good morning it is friday, december 1. representative's vote later today on whether to expel representative george santos.

a 56 page report was released outlining illegal activities and his campaign. we are asking you if you think representative santos should be expelled and how would you vote ? if you agree (202) 748-8000, if you oppose (202) 748-8001 if you are not sure (202) 748-8002 you can text us at (202) 748-8003 and on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. the house gavels in at 9:00 a.m. and in the meantime the house had a debate over the expulsion of george santos yesterday. here is george santos himself

talking about the ethics report and at the committee. [video clip] >> every member expelled in history of this institution has been convicted of crimes or confederate turncoats and neither of those apply to me. on what basis does this body feel that precedent must be change for me? elected from the third district of new york i've been convicted of no crimes. my loyalty to this country that gave me life, liberty and the respect suit of happiness is true and unquestionable. i stand here today debating for the second time in less than a month for the same exact reasons. the differences, one could say i

have been indicted by the findings of the ethics committee. a process that by the admission of the chair himself was not declared conclusive because they did not want to put more time into it. as if this committee runs on a schedule that is in a rush. some members have been under investigation for five years. suddenly while still under investigation. i am not trying to be arrogant or spiteful or disrespectful of the committee. i am curious to know what is the schedule of the ethics committee? why rest to determine a pre-delivered outcome sought out by members of our conference for this body? this looks like a predetermined necessity for some members to

engage in this smear campaign to destroy me. i will not stand by quietly. if they want me out of this body, the people of the third district of new york sent me here and if they want to silence me they have to take the hard vote. host: that was store santos yesterday and in speaking of supportive expelling him is new york republican make melania. -- nick liloda. [video clip] >> here and the 2022 election by his own admission, he induced voters to vote for him by re-creating a new person that donors would support. he did this intentionally

figuring the uneducated and underemployed could not earn the support of the supporters and donors. the facts of his fraud are not in dispute. he is not the person he offered to voters. he didn't work where he said he did he didn't go to school where he went to he's not rich, he is not jewish and his mother was not in the south tower on 9/11. voters were not given a chance in the first instance to determine who they were voting for. our constituents will go to jail for similar the lies one question is do we hold george santos to the same standards are constituents are held or to a lesser one? host: that was a republican from new york. we take your calls on whether

you support the expulsion of george santos happening today. the house gavels in at 9:00 a.m. and those votes are expected later. we will start with gary, in moorefield, west virginia. caller: just sit there and listen to him and everyone with a straight face and sit there and live like he did to get in. they always compared to what was. no, it's what it is. listening to matt gaetz back them up, that puts a kibosh on the republican party to even backup somebody that would sit there and lighted the american people. i was born in new york.

he definitely doesn't do a thing with the congress. that's all i have to say. host: jane is in kenner, louisiana. caller: good morning. nice to talk to mimi. i was going to call about the same business on whether or not i support the expulsion of george santos. basically, the house speaker said this would cause a bad precedent if he had not been convicted yet. it has already created a bad precedent that he's been allowed to be here that long when he has an enormous amount of indictments.

it makes them look like they are supporting him. host: when you make of the argument that we should wait until the court system plays out and he goes to court and if he is convicted then he could be expelled? caller: generally speaking, with people who have access to lawyers he could be reelected three times before he could be convicted. he has had such a horrible ethics report, it's a done deal. he is really making an embarrassment of himself and the poor people of new york. i am disappointed in him and he needs to go. now or later, i don't care. host: one of the republicans

speaking in defense of george santos was louisiana's clay higgins. [video clip] >> you can believe what you like but the 56 page report is not written within the perimeters found in an unbiased impartial report. it is filled with conjecture, pejorative language that no professional investigation should include. no cop would present this to a d.a. and no d.a. would present to a court as unbiased. you may accept this report is grounds for expulsion from congress but i say no. it's not right. the totality of circumstances appears biased in stinks of politics and i will oppose

dissection section in every way. perhaps my colleagues should stand back from expulsion and reflect on the historical record of congressional behavior, consider the founders intent and let the people of new york determine their representative. this is posing as a representation of fact but it's most certainly written with disregard for professional objectivity and wrapped in public disclosure that any man can see is a congressional equivalent of a public crucifixion. i am stunned that people would cheer for this shaming and expulsion. it's like witnessing a fair village gather to celebrate the burning of an alleged witch. since the civil war only to

members of congress have been expelled and both have been convicted of federal crimes. that is the standard in the house of representatives should not deviate from that standard. i am a solid no on expulsion and every member should carefully consider what kind of precedent we are setting here. mr. speaker i appreciate this opportunity to encourage my colleagues sincerely on both sides of the aisle to step back from this expulsion. host: that was republican clay higgins saying he was a solid no. we wonder what you would be if you were to vote? roland from clint burnie, maryland. caller: it's a sad day in america, the thing about not expelling him.

night is day, day is night. he also supports trump. i don't understand, what do we tell our children? do whatever you need to do, public crimes, as long as you support donald trump and you count in the conference? what does it take? if you can't get expelled because of all of this wrongdoing, why vote for trump with all of his indictments as well? we can't tell right from wrong anymore. everything is upside down. i don't know, it's frustrating.

host: we will talk to ralph in kingsville, ohio. caller: yes. i have host the expelling of the santos because these are accusations. if he is proven guilty i think he should be expelled. i don't think you should be expelled until these accusations are proven. if you see what i'm saying. host: you mean if he goes to court? caller: i believe so, yes. host: there's an article here on fact-check.org and it's about the ethics report on george santos and this will give you an overview about findings in that report and what investigators were able to find. chuck is in dawsonville,

georgia. caller: i was thinking about a guy, the senator from minnesota, al franken who had to resign because he didn't even touch anybody but the democrats so incensed at that picture they force that gentleman to resign. in comparison to what santos said it's nothing. i don't understand how republicans keep spreading lies. if you go on fox news they talk about the debate on hannity last night with newsom and desantis and they are claiming desantis one and newsom had answers that desantis could not even answer and look stupid.

this gentleman that was before me was looking for santos to be convicted in court. why not you tell these people to read what they have investigated and maybe they will learn something because they just refuse to believe the truth and refuse to believe when they lose an election. this is the problem with america. thank you very much. host you can continue to colin on online'shat support, oppose or are unsure. we will pause right here on your calls and talk to a reporter, emily know with politico. welcome to the program.

host: representative santos represents parts of long island and queens can you tell us how much support he has among his constituents? guest: he has minimal support here in the third congressional district in new york. it covers much of nassau county, long island and a sliver of queens and the most vocal of his opponents have been a group called concerned citizens of new york three. they have been outside of the courthouse where he has been arraigned. his constituents want him out of office. at least the ones that i have talked to. host: what is the reason, do they feel betrayed? is that the financial crimes he's alleged to have committed? or is that the lying about his

personal history? guest: it's a little of both. i haven't heard about the services being provided by his office. from the time he took office, when so much broke about his fabrication of his back story. several people tried to make sure he did not stay in office but he's been able to hang on the song. we will see if he can hang on any longer. host: if he is voted out, what is the process for filling the seed? guest: i can't overstate how much of the spotlight will be glaring on this special election and outside spending will be pouring into candidates coffers.

governor holcomb will have 10 days to call an election and an additional 70-80 days which would put it on a tuesday in february. then they will choose candidates to run in a special election. it's the first republican versus democrat face-off ahead of a 2024 season and the path to control the house could run through new york. they have eight seats and this is one of them. the race will start once santos is expelled. it is a coveted scene for both parties. host: what can you tell us about the third congressional district?

about the demographics and how in these politically? guest: as politically moderate. it's a district that voted for joe biden but a lot of independent voters with the big jewish population which is why the lie about being descended from holocaust survivors really startled a lot of people and stayed with a lot of people. it does lean republican, it controls much of long island. the other representatives are republicans. they put into canny executives that a republican. it seems they have an edge here

but they say it was a local gop that enabled him to ascend into office. it will be interesting to see what arguments come forth as special elections unfold but a lot of them will be about economic issues, crime and immigration. host: let's talk about the people that may replace him. on the republican side, who are we looking at? guest: at this stage it is a lot wider. naussau county they have interviewed 10 candidates. we are looking at 3, 4 front runners at this stage.

she has a compelling back story that fits our political times. she is ethiopian born, a black woman and backs israel defense forces. very much made for this moment in history. there is also representative barton who has been up representative before. a former nypd former detective has risen plenty of money. host: let's talk about tom swazi. caller: he's a likely nominee for the democrats who is led

by jay jacobs. they say picking a democrat will unfold not only just between him and local leadership but the county chair. he is presumed to be the nominee but there could be others in the mix and it should remind you that this is the first of three races for this district if he is indeed expelled because after a special election february will come our primary where there could be more candidates running and then a general election where people are really looking at which party controls the seed. host: emily ngo, thank you so much for joining us. we will go back to your calls on whether you support the expulsion of george santos. we will have life coverage is

always of the house here on c-span. they gavel and at 9:00 a.m. and you can watch on the go under free mobile video app or online at c-span.org. we speak to roland from new york. caller: i happen to be in george santos'district and i do not believe it would be right to expel him if he has not been convicted in court for crimes first. i sense that this is so political and politics is so damn dirty and the democrats would love to get a democrat in that seat. after all, he said he would not run again.

people that congress should examine their own backgrounds first. frankly, i am sure he is not the worst person in congress today. host: what do you make of the accusations against him? i wonder if you have seen the report by the ethics committee? what's your reaction? caller: i have not seen the report. he should be convicted first before that report would be valid enough to expel him. it would just be wrong. and he is not going to be running again anyway. so let them decide the next genuine time to replace him.

the democrats would love to get another democrat in there. host: i think you voted for him last time? caller: yes i did. host: does any of the background, the history, the person you thought you were voting for is different than what turned out to be true. he admitted to those lies, how do you feel about that? caller: as i have said, i believe people in congress are much worse than him. they are not being expelled. i just feel it would be terribly unfair to do it before he went on trial and lost the case in court. host: pamela on x says this. yes, he should be expelled he

lied about too manyhings. his constitutsant him out. you cannot deceive voters and expect to remain in the job. we have norm and belford, new york. caller: i am calling to support the resolution to remove him. if they have an ethics committee, thus the internal organ that determines whether or not he should serve. i don't see why he would have to be convicted if they find him unethical under their rules and regulation. the republicans have the majority and they are on the committee and support its removal. they are saying they don't need an ethics committee. anyone who is convicted of something they can then possibly

remove. that is pretty much my feeling. host: it looks like michael on x agrees with that. he said he supports expulsion. the investigaonas his due process. we have seen the rests guilty. and also maye the people from his stct would be better to remove him. it feels like to tear justice when we have a president who has lied his entire career. ron is calling from albuquerque. you are not sure? caller: yeah, i am not sure. i feel we are out of point where there is so much hatred in politics that we just don't know who to believe and what not to believe.

his truth that he made up a lot of things and lied about a lot of things and i'm totally against that. but when you get down to it, there is a lot of that going on in the government right now on both sides. my brother-in-law seems to think responsibility and common sense is going to become a thing of the past. this is part of the growth toward site, i don't know. if you have other individuals that are being accused of insurrections and they are still running along doing what they want to do.

it's just another element that is doing what it was taught. i think people elected him in. a lady before said if you convicted him, he could be elected 3, 4 times. but if he is selected 3, 4 times it's because the people wanted him. it's hard to say we should take them out when so many people voted him in. i think the world is becoming confused and it is disinformation that is killing

us. host: just so that you are aware the front page of the new york times on a different subject is says the israeli had plans for hamas a year ago but they were brushed off because they concluded it could not be done. they obtain the battle plan a year before it happened. israeli military dismissed the plan as aspirational considering it too difficult to carry out. it was codenamed jericho wall and it outline the devastating invasion that led to the deaths of 1200 people. it did not set a date for the attack described a methodical assault designed to overwhelm the fortifications around the gaza strip, take out military --

israeli cities and storm bases. they followed the blueprint with shocking precision. it called for a barrage of rockets, drones to knock out cameras and gunmen. support in to israel en masse, all of which happened on october 7. you can read the rest of that on the new york times but until the top of the hour we are talking about the imminent vote on the expulsion of representative santos of new york. we will be taking your calls support, oppose, not sure. we have michelle from new york. caller: i'm opposed to this whole vote from expelling him from congress because i believe

and how our government is constructed. if the people elected him, so be it. it is up to them to vote him out if they so choose. if he's not running again there's no point. if everyone got expelled for lying to the public, the place would be a ghost town. which is not a bad idea. to further thought, if anyone should be expelled from their position it would be joe biden. he has been lying to the american people and enriching himself for decades. that looks like treason. host: regarding santos, this is the document itself, the report from the committee at 56 pages. this is a table of contents and under findings is so substantial

evidence of violation of law and ethical standards of conduct. campaign finance violations, willful and knowing, disclosure violations, sexual misconduct obligations, conflicts of interest and additional allegations. norma is in new york. good morning. caller: i've been listening carefully. i don't think this is democrat versus republican. we have about honesty versus deception. george santos was elected by the people of my district based on deception. he claimed to be jewish and when he was challenged about that he said, i mean jew "ish" to me

that he felt she was. and that his family had holocaust survivors. he lied about everything possible and it's unfortunate that the democrats at the time did not thoroughly bad him during the campaign but they did nothing. we really heard nothing against him until after the election. things started to come out, how he had been deceiving the people. the political decision would be to keep him in the house because they need one more republican vote. if that is where we are at, that's very sad. he is so self confessed imposter.

host: did you vote for him? caller: no, i did not. but it was not based on anything i really knew about him. i just usually vote democrat. a lot of the people in the district voted for him based on what he told people rather than having been vetted. he also said he was a graduate of nyu. all they had to do was call nyu and they would've found out that he did not graduate. simple things like that should've been done and they weren't. as a result he has not been representing people. it's impossible to get through to his office. he is used to doing just one clown act after another. what kind of a government do we

want to have? he is an example of what we wanted keep in our government? is an extremely sad day for america. host: let's take a look at another portion of what george santos sat on the house floor about the investigation. [video clip] >> it's no secret in this body that i have an ongoing process with the doj. i was given an unrealistic deadline to testify before the committee the same day i had to go to court and they gave us a hard line yes or no answer. they would not settle for anything else. i could not surpass the day. which means, it was either go to new york city for my doj case or go before the ethics committee.

i have incurred over 200,000 in legal fees that have been paid for. to suggest that i have not complied with them is to get another lie. they've received every document they fast for and documents we did not have we told them, we don't have what you are asking for. they have been inventing documents, asking for communication that just did not exist. i question again to the chairman, will he set the record straight that his expulsion resolution contradicts the findings of his report? which one is it? am i guilty of sexual harassment or not? the report says i'm not.

the filing says that i am. that's a serious allegation one that i fought to see the end of. when that office of congressional ethics sent to referral to the investigative subcommittee saying they did not suggest further investigation into the matter because it lacked credibility. yes, it's us on their expulsion resolution. host: we are taking your calls, christina is next in cedar rapids, iowa. caller: good morning. i am so concerned about what is going on in our country. due process is a guarantee to

every person. it doesn't matter if we think he lied or they think he lied. i think this is a set up. i don't know of any politician that does not lie. they all tell us something about themselves and we find out later they are not telling the truth. what happened here in my opinion, they are all doing bad. they need someone to be a scapegoat in this guy happens to be the one. they wanted to take the attention off what's happening in the big picture and is kind of sad. my daughter is more mature than these people. we sit here and pay taxes and we try to do good and abide by the law and be good parents but it doesn't really matter, and this is a perfect example why.

when they need to throw someone under the bus or they need the attention of something else, they will make a big scene so everyone can gaze at it. host: these are republicans bringing forward a vote to the table. caller: that's the sad part. this is my personal opinion at the end of the day i think they all work together. i personally think they need to get rid of the lobbyists and they hide behind a group. take individual accountability for once. then you will start getting down to the bottom of things. i think the kid was right when he said they were to drunk and

partying all night. we need responsible people who will take things seriously and do it for the people, not for their own pockets or because of their families. maybe he had to lie about those things because he wanted to see a difference and he can't get in the door because you have to be a certain type of person. it's like ratatouille, not everyone is a chef but a chef can come from anywhere. host: allegations are the new york republican used campaign funds to pay for botox. he's steered thousands of dollars to a consulting firm that he secretly controlled in order to repay a loan. the lies about his education, religion,

expertise all defy explanation. republicans are going to the floor at 10:00 a.m. without knowing if they will be successful in expelling 35-year-old santos from congress. if they're looking to leadership for guidance they're not getting a ton of results. speaker mike johnson has not said how he's voting. elise stefanik have not cited either. steve scalise told us he opposed his expulsion and said quote he will have its day in court which he deserves. the trial isn't going to begin until september. house democrats believe all 213 members will vote to expel. roughly 80 of 220 would have to vote for expulsion to end his career.

expulsion requires two thirds of those present and voting. conventional wisdom among top leadership aides is that he will be expelled. that's according to the punch bowl news. peter is up next in gardner, massachusetts. caller: i think this is very interesting. it's more a symptom of us as a society than it is an issue of someone who did some bad things and decide if it's bad enough to have that person expelled. we have a person who was a candidate and presented what they wanted to see so they didn't look behind the curtain. they could have researched his background like what was done with donald j that resulted in the steel dossier. that was started by republicans

who they were concerned about. they found awful things and he became a candidate and they voted him in. this is the united states in 2023 is not the united states of 1943 or 1930. i kind of think republicans wanted him, they got them. now they will have to wear him in shame around their neck as well as other dysfunctional individuals that keep the party from being a useful political party. host: if you had to vote, if you were on the house floor to expel or not, which way would you go? caller: my inclination would be not and i would hope there is a way they could have a recall vote if they feel is a bad thing that he is there. host: let's talk to eric in

jacksonville, florida. caller: i was calling to say yes, george santos should be expelled. he was elected on false pretenses and the people that say all politicians lie. yes, all politicians lie because all people lie, even if someone says do you look at in this dress, but some people are pathological. george santos is an egregious case in point. he received 174,000 a year paid for by we the people. he is employed by us.

if you work for someone and break egregious ethics violations by that company you don't need to get convicted in a court of law. we live in a representative democracy. the representatives trying to expel him were also sent to washington by we the people and those representatives that represent more people been george santos are choosing correctly. this guy is an egregious layer. he even lied about being on the show hannah montana in the suite life of zack and cody. that is a strange lied to say. obviously, all of his lies are based on his grandmother being in the holocaust and mother dying in september 11.

and then he said i'm not jewish i am jew "ish." he should not be getting paid a hundred and 74,000 a year by anybody. the fact that he would receive my money is crazy. host: we have a text from savannah, virginia. lots of other politicians do worse is a fallacy, unfound reasoning. this politician admitted he lied. he would never have been elected ifpposition research is done their job. mgm in hempstead, north carolina. eachou may determine the rules of its proceedings and

punish their members for misbehavior and with two thirds can expel a member. we wonder what you think, robbie is in florida, good morning. caller: good morning. i'm not sure getting rid of george santos will solve any of the problems because so many of them were created by citizens united under scalia and the supreme court to allow money to be free speech and it's really been a bad thing for our country. there was so much money behind one candidate they could put tv 20. day and night these as claiming the opponent who was a very good candidate was a communist,

socialist, he was for all of these terrible things. he could compete with those type of ads. host: when you said i don't think expelling would solve any of the problems. caller: i don't understand why matt gaetz is still there when he was charged. for sex trafficking minors with his friend down there.

i'm not sure any of this will solve the problem but i believe he should be expelled. we should look to people like jimmy and rosalynn carter when were looking for integrity. host: michael gus defended the report yesterday. [video clip] >> 37 subpoenas, they issued a 56 page investigation report. these are the exhibits they attach to those reports.

the 50 plus page report goes into great detail. it paints a picture of the fraud committed by santos. in many cases, attract the allegations for which mr. santos has been indicted. mr. speaker, if you look at the language of the report it says this, the investigative says they found inconsistencies in his finances. he tried to fraudulently exploit every aspect of his house candidacy. he blatantly stole from his campaign and he deceived donors

into providing what they thought to be donations to his campaign but they were payments for his own benefit. he reported fictitious loans to his political committees? and then later the report said that despite his efforts to blame his former treasurer for the numerous campaign violations the ifc records suggest he knowingly and actively participated in this conduct. host: that was ethics committee chair michael guest and we are asking if you support the expulsion of representative george santos from congress and we got this text from philip and chase, kansas. he has admitted to some of it.

the level of decay is shocking. i egistered republican but the party is no longer the same. americans, democrats and republicans, deserve better. joseph is calling from fort myers, florida. caller: hello? host: go right ahead. caller: i am opposed to removing him. i think he should have his day and court and if they find him guilty they should just have them vote. i just wonder how much time and money is wasted on this investigation when it should be left alone. we have so many problems in this country that all the time and money, they should've just left it alone. when he is guilty, column meaning and calm off.

we have so many other problems that need attention and it seems like nobody cares. nobody is looking at the big picture of all of these major problems. if we kicked out everybody who has lied, we would not have a government. host: if anyone had did any of these things in any other job they would've been fired. what you think of that? caller: well yeah, with the private job it's possible. i don't have a lot of confidence in any of these politicians,

democrats or republicans, depending on what their endgame is. they will change the rules, make up stuff or fudge the truth a little bit. i don't support him lying. some of the stuff he said is unquestionable. and i'm a diehard republican. if he's guilty, get him out of there. they are pushing very hard to get the democratic seatback. it's more political than anything else. this is michael in tampa florida. caller: a simple solution for george santos. resign, maybe this will go away and you won't end up in jail. if you keep fighting this you will get fired and toss.

thank you very much. host: euronext. caller: i think it started with thought cross dressing in brazil. i didn't pay much attention to it. i let it play out. since i live here in pennsylvania it's not that important. the person that said about if it happened in private industry. i did not hear that before now. how many bosses does george santos have? how can you compare that to private industry? he's a representative for several people. he even has bosses that are democrats.

i think that wasn't out of line statement. it doesn't make any sense to compare it to a company where you have one boss. multiple people of send him there. host: i got it. caller: are you there? host: i'm here. caller: ok. host: next we have bob in lakewood. caller: i am definitely in favor of expelling george santos. he admitted himself to lying to his voters in new york and to me with the ethics committee finding all the information to the lies that he has done. i feel he definitely needs to go. there is definitely bipartisan meetings and they decided

unanimously to be expelled and i agree with that. host: we have jameson wait, north carolina. caller: good morning, i don't think he should be expelled. he needs to be convicted first, right? i know it sounds like you guys in the media, you are part of the media. you make it sound like he shot and killed somebody. if he was a democrat you would be getting on republican saying are you not coming down on a gay guy? are you just homophobic? i will tell you who ought to be expelled. you and the media for lying and carrying water for these corrupt democrats and some corrupt republicans. look at this president? half of your audience doesn't know what they are talking about.

you don't even know about hunter biden. there is so much information coming out about money from the communist chinese directly to family members of the biden administration. it is unreal. and you guys act like he has committed a homicide. host: we will be covering any public hearings on hunter biden. we will definitely be covering that is well here on c-span. dan from florida, good morning. caller: good morning. i just have a comment. everyone saying i don't know what's wrong with this country. u.s. had several callers say i

don't really know anything about him but i always vote democrat. do you think that might be the problem with what is wrong with america as that no one knows who they are voting for? they just vote for the party. black voters vote for the democratic party and they don't know the history of how their party is treating them. republicans have done much more for black voters but no one they do not report on that. host: on representative santos. caller: not sure. there is a process that should be in place. and if they just vote him out, then they can vote out anyone. so, that would not be good to just vote out every wine, everyone that has somebody being charged, not convicted,

something like that. host: and we are out of time for this segment. thank you everyone that called in and participated over text and social media. coming up, we will look at other matters for members of congress that are focusing on -- that they are focusing on as we near the end of the year including foreign aid for ukraine and reforms to border security. two members of congress will join us to discuss this as we hear more from you on the open forum. the numbers are on your screen. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. ♪ >> since 1979, in partnership

with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage in the halls of congress from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings, and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat without issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. ♪ >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span two, exploring the people and events that tell the american story. at 8:00 p.m. eastern, a look at how television and the internet affected white house communications strategies with a chapman university professor. at 9:30 p.m. eastern, we will look back to december 6, 1973 when gerald ford replaced spiro

agnew as richard nixon's vice president admits -- admidst and income tax scandal. watch american history tv saturdays on c-span2, and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch anytime online at c-span.org/history. traveling over the holidays? make c-span's bookshelf podcast feed part of your playlist. watch all of the podcast that feature nonfiction books in one place. it features global episodes with critically acclaimed authors discuss -- discussing history, current events, and culture from about books, afterwards, booknotes+ and q&a. listen to our bookshelf podcast feed this holiday season. you can find it and all of our

podcasts on our mobile video app or wherever you get your podcasts or on -- or on c-span.org/podcasts. >> a healthy democracy just does not look like this, it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work where citizens are truly informed a republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word from the nation's capital to wherever you are. because the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back. it is open forum so you can call us on any topic on your mind regarding public affairs or politics. we will take your calls for the next almost an hour until the

house gavels in at 9:00 a.m. eastern time. while you are calling in, we will speak to lindsay mcpherson, a political reporter with the messenger about the border and foreign aid. welcome and good morning. guest: good morning. host: congress has been debating for weeks about trying to get aid to israel and ukraine. remind us about why the border negotiations are involved in that as well. guest: so republicans in both chambers have decided that they do not want to approve more aid, in particular for ukraine, without border security measures. a lot of republican voters, people that they are hearing from in the districts back home do not support ukraine aid. while some republicans on capitol hill do, they say that politically, they want to secure our own borders before we help ukraine secure they ours.

it is a political imperative. and border security is a priority and they see this as a way to leverage because democrats feel strongly about the foreign aid portion. host: what are those border or immigration policy proposals that are up for debate right now? guest: the main focus has been restrictions to legal pathways that migrants used to enter the country, the asylum and parole process. these border crossings obviously have been high and the republicans argue that these pathways, while they should exist legally they need to be curtailed to limit the number of people trying to cross the border and claim asylum. they want to make it so people who are claiming asylum cannot have their acacias -- -- they

feel like the parole process has been used to basically people who would come in and rather than claim asylum they are granting parole because they are numbered -- they are overwhelmed with the number of asylum cases. they think it is being abused and they want to put restrictions on the policy. host: what are sematech -- what are senate democrats saying. guest: they are open to minor changes to asylum but they do not want to do anything to look like they will turn away immigrants. they want the u.s. to be a welcome place for those who need refuge, political and humanitarian crisis is in their own countries. so they are cautious about going too far. and i think particularly, changes to the parole program which have then humanitarian programs, a parole issue. and so, i think they have strong concerns about going too far, in

particular to change these two restricted legal pathways without suggesting other legal pathways that they have held as a priority, wanting to overhaul the visa process for far migrant workers or to provide pathways for undocumented immigrants in the country and the dreamers brought here as kids. and the republicans want to go one direction and the other side wants to open to other things as well. host: what has speaker mike johnson said about taking up a border deal from what the senate gop senators might agree to? guest: he had lunch with senate republicans this week on wednesday. and he told them he does not think that he can pass the giant package which would include the ukraine aid, israel aid and taiwan aid and the border policies because the democrats are looking to pack it altogether. in the house one big package is

not going to fly and the house has already passed israel aid and maybe they can package ukraine and the border together, but he cannot do a giant package, he will have to break it up a little bit. host: what is the timeline for lawmakers to get this done? guest: they want to get it done before december holidays that they are set to go on recess in two weeks for the december holidays. and time is running short and senator schumer said that he might as soon as next week begin the floor process on the bill. but that is not certain at this point. and it will take some time once they have an agreement to move it through the house and senate and they will get an agreement next week. the senate left on thursday, and things are stuck as lindsey graham put it. things are not progressing the way they had hoped.

host: lindsay mcpherson, you can find her work at themessenger.com. thank you for joining us. and it is open forums so we would like to hear from you and we will go straight to the phones. tim in florence, south carolina. independent. good morning. caller: how are you? host: good. caller: i have some comments and i will go off topic because most people really do not know that dryland started this program many years ago. it seems to me that this program has gone to a left type of center leaning where you few count the number of democrats, republicans and independents it seems like the democrats get more of the phone calls, but this is what i want to focus on, omar married her own brother to

keep him in the country, and she was investigated for digging into an $800 campaign contribution. who is the congressperson that is supporting palestine right now? host: are you talking about rashida tlaib? caller: correct. you have these three people and believe me george santos and whoever said it was weird was an understatement. this guy is strange. but, how about we investigate these three people for what they have done. these are facts, not made up. these are facts that these people have actually done. why are they not investigated and yet he is? he needs to be, there is no doubt about that. host: how would you answer a question from this morning about you think george santos should be expelled? caller: you know, the way the

climate is in this country, i do not know. it is so crazy. if you are going to expel him, then why don't you investigate these other people and expel them too. they have committed crimes. and all politicians lie, let's be honest. nobody in their has clean hands as a lawyer would say. so where are we? at least 30 or 40 years ago when you had boondocks democrats and republicans you had reagan, and at least they tried to work together even though they did not like each other. you tell me. answer that question for me. host: let us go to the republican line, and wisconsin. jack, you are on the air. caller: the desanto staying -- the santos thing is an easy decision. the people that voted him in have to vote him out.

we are a republic, not a democracy, which is a government that follows a rule of law which are created by a representative government. so the people that voted him in have to vote him out. as some politicians say, elections have consequences. and the consequence of those individuals that voted santos or biden in our living with the consequences of their policies, or their corruption. as the gentleman said a couple of callers ago, you have to know who you are voting for and then -- instead of just going in and voting democrat or republican. i would like for people to vote, i would like to take a real simple test when they walk in. what does your party -- what does your candidate stand for? ok? it isn't possible, but they

should know why they are voting for somebody. and they do not. and we end up with representatives that take our country in a different direction. when barack obama was elected they said they would make a profound change to america. why would you make to -- why would you want to make a profound change to america when it was the greatest country in the world and still is? why are we changing things? i do not understand it. host: line for democrats in missouri. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you doing? host: good. caller: i have been watching c-span on television and my situation with about everything and everything -- and everybody is calling intimate complaints, what i do not hear anybody say anything about donald trump who tried to steal the white house. i do not hear anybody stay -- say anything about that but they constantly want to throw down joe and hunter biden.

if they have done wrong they should be locked up like anyone else. if anyone has done anything wrong they should be dealt with. santos has done wrong and you should be dealt with. you cannot deal with him with the people because the people do not have what the senate or anybody else has. they can throw them out and be done with him. why leave him in office and continue to be corrupt? this is not something that they are coming up with. everything and everybody is calling in but not giving you the facts on everything that needs to be done. if you have done wrong you need to be out of there, point blank. it is not about people need to vote him out. it would take them forever because they already had the election. he cheated, he lied, point blank. then deal with that situation. it is not about everybody else, it was about santos. that is what they should be concentrating on. they always talk about and worry about somebody else. deal with the man you are

dealing with right now in this situation who can do a lot more harm to the country if he gets the chance. my thing is the borderline and as far as people coming across the border, they should be dealt with because we should have people coming -- we should not have people coming into the united states illegally. they should be coming in legally. whatever it does it takes both sides coming together and stop pointing fingers on each side. both sides are doing wrong. my thing is -- host: we got your thing, thank you for calling in. all of those on the line please stay on the line. we are taking a quick break to talk to representative glenn grossman, a republican from wisconsin on the budget and education and workforce committees. and also the chair on the oversight and accountability subcommittee on the border, oversight -- and foreign affairs. welcome to the program.

let us start with george santos. have you decided how you are going to vote? guest: we are going to talk to a few people and to my new york colleagues and decide. i am sure it is going to be close and it is a close decision for me. it is an unfortunate distraction because there are so many problems. and menendez over in the senate which is more egregious. host: what is going to go into your decision process on the santos mode? guest: like i said, we want to talk to the new york congressman. they are the ones most familiar with them. i know some of those guys they want him out of there and they feel he is an embarrassment to congress and every congressman, front desk quite frankly and i want to hear their argument one more time. host: you serve on the budget committee so i want to hear your views on israel and ukraine aid? guest: we have to get money to israel. it would be nice if it is paid for, but it is nice to get that

done. it is very frustrating that the biden administration does not have a plan. every war has to end eventually. even the korean war, dwight eisenhower negotiated with chinese north koreans to make sure that it ended. to be at did not end the way the side wanted that we had not have a fight there for 50 years now. and ukraine the biden administration has got to say we are working to an end to the war. it is bad for the u.s. to go on. it could bleed into the united states as long as it goes on. it drives china, russia, and iran closer together. and it comes to ukraine funding, we want to see progress and it is our last chance to do something at the border. america is getting ruined at the southern border. so we have to get that taken care of. and before we worry about russia invading ukraine we have to worry about the entire world invading the southern border.

joe biden cannot be trusted. host: on the war in ukraine, what do you mean it could bleed into the united states? what are you talking about? guest: if russia decided to try and do something to this country, play with the web or electrical grid. things can happen. and the united states has gotten involved in other wars in our history by only getting involved economic a lit -- initially but eventually it became more than that. it is something we have to worry about and everybody says vladimir putin will never ruin the united states and i will not be sure of that. regardless, we do not want a strong china, russian, iran axis and that is where we are heading by having this war go on forever. host: turning to the war in the middle east the senate is debating conditionality over the aid to israel. you have senator bernie sanders,

senator chris murphy and most democrats have called for conditioning aid and saying that the civilian harm in gaza is unacceptable and unsustainable. what are your views on that? guest: they cannot be any conditions. israel has to root out hamas and we cannot go through this again a year from now when they cross the border to look for children to chop off their heads or kidnap people and then hold them for ransom. israel has to go in and win this war. it is unfortunate that the palestinians and hamas has decided to hide next to civilian. that is not israel's fault. what these demonstrators ought to be doing is demonstrating against hamas and the palestinians for fighting a war in such a ridiculous fashion that they are putting civilians and risk. israel's cannot say we cannot go into fight hamas because we are hiding next to civilian -- they are hiding next to civilians.

host: back to the southern border, what is your view on the senate border security proposals that are being debated? guest: we have all sorts of good proposals. we had a good bill coming out of the house of representatives. and we have to get back to where we were two years ago. let us not let the american people forget. we had well under 20,000 people crossing the border every month. we are now at over 220,000. it has gone up by a factor of 11. there is no reason that we cannot insist that the biden administration get us back under that figure. it was done under trump, it is not rocket science, that is what we have to do before we worry about any other aid. host: and you serve on the house oversight committee. i wonder what you make of the divisions in the gop about whether hunter biden testifies publicly or behind closed doors,

where are you on that? guest: we will get them both done. you have to get them first behind closed doors because any listeners know that you do not get a real questioning when it is done publicly. congressmen are restricted to a five-minute period, and it is easier to run out the clock. we want to have them interviewed privately and then publicly. that is the way it is done with every other issue up here and that is what we have to do. host: all right, congressman len grossman, republican of wisconsin. thank you for joining us. guest: glad to be on the show. host: we will go back to the calls an open forum. it is ed calling from new jersey. independent. caller: yes. i think george santos should be expelled, but the reality of the matter is the republican party once again is not going to do anything about it because they do not want to lose a seat

number one. number two, if they decide to vote and expel george santos then they would have to -- then the democrats will push them to do the same with matt gaetz who also committed a crime. the bottom line is that the republican party as we all know is not going to do anything. the border security package is good, at least ukraine aid might be negotiable in this matter. but that is an important bill. and hopefully mike johnson will get it through if he can get it through. thank you. host: speaking about that. here is senator -- senate majority leader them to pass the supplemental spending request which includes money for israel and ukraine. [video clip] >> i was deeply troubled by reports yesterday that speaker johnson joined senate republicans and made a push to inject more hr to provisions into the senate supplemental.

that is precisely the kind of thing that undermines the entire supplemental including aid to israel, ukraine, and humanitarian aid to gaza. we all know the border is a problem we should deal with, but it is not related to retain -- to ukraine. or the indo pacific. it has been put in there by republicans. and that means that there is an onus on them to make sure that it is bipartisan. democrats are willing to work with republicans on commonsense and realistic border security. but we cannot have the hard right say it is hr2 or nothing. speaker johnson or if her that matter the negotiation -- negotiators feel like what he can pass just among his caucus we will never get anything done. the democratic votes are going to be needed in the house to pass the legislation, we know

that. so this hr2 or close to hr2 or nothing is a proposal that cannot pass the senate or house. democrats, the solution for passing the supplemental is bipartisan compromise and show that we -- and we have shown that we are willing to do it. the wrong answer is to let ukraine aid, aid to civilians in gaza and israel aid get bungled because the hard right wanted hr2 or something close to it. [end video clip] host: senator chuck schumer talking about the supplemental funding bill. sandy on the republican line. youngstown, ohio. caller: hello. about santos, i think he is a bit of a jerk. i agree with that. but -- and he lied on a resume. but that one guy had a good point about talib, and omar

marrying her own brother and whoever else that he was talking about that he forgot to mention. bob menendez who had gold bars from a muslim country, with arabic writing on them. what was he going to do? isn't that treason? what was he going to do for the muslims were all the gold bars egot? he did not get kicked out. and what about that poor woman, dianne feinstein who was so unhealthy that they would not let her resign, retire because they wanted that seat in the democrat hands. so let us not talk about the double standard. it is obvious. we should keep santos, and the democrats wants that seat pretty bad because i have heard the republicans talking. and their points are pretty weak

compared to everything that the democrats have done. they do not kick their people out. and then again about this border , the woman -- and she was talking about the border, it is supposed to be about persecution only. and you are supposed to go to the first country you come to, the first country you come to, not get flown into the united states. and the money that biden wants is simply to process more people so that they can turn us into venezuela and have voters vote for democrats. and we will not have a country anymore. and the trillions of -- $2 trillion in interest per year on our debt and they still want to get -- to keep spending money? i think israel should be helped. but really we are so far in debt that we are going to be -- it is

going to collapse and nobody wants to buy our bonds. host: sandy did mention senator bob menendez. here is an article from october 26. menendez pleads not guilty to charges of conspiring to act as a foreign agent. it says that "he appeared before u.s. district court. judge sidney stein to enter his plea in response to a superseding indictment which was made public october 12. the veteran lawmaker was charged with conspiring to act as an illegal foreign aid agent on behalf of egypt whilst serving as terrace of -- of the senate foreign relations committee. he lost his prominent position when he was indicted in accordance with democratic senate rules." so that process is still ongoing. nicholas, frederick, maryland. democrat, good morning. caller: i would like to make a

comment about santos. if santos was a democrat, with the same scenario, every republican would not be using those excuses, they would vote him right out along with the democrats. and this goes above and beyond what the other callers are making about politicians with dirty hands. this goes way beyond that. and he needs to go. but i am predicting that the republicans will save him. but they would not if he was a democrat. host: all right. and if you are on the phones, please do stay on the lines. you will get back to your call shortly. we are going to talk to representative haley stevens, a democrat of michigan, a member of the education labor committee and also the select committee on u.s.-china competition. welcome to the program. guest: thank you and good

morning. host: i would like to start with the vote on santos. your thoughts on that. guest: i was listening to viewer calls on your show, and i would just like to remind everybody that this has been bipartisan introduced legislation to expel mr. santos. republicans and democrats have each introduced resolutions. and now we have the ethics committee coming forward with pretty damming conclusions about his illegal activity. and i plan to vote to expel him. i think -- excuse me, more than time for mr. santos to be expelled and removed from the body. host: representative, some callers would say that look, it was his constituents who voted him in, they should be the ones to vote him out, not congressmen and women. guest: look, i take very

seriously that only five members in the history of this body, several that were in the civil war period have been expelled. and it is not something that i as a voting member of congress take lightly. this is beyond egregious and frankly i am sick of talking about mr. santos. i am sick of allocating debate time on the house floor to his behavior. we have real issues to work on for the american people, and this has been as mitt romney has said a complete distraction for the work of congress. so, let's get back to business, let us remove the distraction and it is more than just that, it is unprecedented illegal behavior that he has engaged in that colleagues on both sides of the aisle will vote to expel him for. host: let us talk about other things, one being israel aid.

this is "the hill" headline these 10 democrats blocked the support of their party to support the bill. can you tell us why you are one of those 12 and if you still believe that? guest: absolutely and at the time as i said that was a personal decision. i represent a district in the suburbs of detroit what we call metro detroit. i regularly get out and to my neighborhoods and speak with constituents. we had an election at the municipal level in oakland county shortly after that vote. and i will say this, when i was talking with constituents, the culpability of what has happened on october 7 was so raw. when i think about my duty as a member of congress, it is to represent and speak for the voiceless. it was not -- it was a decision

to truly stand by the united states' greatest ally in the middle east, particularly and stand up to what happened on october 7. iran funded terrorism coming down into the country, killing 1200 people as well as taking 200 hostage. host: there has been a lot of reporting about divisions among the democrats when it comes to israel aid and the administration support for israel. during this war. what are you hearing and how deep are the divisions among democrats? guest: i certainly believe that we are more united than divided. i do think that there are a few who are not going to vote to support aid to israel. i believe that supporting israel is very bipartisan. we certainly have seen that throughout a multitude of years.

and we are going to have to take the vote again and we are going to have to get the aid to israel and also have to get the aid to ukraine. as well as potentially in this package, address border security. i am prepared to do all three, what i know israel needs our support and i know that we have to put an end to terrorism and protect a stand for free and democratic societies and push against an attack on all of humanity which is what happened on october 7. host: you do represent a district in michigan. how concerned are you about the arab american vote as far as support for president biden's reelection. guest: certainly i think that president biden has been doing a phenomenal job, if it is on the middle east or passing infrastructure or a chips and science law that i helped to offer -- to author. i think that president biden

will have a lot to run on as well as a division -- a vision for the future. we have more work to do. clarity, transparency, consistency of leadership will continue to win the day. and that is what joe biden will do until next year's election. host: do you support additional aid for ukraine? guest: i absolutely do. i want to see us support ukraine and i have been battling putin since my first day in congress when he kidnapped my constituent paul whelan who has been one of the longest attained americans ever in russia. this is why i co-chair the task force for american hostages and americans wrongfully detained abroad. we have been playing a big role as it pertains to what has transpired in israel on october 7 with all of the hostages. we need to do both, standby democracy and stand up to

autocracy, and frankly we cannot allow mr. putin to get away with his lawlessness. host: you serve on the select committee for u.s.-china competition. can you tell us what came out of the meeting between president she and president -- president xi and president biden? guest: it sent a strong signal that these countries will work together, our countries will work together in ways in which we can. we cannot take the stance right away that we have in the past. we are waiting for russia to make its decisions as it pertains to ukraine, but with china, we are keeping our eye on taiwan. we are keeping our eye on trade and balance and we are also, frankly trying to ensure that we have the manufacturing base in the united states of america

that we do not have to be overly reliant on the chinese communist party. what xi and biden spoke about was pushing back on the opioid epidemic and finding areas to have a conversation. and it was absolutely received very well back in the mainland of china. and while i know that for the last couple of decades we have worked very hard to bring the ccp along to see if they were going to embrace democratic or capitalist market principles and in many respects they have not totally. they are exploiting some of our approaches to doing business for their gain and that does not necessarily match up to the american spirit of entrepreneurship. we have eyes wide open and we have to continue to work with

our allies and trade partners on sourcing critical materials and minerals for the manufactured goods that move our innervation sector forward. host: representative haley stevens, thank you for joining us. we will go back to the phones to hear from you next. david is in sheboygan, wisconsin. good afternoon. caller: i saw a lewis report about transsexuals and it said that a lot of the people that become transsexuals have autism or adhd. and i think that needs to be investigated. thank you. host: deborah in plainfield, wisconsin. republican. caller: hello. host: hello. caller: i am just wondering how anybody who claims that they are

republican, i was and still consider myself republican, except i did not vote for trump. i voted for biden, and i am really happy that i did. and i think he has done a great job. and this israel and gaza thing, that is a mess and always has been. and one person is not going to be able to solve it. but they want to keep -- host: are you still there? did we lose you? barbara in austin, texas. democrat. caller: hello, i would like to talk about george santos but first one of your first callers was complaining that c-span is leaning left and as a longtime

listener, i low that that is -- i know that that is not true. i have never heard any host express a personal opinion and obviously, anyone who says that is just determined to find something to get angry about. about george santos, people are saying they should not expel him until he is found guilty in a court of law. that is not the way it works. this is according to the house rules. and not you know, a court proceeding. so he has due process in the house and it is time to stop saying wait until he has process in the courts. also, holding a person accountable is not throwing them under the bus. what is missing here is accountability.

it seems that a lot of people just seem to have -- they never hold anyone in their own party guilty or responsible or accountable, they are all -- always pointing fingers across the aisle and making false equivalencies. i have never known anyone in the house that has been as unethical or immoral as judge stanton -- as george santos. and they are always saying look at that other person in the party which is avoiding the subject and inconsistent with any kind of morality. i cannot help but comparing this to al franken, a democrat who immediately resigned when there was any question about a photo that was taken. he was not even touching a woman he held the ham -- his hand up in front of the camera as if he was touching her. because of that he resigned. and you look at all the things

that santos has done, there is no accountability for santos or trump in that party. period. we never do anything wrong, do not dare look at just look at us. that is about what george santos did. host: john, independent. southern pines, north carolina. caller: good morning, i wanted to make brief comments. first on george santos. i think we should all be concerned with congress taking away power from the voters, whether it comes to santos or trying to remove donald trump from the ballot say in colorado. it sets a dangerous precedent. the last caller said it had not been used often, maybe since the civil war. democrat should be careful what they ask for. he might have committed some crimes. i disagree that they are egregious. i mean we are not talking about

felonies, we are talking about mismanagement of campaign funds and lying so let the voters decide. his career is over, we know that. the accountability should be left to the voters and it comes to santos as well as donald trump. my second point, i know representative grossman is no longer with us i wanted to ask him and i wonder if you could have the story be a segment on this, he is on the committee for national security. we need to talk about what both sides are willing to do to ensure election security and integrity because that is probably the greatest national security issue that we have. i do not know if moses -- if most of your listeners realize that. lastly on ukraine and israel aid , i am not naive enough to think that we can just pull back to our own borders to become isolationists. we have to support to some degree israel and ukraine. but to anyone listening in

congress here is what we the people are frustrated with, the lack of accountability. look at how many millions have been lost. if we are unable to manage our money, that is what we should be focusing on. it is not whether or not we should support israel and ukraine what we are doing to make sure we know where the money is going to. it is pitiful that congress is unable to give us a simple accounting of where the money is going to. host: john, i just want to correct on one of your points you said that george santos was not charged with any felonies, that is not true. he is actually charged with felonies. you can go to justice.gov and take a look at what those are specifically, including conspiracy wire fraud, false statements, falsification of records, aggravated identity theft and credit card fraud. david in riverside, california.

republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i watch the debate yesterday with gavin newsom versus ron desantis on foxnews and i thought that desantis did well. everyone seems to think so. we need ron desantis because he is so presidential. i do not understand how he is not beating trump. trump might be in jail at the time of the general election. if he is a republican nominee we need to win this election. he made good points about the lockdown. i had to deal with the lockdown for two years. kids could go to school and they locked kids down from school which was terrible but they did not have randi weingarten as the head of the teachers union. i remember the feeling of fear and i heard that they did that in china and now they are doing that in america and that was not supposed to happen. other people said they cannot lock us down of course they can do that in china because it is communist so i was confident. we were the first date lockdown

and since then i have seen homeless people. people looking for food and not money which is also unusual. i think ron desantis is doing an important thing, not george santos. people confuse those names, talking about the lockdown's not because we can go back in time but so the government never locks us down again. we are free because god made us free. communist do not believe that so they lock people down. host: let us look at a portion of that debate. between ron desantis and gavin newsom. it aired on fox news. [video clip] >> california has more natural advantages. you almost have to try to mess california up. that is what gavin newsom has done. he is a first governor to lose population. they actually at one point ran out of u-haul's in the state of california because sony people were leaving. he has imposed restrictions on

his own people while exempting himself and going to the french laundry while his people were suffering. he led the country and school closures, locking kids out of school while he had his own kids in private school in person. he has very good at spinning these tales. he is good at being slick and slippery. he will tell a blizzard of lies to mask the failures. but the reality is that they have failed because of his leftist ideology and the choice for america is this. what biden, harris, and newsom want to do is to take the california model nationally. in florida we show that conservative principles work. this country must choose freedom over failure. >> i'll tell you why i am here and i am here to tell the truth about the biden and harris record and compare and contrast ron desantis' and the republican party's record as a point of contrast as different between daylight and darkness. you want to bring us back to a

pre-1960's world. america in reverse. you want to roll back hard earned national rights on voting rights and lgbt -- lgbtq rights and women's rights, not just access to abortion but contraception. you want to weaponize grievance. you are focusing on false separateness. you in particular are on a cultural purge, intimidating and humiliating people that you disagree with. you and president trump are really trying to light democracy on fire. so there are profound differences tonight and i look forward to engage them, that there is one thing in closing that we have in common is that neither of us will be the nominee for our party in 2024. [end video clip] host: that was on fox news the debate between governors newsom and desantis. elizabeth from hawaii. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. it is really early, 3:45 in the

morning. host: what are you doing up so early? caller: i have odd sleep habits. but i do my best. i am getting old. thank you for taking my call, open for them. former northeast enter from connecticut, but i've been watching george santos. and i think for me, his -- many of his lies and deceit's and grippeds -- grift barrel down to accountability and to say the voters need to vote them out there is no time for that. it is cause-and-effect, consequences. i taught my adult children and now my grandchildren that there is accountability and -- in everything. you make a mistake and you are held accountable. some consequences are more severe and you go to prison or pay a fine, whatever it might be. in george santos's situation, it

is wrong to allow him to stay in his elected seat. he made that decision when he did the deed. whatever deeds he did has gotten him to where he is now, and he should not be excused for them because it sends a message to everyone and have other elected officials done just as badly or will do badly? that is on them and needs to be dealt with separately. to have wisconsin saying the voters need to vote them out, there is no time for that. you speed you get a ticket and you murder someone and you go to jail. he has a blemish on the united states, that is the first thing. the second thing that i want to say is that anyone who supports donald trump is creating chaos. this man is a convicted -- i'm not going say felon but i know

that he has 91 felony charges. he is acted on financial problems -- convicted on financial problems. if you sober -- supports donald trump you are sending a message to the world and our children that we will tolerate this type of a candidate knowing who he really is. and then i guess the last thing i was gonna say is for people who keep bringing the bible into their decision-making and their conversations, not all of us believe in the bible. i was raised christian, but i no longer follow christian tenants. i do not want to hear about the bible, this is supposed to be the separation of church and state. please stop banging on the bible every time you want to make a point. i thank you so much for giving me this time. host: john in pennsylvania, republican. caller: regarding aid to israel the world bank says in order for

a country of service their debt the gdp ratio should be about 77%. ours is that 122%. israel's is at 62%. they are well below finance. in addition to that they are one of the leading exports of arms in the united states. people need to stop listening to the media and start looking at israel. if they are such a great ally of the united states, why did they welcome that man is a hero. when iraq invaded kuwait why could they not be part of the coalition? number three they gave military technology to china in 2014. any elected official will tell you that whenever they vote they always ask themselves two things, what will alp say and what does aarp say and what will apex say. the reality says if you look at

what is happening they always say anti-semitism in the united nations. united nations has a policy that any country that conquers land during war that it is not their land. that is why the occupied territories are not israel. my last point is if they are such a great ally, why is it that every president from jimmy carter up until george bush that tried to have a two state solution what did they do behind closed doors? i want to encourage people, do not listen to msnbc or fox. do not listen to cnn. go back and do the research and look at what is happening and ask yourself are these pro-israel lobbies in the united states lobbying in the interest of the united states? it is interesting. you give israel $14 billion a day when they are in a better financial position to pay, and yet people squawk over debt

forgiveness for student loans. that is my point. host: got it. jason in montgomery, alabama. independent. caller: how are you doing? host: good. caller: i had an urge to break up the maga cult watch party to call in every other call and complain about how you are so biased and do not provide opportunities for other voices to be heard, and do not cover certain topics. it is just ammunition for the fact that you cannot please them. you literally have a segment called open forum but they are calling in and you are allowing them to say whatever they want, not putting any spin on it and broadcasting it to the world, putting it on your website so people can view it later. and they still are not satisfied with the opportunity.

they still complain. you literally have people like peter navarro and all of these people from the trump orbit on their talking about what they are wanting to talk about and they are still not satisfied. they still want to complain and they have all of these issues that they think are so covered up. literally, you guys have covered every conspiracy that they wants to come up with. the truth of the matter is they do not want an open forum. they do not want conversation. they do not appreciate that. they want 100% control of the conversation so they can talk about all of the delusional myths that they talk about and all the stuff that donald trump wants them to talk about. they do not want to talk about reality or the actual crimes that george santos has been charged with. they want to talk about the speech of elana omar or rashida to leave --ihan omar and

rashida to leave. one is people talking and another is a fraudulent republican in the congress that has been charged and even other republicans in congress have said is an actual criminal and they want to get rid of. you could say the same thing about menendez. if you commit a crime as a representative or you are charged you cannot convince me that you are able to fulfill the obligations of your office and go to court for something that everyone else says you did. but you have a certain little corner of your group saying we need to wait for the wheels of justice to turn. stop it. there is only like two people in congress right now, menendez as far as i know and santos that actually have charges against them. out of 400 plus members. getting rid of those two people will not make a big difference. host: josephine on monro

township, new jersey. democrat. caller: good morning. i have a question for you. i would like to know who exactly is eligible to vote in congress on this matter with santos? host: all of the members. all of the members of the house. caller: yes, but, shouldn't they recuse themselves if they are in any way, shape, or form connected to any of those charges? we know congressman have been behind closed doors accused. does that still make them eligible? if not, would they be a two thirds majority if these people had to recuse themselves? host: you know, i am not aware

of -- you are saying conflict of interest that people were involved in the crimes that mr. santos is being accused of? caller: or, other crimes, but exactly. or similar to what he is. they were tried behind closed doors? so we are not aware of how many congressman have been accused of that. host: rosemond, california. a republican. deborah, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to bring a couple of my comments and suggestions online. in the state of california, we have actually a recall where we can actually recall an individual from office. that has been voted in. unfortunately, the state of new york does not have that option

for recall of any of their elected officials. there was a bill that was put to the new york state senate in 2017 that did not pass. if the states were to have recalls for elected individuals, and we would not be having this issue today. there is also a situation in the public sector that when individuals are under investigation, like in law enforcement they are put on administrative leave or suspended with pay during an investigation. during that investigation these individuals are not allowed -- not able to conduct their roles in their position. third, i think, thirdly in regards to the aid for ukraine,

israel, taiwan and the u.s. border. since israel, ukraine and taiwan are all international defense issues or homeland security, we should be focusing and keeping the bill separate in regards to homeland security. host: got it, and we are out of time for this episode of washington journal. we will be back again tomorrow morning 7:00 a.m. eastern time. we will take you live to the house floor. this is [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] live coverage. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker.