you only need
8:17 am
democrats. you have seen senator joe manchin, kyrsten sinema say we cannot agree to this, we cannot agree to that and whittle the package down. this is the reality of a 50-50 senate and the reality of having senators like joe manchin run a state like -- from a state like west virginia that really went for trump in the last election. if it was not joe manchin, i am not sure if there was any other democrat that could hold that seat. we would have had mitch mcconnell with being able to do everything they have been able to do with 50 votes even though it is not what they initially promised. when i talked to lawmakers, i hear about the overpromising and the under delivering. they have been able to do a lot from that $1 trillion covid care act that the past in early 2021 -- that they passed in early 2021. even ketanji brown jackson, that
8:18 am
was something that happened because mcgrath were able to hold senate -- because democrats were able to hold senate. host: this is brian in sacramento, democrats line. caller: good morning. i am a first time caller. i just wanted to say i am a democrat. i think we got a lot done. i think we could get more done if we had better odds in the senate. the bulk of my call is to complement ms. wilkins on the fact that it is so nice to see young women out there explaining to us, her readers
8:19 am
and her listeners what is really going on and allowing us to sift through massive amounts of information to make their own opinions. that is all i wanted to say. host: emily wilkins, on top of that we have a viewer asking why we are in the crazy scramble to get massive bills passed? what has congress been doing? guest: congress has been doing a number of things. these big transformative bills would be transformative for a number of americans and we have overlooked some of the smaller things we are able to get done. even when you think about the gun legislation that passed the house, it is the biggest gun legislation in 30 years but when you compare it to what democrats initially wanted, it is just a drop in the bucket. that is the reality of governing right now in a senate that is divided 50-50 in the house where
8:20 am
you only have a handful of votes at the margins, in a polarized u.s. our government reflects our country right now in the fact that it is very polarized. this is the reality of governing at this time. there are things we have gotten done but when you had biden lay out this huge addenda at the beginning -- his huge agenda at the beginning of his presidency and democrats thought they could be able to do it because we have 50, certainly they have gotten things done, but so much more was promised. host: is there a sense from congress what happens if the house changes hands after november and republicans take over in january, what happens as far as republican efforts on the house side and what that has to do with dealing with president biden? guest: republicans made it clear they are prepared to launch investigations. i have heard republicans express interest in investigating hunter biden, immigration, and having a
8:21 am
tougher january 6 investigation and investigating dr. fauci. we will see what they do or do not wind up investigating but that will be the bulk of what we see. even if republicans managed to win the house and the senate, a lot of it will be vetoed by biden. republicans will probably have the 50 votes they need to pass stuff through so that will be a limiting factor for some of the things they would like. we will return to a point where we will not see quite as much legislation actually getting through congress should republicans take the house in november, which at this point due to historical precedent and the polling we are seeing, does seem to be a very likely outcome. host: let's hear from todd in west virginia, republican line. caller: good morning. i want to let you know you guys rock. i love your show. ex-military affairs. we are so crunched with the energy sector right now in the
8:22 am
country after mr. trump left office. i have an idea for the present administration. i grew up in the 1970's and the carter administration. we had gas vouchers and gas lines because we dependent on the world for fuel and energy. they want to go so badly to electric vehicles here in our country. we are already trillions of dollars in the hole. why don't you guys give us a car voucher for an electric vehicle to get us off of the fossil fuels? host: that is taught in west virginia giving us a call -- that was todd in west virginia giving us a call. guest: the electric vehicle voucher is something they were considering in the reconciliation bill that is no longer there. it is not a huge concern for voters. the time i have talked with folks, it comes up again and again. the biden administration knows
8:23 am
this. the difficulty is how this is a problem that has to do with a really wide industry that made a lot of changes during the pandemic and is now having to come back online. so far you have seen a number of things from the biden administration tapping into the strategic reserve, allowing ethanol to be used more in fuel. that has not had a huge impact. it is like secretary buttigieg said, gas prices have been solid but still really high for a lot of americans and will still be an issue in november. at this point, i do not think there is a town that congress can do and the idea that has been floated before that it might wind up impacting inflation. there is also talk about a gas tax holiday. you heard speaker pelosi say our concern is that if you were to get rid of this tax, there is nothing that would require these gas companies to pass those
8:24 am
savings down to the store -- to consumers. that is her main sticking point. we have not seen that legislation moved to the floor even though president biden called for a. host: i want to ask you about ukraine but i want to show you from cbs yesterday, the ambassador to ukraine to the united states spoke about russia's attack on odessa and calls for continued support from the united states. [video clip] >> what happened is telling about what has been happening for the past eight years. for the past eight years ukraine always acted in good faith and tried everything possible and sometimes impossible to end the war and return our sovereignty, similar with the 151 days. we are standing strong and defending our country. at the same time, we will find any options to resolve the crisis. this is a crisis that russia has
8:25 am
graded for other countries, not only ukraine -- russia has created for other countries, not only ukraine. in russia's violation, they are clearly showing who they are and that they have to be stopped. >> is russia technically violating because unnamed officials are quoted as saying that they may not have because russia never pledged to avoid attacking parts of ukraine that are not used for grain exports. that seems like a pretty big oversight. >> let's call it what it is. everything russia is doing in ukraine is a violation of international law. taking over another country is a violation, it is a war crime. we have the deal with the u.n. and from turkey. we are fulfilling the duty. they agreed with russia and they have the stop the war. they have to do everything without any initial signs. with this, they are just showing their true face again.
8:26 am
the response to that should be more weapons to ukraine so that we can defend ourselves, we can get them out from our country, and we can unblock our ports. host: that is the ambassador of ukraine to the united states. emily wilkins, we have heard from congress a lot after the war started between russia and the ukraine. where is information that congress is getting about ukraine? guest: congress was briefed by the first lady of ukraine who came in person to talk to lawmakers. we will see the house and the senate get two separate briefings on wednesday about the situation in ukraine. this is something that when you saw congress passed that large sum of funding for the president , you knew that this was going to be something that was going to be going on for a period of time, something they were thinking about long-term, strategically. congress is still very much involved in ukraine and paying attention to ukraine but it has gone to the point where other
8:27 am
domestic priorities have superseded that, both in terms of what happens in congress as well as what the american people think about on a day-to-day basis. host: here is mike in california, independent line for our guest, emily wilkins. go ahead. caller: good morning. . my question is why was a constitutional amendment required for alcohol prohibition but none for drug prohibition, a simple statute was passed for drug prohibition. guest: i'm going to dig deep into my a peek u.s. history knowledge. i believe there are different ways you can have various bands on things, that you can make rules that apply to everyone. you can do it through a constitutional amendment. that is a difficult process. if you are able to pass a law or have any sort of regulation, both of those have much less easier ways to go about doing it. host: this is from william in
8:28 am
texas, democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question for you, emily. you keep telling me democrats have not done anything and they are not doing anything and they cannot do anything. tell me what the republicans have done in the last five or six years? absolutely nothing for the american people. they built one wall and killed one million people with covid and you are telling me it is better to have a republican than a democrat? host: i will let the guest respond to that. guest: i hope that the guest has the opportunity to go back and listen to earlier in this program because i laid out a couple of things that the democrats have done this year. passing covid aid, infrastructure funding, passing the gun bill we saw the other week. what the overall perception has been is that democrats have over promised. they have talked about doing a lot of things that they will now not be able to do. even though they have done a
8:29 am
lot, that perception of you said you would be able to do this and now we cannot, that is having an impact on democrats across the country who feel that their party is not living up to what it needs to be doing, particularly because they have the majority in the chamber and the big asterisk is you only have a 50-50 majority in the senate, which makes it very difficult to get any sort of big substantial agenda passed. host: besides the things we talked about, what else should we look out for this week in congress? guest: we covered all the big things. if you are a fan of taggart king, carole baskin's law will get a vote of the house this week that is about restrictions on keeping lions and tigers, i know that was a big show. that is an interesting bill. on a more serious note, the water resources bill, the water
8:30 am
development, water safety, water infrastructure, an important piece of legislation. beyond that, we did hear a majority leader say he is looking at bringing safety bills forward. it is not clear if that is the assault weapons ban or other pieces of legislation dealing with police. a number of democrats within the house both in terms of centrist democrats as well as more moderate have been pushing pelosi to bring legislation to the four that shows that democrats do support this police -- support the police. they are really trying to push back on the defund the police narrative. host: emily wilkins covers congress and campaigns. hope you come back. guest: thank you for having me. host: when we come back, molly reynolds will highlight a bipartisan effort to change the way electoral votes are counted after a presidential election. that is coming up on "washington journal." ♪
8:31 am
>> at least six presidents recorded conversations while in office. hear many of those conversations during season two of c-span's podcast "presidential recordings." >> the nixon tapes, deliberations and 100% unfiltered. >> let me say that the main thing is that it will pass and my heart goes out to those people who are overzealous. if i could only spend a little more time being a politician and less time being president, i would have kicked them out. >> find presidential recordings, season two on the c-span now app and lab or wherever you get your podcast -- c-span now app or
8:32 am
wherever you get your podcast. >> c-span has coverage of the house january 6 committee investigating the attack on the capital. go to 6, the resource page to watch the latest videos of the hearings, briefings, and all coverage on the attack and subsequent investigations since january 6, 2021. we will have reaction from members of congress and the white house as well as journalists and authors talking about the investigation. go to 6 for a fast and easy way to watch when you cannot see it live. >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker, play c-span radio, and listen to "washington journal" daily. important congressional hearings and other public affairs events
8:33 am
throughout the day. weekdays catch "washington today" for a report on the stories of the day. listen to c-span anytime. just tell your smart speaker, "play c-span radio." now available at the c-span shop , c-span's 2022 congressional directory. go there today to order a copy of the directory. this book is your guide to the federal government with contact information for every member of congress including committee assignments. also, contact information for governors and the biden administration. open your -- order your copy today. every c-span shop purchase helps support c-span's nonprofit operation. >> "washington journal" continues. host: this is molly reynolds of the brookings institute.
8:34 am
she is their senior fellow here to talk about an effort to change how electoral votes are counted. thanks for joining us. guest: thanks for having me. host: it goes back to the electoral count act of 1987 -- 1887. guest: it is the federal law that we have currently that governs how the electoral votes actually get counted at the very end of the election and not only does it date to 1887, it reads like it dates to 1887. the reform effort aims to modernize the language and take steps to clarify some provisions that are in there that we have learned more recently might be vulnerable to some manipulation. generally the way that the 1887 law works is it provides for
8:35 am
basically what should happen on january 6 when the vice president is in the congressional chamber counting the electoral votes. host: it goes also in connection to the 12th amendment of the constitution which reads the elector shall mean no respective state or persons, and the number of votes each. talk about that connection. guest: under the 12th amendment that is part of the constitution that says that this is how we elect the president, it uses the electoral and requires congress to meet to tabulate the votes and that is where the eca of 1887 kicks in. it is the law that says that one member of the house and woman
8:36 am
-- and one member of the senate object, the joint session shall divide and each chamber shall debate the objection. the original law has provisions for how that works in the senate , that sort of thing. host: why did congress feel like it was needed at the time? guest: it is the aftermath of some contested presidential elections from the middle of the 19th century. that is when congress stepped into say we need to make clear exactly how this should work. host: this is our guest and she will talk about the process of counting electoral votes. if you want to ask her questions about that process, (202) 748-8000 democrats. (202) 748-8001 republicans. independents, (202) 748-8002 you can also text us at (202) 748-8003.
8:37 am
what did january 6, 2020 one as far as the deficiencies of the act? guest: a couple of things happened on january 6, 2021 that inspired this effort to reform the electoral count. one was this question around what is the role of the vice president. as we knew at the time and have learned more about in the intervening 18 months, there was a lot of pressure on vice president pence to assert the authority that he does not have or did not have under the law. one of the things that this effort to reform the law does is it really clarifies that the vice president's role is purely ministerial. his job is to open the envelope and read. he does not have any discretion over which votes get counted. that is one thing that has the january 6 highlighted. the second is around this
8:38 am
question of objection. one of the things we saw was an effort related to the electoral votes from arizona and the votes from pennsylvania for groups of house members to object the counting of those votes. under the current law you need only one house member and one senator to sign on to an objection for that to trigger a division of the joint session where the house debates the objection and this debates the objection and votes on it. one of the things the proposal does is it raises a number of members of the house and the senate from just one to 1/5 of each body chosen. host: that is a large change. guest: it is a large change. the goal is to reduce the number of what we might think of as trivial objections. the proposal also clarifies what
8:39 am
is an objection that congress should be raising. what are the circumstances under which we think an objection is legitimate. it tries to reduce the chances that we see these trivial objections through the submission of electors. host: back to the vice president. is the current law ambiguous in the way that he serves in ministerial role or whether he can serve further than that? that was a question from the president's team as well. guest: most legal experts would say that the current law does not give the vice president any latitude. it is clear that in the run-up to january 6 there was a lot of pressure from folks inside the white house on president -- on
8:40 am
vice president pence to take a different interpretation of the law. this proposal makes as clear as possible that the vice president's job is ministerial in the counting of the votes. host: just to show you some of those provisions we will talk more about throughout the segment as far as the format of 2022, it would make sure that the vice president performs in a ministerial role, it would ensure a single conclusive state of electors including governors being responsible for submitting those state of electors. it will provide an expedited additional view of claims and raises the threshold. we will talk more about that as we go on. if you want to ask questions, you can do so on the line. you can also text us at (202) 748-8003. mobile, alabama, republican line , this is bill. you are on with our guest. go ahead. caller: it is obvious that those
8:41 am
people who wanted to stop trump chose not to follow this law. in the future, if there is a law and they want to stop somebody, why do you think they would follow that law? guest: it is a great question and it illustrates one of the challenges of lawmaking around votes and lawmaking generally, which is that you can write all the laws you want, but there are limits to what you can expect in terms of or there may be limits in terms of what you can expect. one of the goals of this act, this reform proposal that we have not talked much about yet, is this idea of what has been called a federal court backstop. one of the things that proposal provides for is that there is a
8:42 am
dispute in a state around a slate of electors. it puts forth an expedited federal judicial review process for that dispute and it says specifically that if there is a dispute in federal court between competing states of electors, what the state -- what the court says is what goes and that is this late that congress has to count, that is what congress has to follow. no law is perfect. there are questions about specific provisions of this law and this proposal. one of the things that it really tries to do is anticipate some of those possibilities, some of those places where folks might try to mentally process and say we are going to tighten things up as much as we possibly can. host: as far as the framework, is it a single judge that would review it? is there a panel?
8:43 am
guest: it calls for a three-judge panel with expedited and prescribed review to the supreme court, if necessary. host: let's go to patty in wisconsin, independent line. hi. caller: thank you. i need a civics lesson because sometimes i feel like a popular vote is not representative of the electoral vote. i feel like at times my vote has been canceled out. can you explain the popular and the electoral? thank you. guest: absolutely. the way that we select the president in the united states does involve the electoral college. each state has a certain number of electoral college votes and it is the number of seats they have in the house of representatives plus two to account for their senators. in each state, the process of determining who gets those
8:44 am
electoral college votes, that is what is done by the popular vote. for the caller in wisconsin, you go to the polls. so do your neighbors across the state on election day. you cast your ballot and whoever wins the most votes in wisconsin gets wisconsin's electoral vote. there are a couple of states where the electoral vote can be split at the congressional district level. whichever candidate gets the most popular votes in a congressional district gets some of the electoral college votes. that is the process by which we select the president and the caller is right, that it can and has in recent years created disjuncture between who wins the most votes overall and who actually wins the presidency because we have this intermediate step in the electoral college. host: we have a viewer on
8:45 am
twitter saying why recount how we count electoral votes? only in congress are they unable to count electoral votes. guest: one of the things that january 6, 2021 and the run-up to that exposed for us is that even though we have this law from 1887 and it reads like it is from 1887 but it is clear on what should happen. if you have a group of folks who are determined to manipulate that law, there were some holes, some places where they could try to manipulate what was provided for. the goal in this reform proposal is to modernize the process and clarify what the steps are and to reduce the chances that the electoral college vote count cannot be completed. in which case, we would end up
8:46 am
having what is called a contention election where the outcome would be determined by the house of representatives. host: from james in new hampshire, democrats line. caller: good morning. i love "washington journal." longtime viewer. thank you for your professionalism and intelligent. it is refreshing. two questions basically concerning the electoral count that occurred on january 6. correct me if i am wrong in anything i say. since vice president pence was basically a ceremonial action, why did president trump push the narrative that he could have changed or considered not necessarily changing but affecting a different count. secondly, if that is the case,
8:47 am
is it possible that the insurrectionists who broke into the capital, where they duped by president trump and if they were , isn't that disingenuous? guest: your first question about what were president pence's powers, all election law experts look at the existing law and say that the vice president's job is ministerial. he does not have the power under the existing law to intervene and decide which way to count. that is the consensus on the current law. as we saw on january 6, there was pressure from folks with less mainstream legal interpretations of the law to try and pressure vice president
8:48 am
pence to do something different, to choose which electors to count. one of the things that this proposal that was introduced last week tried to do is clarify that. the other question on how does this fit in with what we saw happen with the insurrection at the capital on january 6, the caller's line of argument about the individuals who stormed the capital following this line of reasoning, that is certainly a case that we have seen the committee try to make over the last 6-8 weeks of the public hearings. one of the ways they have tried to tell the story of what happened is to say that some of these folks were misled by this rhetoric around what the vice president really could do, which
8:49 am
suggested he had much more power than he actually does. host: can you clarify what the rules say about a single slate of electors or the possibility of them to alternate slate of electors? what are the actual rules? guest: this is another place where the new law is meant to clarify what happens. under the reform proposal, the goal really is to ensure that a single conclusive slate of electors come in from each state. we mentioned before, one of the things it does is that in each state, there will be a single official who was allowed to submit the single slate of electors. generally, that would be the governor. the state could decide it would be the secretary of state. in other places, there is an emphasis on states having to use laws in place before election
8:50 am
day itself. another place where this reform proposal really comes in is to try and prevent the possibility of a state changing its laws and rules for determining who gets electoral vote after the fact, between the actual popular vote on election day and when the electoral votes are counted. host: brookings institute molly reynolds joining us. orlando is next. caller: good morning. maybe i am a genius but i do not think i am. with all the people in congress with a college education, it seems like someone would have said the electoral votes are not fair because one state should not have more electoral votes than another state if every vote counts, is it possible that day can get our license that proves
8:51 am
you are a citizen and the barcode on the back of the license can create a program to scan the barcode and that tells you how old you are. if i buy cigarettes, they scan my license and it tells you how old i am, my birthday, whether i am a citizen. wouldn't that be more feasible, or however you say it, to scan your license and that way every vote counts and not one state getting more votes? if you do not have enough money to live in the state of california because they are pushing everybody out -- host: we got your point, thank you. guest: i picked up on two things from this caller. one is the question of is the electoral college fair. it is the case that the electoral college is designed by
8:52 am
the drafters of the constitution based on particular politics of the late 18th century and disputes between the states and their delegations about what was the best way to balance power across the country between white southern slave owning interests and northern industrial colonial interests. it is the case that the caller's question about is the electoral college fair is something we have been debating for quite some time. on the second piece, i want to also mention that while most of what we talked about already, most of what will get attention in the coming weeks about the electoral count reform effort is this piece around the counting of the vote. when it was released last week,
8:53 am
we had a second proposal, slightly bipartisan, slightly different than the one that is around the eca, but a second bill around some election administration questions. this gets to the caller's question about the relationship between using your drivers license you go to the polls. under the second proposal, it tries to address some issues that we saw in stark display in 2020 including increasing penalties for folks who threaten election officials. it also tries to improve the postal services processing of election-related mail. it re-authorizes something called the election assistance commission, which is a small federal agency that is responsible for providing federal assistance to states to run their elections. this is a reminder that we are talking a lot about the actual mechanics of counting the vote, the electoral vote on the sixth
8:54 am
of january and the process but there are other pieces of our election apparatus that are being discussed actively for possible legislation. host: that was a source of minor pushback from the democratic side because they wanted to make sure that elections on the mobile levels were all insured and protected before they go to the process of the actual vote count on january 6. guest: yes. it illustrates that this -- the electoral count act and the process of counting the electoral votes, we have seen some vulnerabilities in that system. that is what part of this is designed to address. there are much broader challenges in the context of our elections. it is good to see congress working not just on the mechanics of the eca but also these bigger questions. host: al is in tennessee on the independent life. good morning. caller: i want to make sure that
8:55 am
everybody knows that this legislation allows only for the governor to submit the electors. it takes all the power out of the state legislature. speaking of people, the people that are interested in this are susan collins, lisa murkowski, mitt romney, the same suspects. speaking of people, do you know if inching go -- ninchinko is in support of this? maybe you can tell the audience who he is. guest: one other the caller raises is the question of who is working on this legislation. it is important to reflect on the degree to which it is a bipartisan group of senators, senators from both the democratic and republican parties.
8:56 am
one that really has been in the works for a while with members of both parties in the senate working on it. the previous guest was talking about the challenges of bipartisanship in the current congress. when we think about where might there be some successes, where might we look to for some place where we have seen bipartisanship, this is a good example of that. host: let's hear from susan collins from last week talking about the legislation and the proposals the bipartisan effort. [video clip] >> mr. president, in four of the past six presidential elections, this has been abused with members of both parties raising frivolous objections to electoral votes. but it was the violent breach of the capital on january 6 of 2021 that really shined a spotlight
8:57 am
on the urgent need for reform. over the past several months, senator manchin and i have worked with a terrific bipartisan group of senators who are united in our determination to prevent the flaws in this 135-year-old law from being used to undermine future presidential elections. host: that was susan collins from last week. to the caller's previous point about taking the power out of the state legislator and giving it to the governor, is there an issue with that? guest: one of the things that this reform proposal is meant to do is ensure that each state sends a single conclusive state of electors -- slate of electors to washington to be counted. one of the concerns that the law -- the proposal is meant to
8:58 am
address is the possibility that we would see a state try to send an alternative slate of electors, perhaps signed by a governor or a different state official or a state legislature. one of the things that the law tries to do is say no, we will put steps in place to ensure we have a single conclusive slate of electors. that is why each state has to designate before election day who that single official will be. all states will probably view the governor. it also puts into place this expedited process for judicial review if there is a dispute and it is clear that if there is a dispute, what the federal court is what congress has to follow. host: steve is next, democrats line, maryland. caller: i am extremely confused,
8:59 am
molly reynolds. i thought this was the most secure election in history. based on the hearings i am watching and the reports, they keep saying this was one of the most secure elections in history. it leads me to the question, why are we doing an electoral count act reform if it was one of the most secure elections in history? guest: this illustrates the various steps of the process of selecting a new president in the united states. when folks talk about the fact that the 2020 election was the most secure election in american history, that is correct. they really are talking about the part where the caller and millions of other americans actually cast their ballots. in 2020, lots of people did that by mail. other people went to the polls. that process whereby individuals
9:00 am
cast their ballots and then those ballots are counted, that part is the part that people talk about when they talk about the most secure election in american history. what this reform proposal is targeted at is what happens after that point. what happens after hundreds of millions of americans have cast their ballots and we have to go through the rest of the process of getting from those wrong votes -- raw votes to counting the votes in the electoral college in the individual states and counting them in washington on january 6. is there another target date? caller: -- guest: the first part of your question, is the bigger one. the fact that we have real bipartisan by in in the senate,
9:01 am
it is a good first after that -- first step for that. as the previous test was talking about, there is a lot on the agenda for congress and -- his day in the sun. we will have to keep an eye on it. we will need 60 votes. the fact that there is a rock bipartisan support in the senate is a good step. even some republicans in the senate who are not involved in the negotiations are likely to supported -- to. they were there on the sixth of january. host: this is molly reynolds of the brookings institute.
9:02 am
in florida, nelson. caller: miss reynolds, i am not confident in the proposals -- because it needs more bureaucracy, more people involved and more hands in the five. the big problem we have regarding all of this is the fact that in 2020, there were several states that violated their own state constitution. when you violate the constitution, the statute -- the statutes become meaningless. a comment that the democratic party likes to use when it is to their convenience. i am 73 years old and i have been voting in every election
9:03 am
since i have been old enough to vote and i have always trusted the results except because of the last one because there were several states that violated their constitutions. host: that is on the state level. we are talking about when the votes are counted in comments -- congress. i am trying to apply to the conversation to the expert i am having here. caller: let me finish. it is a mistake to create more laws and it is a mistake -- a mistake to create more bureaucracy because it only creates more cop -- problems. guest: what i think about this particular reform proposal is not just creating more laws.
9:04 am
the same basic structure is the same. there are folks who think we should eliminate the electrical -- electoral college and that would be a much bigger step in this reform proposal -- damnedest reform proposal. the -- in this process of counting reform votes. says if there is a dispute, this is how it will be addressed in the courtroom and once the federal courts have been adjudicated, what they say is what goes and that is the step congress has to follow. clarifying, what is the rule of
9:05 am
law approach? host: that judicial review all done before the actual count takes place in congress. guest: what other questions -- one of the questions, you heard some folks were well-versed in this law, is there at sign provided for -- in the proposal, if it is exabyte -- expedited enough, when it resolved -- as the house and the senate debates, there will be questions but the real goal here is to provide more of a full process. host: let's hear from las vegas. caller: after a controversial
9:06 am
question i would like to ask -- i have a controversial question i would like to ask. what if the mob had captured vice president pence before the electoral vote were counted, where would we be asked at this point? i will wait for my answer offline. guest: it is impossible know where we would be and i suspect it will be in a worse place that what actually happened on january 6. the basis of the question illustrates the importance of trying to tighten and clarifying reform and modernized the process for tabulating because it is true that what generated,
9:07 am
what happened on january 6 was the senses that the vice president had discretion that he could use in the counting of the votes and the proposal stems and in says no, he does not clarifies things and makes it clear that he is acting in a minute story level -- ministerial level. -- the most senior member of the majority party. host: john in cleveland unlocked as ohio, independent life -- cleveland ohio, independent line . caller: given the federal basis that the federal supreme court has put the monkey in the rich -- ranch, the state supreme
9:08 am
court has nothing to do -- what is the objection of the potential -- is it too late when the government all texas governor already sensitive -- when the government -- governor already sent it there? guest: i think the important thing to remember is that no law is going to be perfect but the gloom of the proposal is to --bo on up the proposal is to make it clear on what should happen and reduce the chances of there being multiple alternatives electors. host: in florida. democrats line. caller: i do have a question
9:09 am
about the electoral council at reform. i would like to go back to the guy that, before that was questioning -- that called before that was saying he doesn't believe in elections because states didn't fall -- follow their constitutions. back i didn't provide any links and it has been disproven. i looked at political fact -- political fact --politifact and it is not proven. they enacted emergency measures during the pandemic to enable more people to vote which is a
9:10 am
good thing. let me get to the electoral count act reform. i hope it works and i hope it does something to get these crazy actions that were tried last time to change the results of the election. get the news and they say -- we will get the news and they say all these -- the state legislatures, which are all trying to change their lower level loss to make it easier -- for people who shouldn't change elections to be able to change election so i have taken enough of your time and i think you. -- thank you. guest: the caller illustrates something that is a challenge in the united states -- for
9:11 am
elections in the united states because we are a large and diverse country where the a lot of the possibility happens at the local level -- responsibility happens at the local level. there are places where the system has vulnerabilities where we have to step up and address and what this law does is taste -- a process and -- takes a process and tries to clean it up. there was a second piece of legislation introduced at the same time that does try to address some of the questions about ensuring the safety and integrity of our elections around sites and increasing penalties who threaten election officials. there are challenges in the
9:12 am
process of running elections but this electoral count act takes up a important piece of that. host: republican line. caller: disagreed with the legislation but to explain why, i want to use the 1876 election. in 1876, there was an intent -- contentious election. it appeared as tilden was decided the winner but there were reports and rumors of suppression of black holes in the south -- black votes in the south. what congress did is they had a bipartisan commission of an people number of republicans and democrats and a conservative
9:13 am
supreme court is an ace -- a liberal supreme court justice andy decided there was fraud. if something like that were to happen again, the current laws would be necessary and that is why i disagree with the electoral law that is being proposed. guest: one of the things that i think the caller says in the historywill, it is a cat scan mouse game. -- cat and mouse game. fast forward to today, you have to talk about -- we have talked about the reform proposal because in 2021 and 2020, the
9:14 am
process of tabulating the college. i they revealed vulnerabilities that need to be addressed. host: senior fellow for governance studies. that you for your time. we will do open form -- open form --forum. we will take your calls. the washington journal continues. ♪ >> larry elder will be our guest to talk about political
9:15 am
correctness, the left in racial politics. he is the author of several books. what race has to do with it and a love like me. join in the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments, texts and tweets. in death --depth larry elder -- with larry elder. if you are joining book tv, sign up with our news level to receive schedules, author discussions and more. book tv on c-span two or c-span now or -- ♪ >> is c-span's online store.
9:16 am
browse through the latest collections on apparel, boats and accessories. -- repurchase supports our nonprofit operation. shop now anytime at c-spanshop .org. >> there are a lot of places to get political information but only at c-span you get it from the source. no matter where you are or where you stand on issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here, or theater, or here, or anywhere that happens. america is watching on c-span powered by cable. >> teaching journal continues. host: do you want to send as a
9:17 am
text, you can do so at (202) 748-8003. -- the increasing interest rates in an effort to control information -- inflation. she writes -- our workers leaving less money and that is referred to as a dampening demand. make no mistake, if the fed touches too much, the resulting recession will affect workers of color and many people. that is the senator's in the wall street journal.
9:18 am
here is a portion of her statement from yesterday. >> we are seeing a slowdown. we are likely seeing some slowing of job creation but i do -- i don't think that that is a recession. recession is broad-based weakness in that economy. we are not seeing that now. there are risks we have to appreciate. inflation is higher, not just in the united states but many of our neighbors and you will -- the u.k. and canada and central bricks -- banks are addressing that. we have the war in ukraine that threatens higher oil prices that we are seeing. one of the things i have been doing in recent weeks is working with our allies to try to cap
9:19 am
the prices. both to diminish the revenues that russia gets but also keeping russian oil selling in a global market so that when the next round of sanctions are put in place, we are concerned that oil -- could be shut in in russia leading to a price spike. there are things on the horizon. versus knowing -- slowing globally and i am not saying we will avoid a recession but there is a path to keep the labor market strong and bring inflation down. host: it is a treasury secondary from yesterday. let's go to chester, virginia.
9:20 am
independent line. caller: the people in this country are waiting for that justice to do their job. josh thomas -- it just thomas in the supreme court -- judge thomas in the supreme court. he should resign or be impeached. his decisions are a compromise and the justice department, everyone wants justice and no one should be above the law and if we don't -- when the people don't get it in 2024, it won't be a election that is bloodied by people. the votes will be -- they want justice -- host: we will leave that there. it was representative list --
9:21 am
liz cheney talking about the interest or the possibility of the panel interested in texts from justice thomas's wife saying that her text causes her husband to refuse her -- recuse himself. lawmakers has emphasizes that there were continue summer -- the work continue summer. representative cheney talking about that yesterday. this is from new jersey, jim. caller: acute for taking my call. -- thank you for taking my call. i believe all these goals are set in on -- votes are sent in to cap and they are certified at
9:22 am
the state level and cents on december 14 and that is the electoral college count and that gives the next incoming president a period of transition to form his government. ever since the 14th, donald trump has been trying to fight that. that should have been done after the 14th, no objections. host: ok. pat in ohio. republican line. caller: hello. appreciate your forum. when to correct the gentleman from florida -- i want to correct the gentleman from florida. the state of pennsylvania, in
9:23 am
2017 way before the virus, they changed their election laws and procedures and weights against the state of pennsylvania's constitution to do that. that is the best example i can give you of changes and the supreme court said they wanted cure their case because the case should have been brought up closer to 27 -- 2017. someone dropped the ball there on the consumer their party -- republican party and i moved from georgia five years ago. we had a few -- quite a few fraudulent problems in georgia and that was caught on video. host: joel in pennsylvania, independent line. caller: thanks for taking my
9:24 am
call. but comment is this -- my comment is this. the people that say that elections are ready to end the voting system is no good, within the next election, they win, how they feel about? -- next --that? host: that is joe in pennsylvania? --. if it matters to politics or do you, you can run it. (202) 748-8000 democrats. (202) 748-8001 republicans. (202) 748-8002 dependence. -- dependent -- independents.
9:25 am
thanks for joining us. guest: it is doing better and his position has been updating the public and the press on how he is doing. in line with that, he has been -- improving. he has been working in the residence and he has evidence with others -- events. host: as far as his work load and particularly at this time with midterms, there are concerns of the president's ability to advance a agenda? guest: the white house says he is working well and there is no concern.
9:26 am
there might be concern about other democrats about his appeal and other democrats to see other potential candidates making moves and visiting early states. they say he is doing better and they don't expect any big shakeup in his schedule. host: one of the scenes that came from white house reporters after he got covert was hearing directly from the president's personal doctor and set of doctors -- instead of dr. jha. you talk about that -- can you talk about that? guest: there has been a major frustration within the press. the caller coordinator has to edit that -- covid coordinator
9:27 am
has said that they were intermediate teachers -- enter mediators --intermediators. when trump contracted covid, they were able to ask questions. i spoke to president obama's family physician and he said that perhaps the reason was they did not want the press to ask probing questions about other now covid related issues? -- i'm covid related issues -- non covid related issues. host: one of the questions of the week will be as far as where inflation is. how is the white house prepared? guest: they have prepared the
9:28 am
public with what to expect in our reading buddy -- rebutting -- and this are expecting a one-2% decline on gdp. typically, some economists review that recessionary -- because job numbers remain strong, that is not how things should be considered. host: this -- is this a typical approach to look at a broad-based series of numbers as where -- as opposed to a narrow view? guest: the sentiment -- there consumer sentiment -- if people make purchases in spite of inflation and people are holding onto their jobs and continuing
9:29 am
to get hired, that should be considered as far as factors and how the public or economists repeat gdp numbers. it remains to be see how the numbers will be inserted. -- interpreted. host: we saw the warehouse to senator joe manchin pulling back on certain aspects on the reconciliation bill. where is the white house on what they are able to see on this bill? guest: white house is looking to pass whatever they have. . the focus is on being a -- at influence and her push to get something nailed down will be the primary focus. host: one of the questions is the president will release
9:30 am
terrorists towards the trump administration, particularly george -- towards china. guest: president is expected to meet with the chinese president. he is quiet on what he expects to do on the terrace. there is an expectation. host: we heard the white house talk about making actions executive wives due to the roe v. wade decision from supreme court, we heard calls for climate emergency coming from the white house. the president is not feeling well so that may stop the efforts but anywhere from the warehouse -- word from the white house? guest: we were expecting something from climate. the day before he came from
9:31 am
covid and they were expectations servicing. there is a lot of pressure from the warehouse to do something. there is a letter from staff and congress in different branches of government urging jake -- president biden to take the situation seriously. we have not seen anything yet. host: you wrote a story taking a look at the white house but you will about gavin newsom -- wrote about gavin newsom. guest: he was in washington and he is traveling the country as other governors and attracting national headlines. he expected the governor in florida in a ad and he
9:32 am
published another addict in a texas newspaper going after greg abbott. there was -- there was a poll that was taken in gavin newsom was viewed as the candidate most difficult to beat by the attendees so he seems to be attracting attention as a perspective 2024 candidate. he has been very deferential to the white house -- but there is among some democrats some excitement about it. host: her story at the washington examiner website. catherine doyle. thanks for your time. we will continue back on open forum. thank you for waiting.
9:33 am
caller: was listening -- i was listening to some other people's calls and they say the democrats need to get over what happened on january 6 -- but it is not enough to the politicians to get over this but the actual people. we will never get over that especially when trump tried to do in detroit. they tried to break in to the center the night of the election. they never expressed their opinion about all those people that suffocate coming over here in the tops -- trucks and the one that got over the borderline
9:34 am
and the truck killed them and they never expressed that. down there where the governor in florida -- i'm sorry, in texas. what happened to the school shooting? he tried to cover that up. they are hollering about chemical plants. there have been three kennel plants exploding -- chemical plants exploding in the last three years. they are talking about the shortage. host: let's hear from ralph in washington dc. caller: i am about to skewer one of the sacred cows of the media which is the black lives matter effort. i went on the database.
9:35 am
blackhearts 2.8 times more likely to be killed -- black people are 2.8 more -- times more likely to be killed with coolies which is like -- police which is likely true. blacks commit aggravated assault 4.5 times more likely than whites. the idea that the police are intensely going out and killing blacks is a life. --lie. people -- if you as a liberal, how many people get killed, on our black people, they will tell you hundreds of the statistics say there is eight and we have a black lives matter organization. three women who have admitted they are communists.
9:36 am
they are being investigated for money lottery. -- laundry -- money-laundering. host: is ralph in washington dc. the washington times looks at the status in the supreme court on who leads the initial draft from justice alito on roe v. wade. this is from mark sherman. saying that less than 24 hours after the leak, teach -- john roberts had a probe into the breach. the supreme court won't say whether it is investigating and they won't say whether the leak -- weaker has been identified -- the leaker has been identified,
9:37 am
they have taking steps to try to prevent a repeat. the court has no comment,". go to jason -- let's go to jason. caller: where up -- will there be an investigation into the congressman who were standing by to help our former president pull up his -- pull off his coup? host: jeff, republican line. caller: op don't hang up so quick this time -- i hope you don't hang up so quick this time because this program is to educate people in the united states.
9:38 am
if anyone has a pen right this time. -- write this down. you will see what is going on around here because the town hall is not censoring us -- is now censoring us. this town has a lot of violations. the sidewalks are packed with cars and the -- they have to go into the street. would like to say that somebody called on her general sunday -- your channel sunday. there are 8 million -- a million nigerians from japan, how that would change. i don't know how, will -- trump
9:39 am
will be elected -- will fix it if he is elected. host: -- caller: calling in regards to the gentleman that called. i went to say to have -- want to say to him that black lives does matter and we are concerned as black -- on black crime. we are concerned about both -- police mop -- officers murdering black people. they shot someone 30 times. three months ago, they shot a female 29 times. i am real concerned about police officers that are supposed to serve and protect us that is
9:40 am
murdering us. they are only murdering black people and we need to do something about. the lady that was on prior to this call was saying biden would meet with police officers. i wish she would address that, now only to the police officers but to the public also. host: an open forum for 20 minutes. (202) 748-8000 democrats. (202) 748-8001 republicans. independents (202) 748-8002. d wore her desk world health organization, putting out -- the world health organization putting out a statement --
9:41 am
declared the virus a global health emergency. the white house coronavirus response coordinator made a, after saturday's announcement, an unusual group. it was the doctor on cbs talking about monkeypox outbreak. if a national emergency should be declared. >> you are seeing outbreaks out of control and part of the world. it is important. right now, we are looking at public health emergency as something that hhs might deliver -- or invoke but it depends on what they allow us to do. we have ramped up testing and we will continue to look at policy
9:42 am
options. >> you said that we can get our arms about -- around this. you said monkeypox is a virus we understand. are you saying today that monkeypox can be conveyed? -- contained? >> absolutely. we have a single strategy which is we are testing. we are getting vaccines out. we have the capacity to do 80,000 tests a week. that is an extraordinary number. we will release more vaccines. there is a very ramping up of response. host: this is james, republican line. caller: good morning. i think that we are overthinking the situation about the electoral college. you have a listener called who
9:43 am
was on target. if it is a problem, and i think it was in georgia, with the electoral college but if the governor is going to call a special election, he needs to call a special election, get with his general assembly and they both say this is what we are sending to washington. i don't think this needs to be the governor by himself doing an emergency situation and arbitrarily come up and make a decision. all of that need to go to the general assembly and they sign up -- sign off on it and that will cut down on the confusion by the way we are speaking about it we are over talking this day. host: thank you. john in i am in florida -- miami, florida.
9:44 am
caller: to highlight, friday, march 10 years since two cuban opposition ushers -- where assassinated -- on july 22, a bipartisan resolution by senators rubio, durbin, cruz minutes were honored -- author -- and men -- slaughtering them --menendez were honoring them. -- being followed by state security agents by the castrol dictatorship. -- the promote democracy and civil liberties through nonviolent resistance.
9:45 am
the robert f kennedy center links this with the protest that corrupted in cuba and the massive present in different -- and the current 700 humans that are detailed and sentenced to long prison sentences and show trials and other humans who were killed in july 11. a democrats the brutality of the regime and there is a bipartisan consensus in the senate and house to spotlight the career and legacy of them. host: that is john in miami. president trump expected to come back to washington to address an organization. political has a profile -- politico has a profile. the domestic policy advisor, thomas top advisor in the
9:46 am
national security adviser tina up working from whiteboards along with other people. it was reviewed by politico and outlined 10 priorities but the lands -- the president lost the election. others have not started their project and they turned it into a print for a new nonprofit described as a white house in waiting. president trump returns on tuesday. you will deliver a keynote address. -- he will deliver a keynote address. the former vice president set to address in washington today at the curtis fantasia -- heritage foundation.
9:47 am
you can watch that on c-span now and view it at our rick in massachusetts. caller: my first comment is russia. biden is sending his money at it seems -- what i am seeing, i am hearing that russia is dropping plots --bombs. he keeps talking about, -- [indiscernible] my second, it is with tom himself, he should have been in jail. -- trump himself, he should have been in jail.
9:48 am
he is running around like a free white male. at all times of money to stay out of jail -- have all kinds of money to stay out of the --jail. host: republican line. caller: thank you for your program. i am calling about the midterm elections this is --year. we are being told that the minority party against --gains in the midterm election. this is a -- ridiculous. we cannot let that happen. american democrats and independents need to get out and vote in november.
9:49 am
82 million beat 75 million votes in 2020 and the democrats and independents need to gain there's lovely in the senate -- derek slammer the lead -- bear --their slim lead. host: also, how republicans are capitalizing on that leading to the november election. here is part of that exchange. >> when you look at the issues, you can understand what desk why president biden is raising are at all-time lows. 31% of the american people think he is doing it until with affliction -- inflation at highest.
9:50 am
why are the republicans doing better --not doing better? you are talking about a dead heat. what is wrong with the republicans that you cannot capitalized at this moment where virtually everything is going wrong? >> majorities are not given, they are earned. let's look at what happened last month. republicans want to see -- 84%, hispanic. biden won it a year -- 1.5 years ago. the last time a republican held the seat is 100 years ago. it is along the border. republicans are doing well and there is a plan to put america on track.
9:51 am
the points that you put out there, put it in perspective. if a person is paid on a salary, they have lost a entire month of work for free because of the biden administration. the border is a national security crisis. you look at a crime on the streets, that is a direct effect on the democratic policies. there will be 107 days to change the course of history. host: wall street joiner profiles what is going on in the utah senate race. to turn senator mike lee is facing a 46-year-old federal intelligence agency officer who is running as an independent. mr. lee, 51 years old has a staunchly conservative voting record in the senate where he
9:52 am
has of road -- opposed positive covid-19 bills and ukraine eight --aid. that heatley could lead to showing mr. mcmullen five percentage points above --nehind --behind lee. joel in bayville -- faith hill -- statesville --fayetteville. caller: the first comment is about black lives matter. they need to do like other black activists, like martin luther king. he doubt with president johnson.
9:53 am
president douglas. what president lincoln. wpd -- wdb the block -- divorce -- if you don't work under the system, you are going to wind up in finland. or someplace outside the united states. this up in court to about, date they pass something that says black people would never be citizens of this country. date reversed it with amendments -- date reversed it with amendments but they can always go back on plessy versus ferguson. next, is about the border. all these organizations that started these -- maybe we could get some control over immigration.
9:54 am
congress does not want to do it but it has to be at a grassroots level to keep people under control and stop violating the border. host: don in colorado --shawn in colorado? caller: we can barely afford to put out on our land. the biting crime family has destroyed everything in 18 months? trump was the greatest president we have ever had. we have january 6 political prisoners. if he can follow political prisoners for age so trial, -- for a show trial, people are putting two dollars in the tanks, this is a joke. the media is complicit in the
9:55 am
climate host --hox. host: the washington post reporting that a pennsylvania room with -- woman -- reporting that she wanted to shoot nancy pelosi has been sentenced to 60 days. she is among the a hundred plus people who were arrested and charged with seizing the capitol building to contest the will -- rull. he is over 200 people -- she is one of 200 people who have been sentenced. let's hear from john. caller: i want to make a comment on the gentleman earlier that
9:56 am
caught about the police. what democrats are saying is not just defund the police. we should use the term purge the police. there are individuals in the police department and the military that are causing everyone problems. they are causing us to eat lose money -- lose money. if you look at safely, they purged the fast food industry. they stop trying to train people to treat people correctly and it began to hire people who have a tendency to see people correctly. i will like to suggest that the democrats take a new ban -- about purge the police and increase the payment for great
9:57 am
policemen who were left off after the purge. host: independent line. caller: hope you are well. i would like to make a couple of comments. i am a former democrat. this january 6 stuff is going far out of our realm. it is nothing but comedy tv. i was at home at day and i was going to go. i was familiar with the lady who took the police. she doesn't deserve that. she may have said that later on. who hasn't made a comment in the past? when i was watching on january 6 and i was watching you and fox
9:58 am
and cnn, they were taking pictures while president trump was talking and in those pictures, you could see the all black with the gas mask. you knew something was happening and i was texting people to leave. my second is i would absolutely love to see us so that -- asked go back to being not just a republican, not as a democrat, not whites, not black, we are american. we are an open border that we don't know who is going through and if we can remember what it was like september 12, we need to tell these people on the hill to concentrate on us. we are suffering right now. we need help, the gas prices, the food prices, housing.
9:59 am
i got my property taxes and i cannot believe how much it went up. if pennsylvania" are mixed in, we will be in trouble. host: this is frank from pennsylvania. republican line. caller: have a question to say. -- at a question to say and two comments. they are complaining about, it is my body. let me do what we want to my body. when it comes to the shots, it is still my body but who wants to get the shot? everyone is losing their job and if everyone would tune in, it is double standard. if everyone would tune in on telegraph, they would find the
10:00 am
group -- telegram, they would find the truth. his is vaccine working -- caller: yes, the vaccinations do work. i called because the republican party. first off, hats off to liz cheney. i think she is the leader of the republican party right now. number two, i think i remember the statement they marching and protesting. this is about the women in the country. i think they are the leader of the crime. guess what, the borders this is not the first time we had a put -- democratic president. thank you. host: last call on this program.
10:01 am
that finishes off our program. we appreciate all of you watching and participating. we will see you tomorrow at 7:00 a.m.. ♪ >> here is what is ahead today on c-span. this afternoon, the white house has an update on president biden's health after he tested positive for covid-19 last week. we will hear from white house press secretary and covid-19 coordinator dr. jha. watch live coverage beginning at 3:10 eastern. then at five :00 eastern, former
10:02 am
vice president mike pence talks about his policy agenda it is being hosted by the heritage foundation in washington, d.c. you can watch both events of today here on c-span, on the free c-span video app or live at >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. by these television companies and more including comcast. comcast is partnering with partners. students with low income families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. comcast supports c-span along with these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> the senate returns


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on