bookslf features multiple critically acclaimed authors, biographies and q&a. listen to the podcast feed this holiday season. yocan find it wherever you get your podcasts and on our website. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. apparel, books come home to core and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. >> washington journal continues.

host: our viewers are familiar with our guest. the most recent legal challenges facing donald trump. 91otal charges to state cases. why do we stand with the roadmap ahead? it is -- gues we are talking about the federal case brought in washington dc. of those four, cases, that is the first one on the trial can do -- trial calendar. but there is anything in the interveng week. the appeals court will hear trump's challenge. he is arguing that he cannot be

commonly prosecuted in the case and that all charges should be dismissed and everyone should go home. presidential immunity sounds like a get out of free -- get out of jail free card. it is a preposterous notion that someone can be immune from being held responsible simply because they were president at the time. for those who care about such things, it is one of the rare courts that live streams the audio of the arguments. it could impact the trial date. maybe it stays on march 4.

starting the process is missing the case. host: the decision was on the lower court. what is the appealourt taking up her guest: districtourt judge is trying to rent -- she tossed aside this argument and used the phrase i invoked. that decision was appealed. the supreme court was asked to intervene. this is headed your way anyways. they said they are not ready for us.

we have pretty expedited argument. a pretty nimble calear that having this argument next week, a week from today is an ambitious timeframe. host: talking about the expedited argument and calendar. there is more needed. that decision could come early this week. guest: you have different states coming up with diffent rulings about whether trump should be on the ballot. looking at whether it would prohibit trump from getting on the ballot. they are both being appealed, so his name remains for now.

we cannot have a patchwork of decisions. host: what civil cases should we be keeping an eye on? guest: trump's is stealing is still out there as well. he was there in the courtroom, seemingly viscerally connect did. washington with the injured police officers and the members of congress. the same one we talked about having a hearing last week. they ruledhat trump can be -- sued civilly for damages on january 6. that is still out there there

are the other three criminal cases that you referred to. host: c-span viewers are very familiar. questions or comments. as folks are calling in, all these different -- guest: let's start with the election interference case. the case in washington is heduled to go to trial 24 hours before super tuesday. there is a remarkable -- it is shaping up forhe first week of march where you have the jury selectioin a trial for a former president happening 4 million of voters can go to the polls.

just almost bullet juxtasition of a historic, the first week of march. there is one in new york city, a local criminal case about the legend hush-money payments. initially, that was scheduled for trial in mch as well. we expect that shift another federal criminal case with the legend's handling of classified documents by donald trump. that is scduled for trial in late may. there are challenges that could delay that one. a broad, sweeping case with many codefendant.

he has many codefendant's. that trial could go on the calendar this year. host: if there is a trial expected to be wrapped up before voters go the polls in november, which one is that most likely to be? guest: the washington election interferencease. it alleges that donald trump use the insurrection as a cover to further press lawmakers on that day overturn results. that trial because it is first on the calendar. it reduces the risk of viables and delays. the judge of the case has been diligent about keepinghings on schedule and on track, pushing away, sliding away all t requests for delays that trump

is making in that case seems to be likely to go before the election. host: we talked about 91 cases. this is the narrowest four step one piece gst: four felony charges and no codefendant. just donald trump. and yes, it was brought efficiently without the complicated, sweeping nature. host:alking about these criminal and civ cases with amendment challenges as well a od time if you have challenges about the various legal challenges. this is mary. caller: i just wanted to speak

on the subject of slavery. i wanted to say that america needs to repay these atrocities. america needs to write the wrong. host: certainly an important topic to talk about, but not the one we are focusing on in this segment. do you have a question for him? caller: well, no. i just wanted to make a comment and then i wanted to comment on president trump. host: let's talk about trump because that ithe topic we are on right now. caller: i think trump is the worst thing that ever happened to the united states of america. i think people need to realize that. trump shows us the condition of our country today. which is divided andull of

hate. that seems to be ok with a lot of people, but that will be the downfall of america. host: that is mary in north carolina. focusing in on the 14th amendment case. his argument for removing donald trump on the ballot. he says we do not live in a democracy if the losing is to stay in power. he should ner be allowed to be in power again. removing him is undemocratic, saying that is nonsense. democracy is not just elections. it is norms here. what is the trump response to these moves by the secretary of state? guest: they are calling it election interference and a biased efforto remove a candidate who has the backing of his party. he had -- every indication that

he is an overwhelming favorite, but they are arguing that it is symmetrical and they are arguing we spoke with one of them about the ethics and washington. and the litigant said the point of the 14th amendment provision is to prevent someby who engaged in insurrection from running again. some people are arguing that the voters have their 20's. let the voters decide. the response of the litigators is, the voters had their choice in 2020 and donald trump funded to it by allegedly seeking to overturn the results of an election. host: what role have they played on the 14th amdment challenges? guest: multiple roles.

but also messaging on this. making the argument that this is bigger than just letting voters have their say. there e legal protections and constitutional perception agait having someone that that running again. if you do not utilize those production, there is no use in them in the first place. mary use the phrase that trump would be the downfall of america. i appreciate the sentiment she is communicating but some people may be in the jury pool. in these different jurisdictions in fort pierce, florida and fulton county, georgia. they share her sentiment. trump has argued that in washinon dc, there is a bias

that they would not be able to produce a fair jy. some might agree with mary's sentiment. they have had the same a classmate of them th they need to move these cases out because the juries are too loaded against trump. others say there is a jury selection process and we expect the same thing will be true in march. there is a vibrant jury selection process. host: where is the place in thr mind, that they can a fair trial? guest: many of them bring the cases to their home areas. some have moved outside of the

area including the eastern district of virginia and the western district. defeants may areciate the difference, but the judges ha been diligent saying there are nearly one million people. there are fair jurs. host: this is peggy on the line for democrats. caller: ok. if the appellate court decides that trump is not immune prosecution, does that mean that everybody can go on with the trial? or can the supreme court refused to take up trump's case on immunity after the appellate work assigned? guest: that is the critical question.

if the appeal court decides no, you do not get presidential immunity from crimes, it is likely if notertain that he will appeal that decision. will the supremeourt pick it up? will it pick it up promptly or at its own leisure? if the supreme court makes a move one way or the other, it could affect the timing. but no, we are going to leave this with the lower court. host: is there anything that can be read from them doing that? guest: they did not give an explanation for picking up that petition. but they might. if this goes to them a second time or if jack smith wants to

appeal taking or rejecting that appeal. host: shira, republican. you are on. caller: good morning. i have a question about the insurrection. how come he has not been charged withhat? how come they have not found him guilty of that? guest: my question has been one that has been persistent. it is common -- critics of the prosecution have said that nobody has actually been charged with insurrection. therhas been conspiracy and the peaceful transfer of power and it was quite notable when

the indiment was released in august. there was no charge, but the ly reference comes late in the document, making an allegation that donald trump used the capitol riot as a cover to continue to pressure members of congress not to certify the result of the election. it is a question to bring to the special counsel. it has been stated that they complicate the case and the efficiency with which the case can move and the breadth of the case. host: when ja smith is referring to what happened, he calls it a rioor an attack on the capital? what is the verbiage at he

uses? guest: we'll find out, but it gives y indication -- it will come up. you can get a sense from the pretrial filing. he makes this cursory reference about witsses and impacting the speech and debate clause. it is relevant to members of congress. in because he species in the indictment that january 6 is relevant to the charge of obstruction of a proceeding, it is quite clear that there will be a lot to talk about. how he phrases it.

host: is it something we should even be doing right now? guest:t is a little bit of a dangerous game. not on have members of -- some people credit it as the antecedent to this criminal case, but it is also a investigation into what communication theyere having on january 6 and some of them were stonewalled. therare all kinds of different directions of curiosity. host: maryland, independent. yoare on. caller: it looks like you ran headlong into the buzz saw

there. he sainever mind what the media calls this. all these cases are based on the ct that he is guilty of one or the other case. insurrection was the civil war. the civil wadid not happen january 6. i did not vote for trump. but what his opposition is doing is making his case. it is li when he was elected the first time, they could not stop talking about him and now you have charged him with all these different things and making up a word, giving it a new definition. january 6 was the failure of the catol police to defend the capital during a protest that turned io a riot. it was a catastrophic failu and a disgraceful thing tha people are wandering around the capital and slapping people with sticks. it was disgraceful but not in

insurrection. all of this is based on him being guilty of something prior to entering the courtroom. guest: he speculating some of the arguments that we have heard. he makes a good pnt about what we are talking about. the challenges that we are seeing across america will be kindf a wash test. but litigants challenging to get trump off the ballot believe that it precludes trump from being on the ballot. we saw the supreme court rule in their favor. and then you see federal prosecution of donald trump and d.c. and we do not charge him with excitement.

an argument against insurrection. the failure of the capitol police has been referencedy members of congress. the capitol police were outmanned by 1000. there has been an investigation into security faires. that has been an investigation into what went wrong head of january 6. that all being said, to release or pubcly post all 43,000 hours of video. as of today, dozens of hours ar there. but there has been no indication of something captured on camera,

no silverullet in that vid that will show anything other an whawe know already that they were manned by a mob. some othem we caring stolen police riot shields. dozens of them assaulted or resisted police officer's visit. more thahalf of them have pled guilty or have been sent to trial. host: they want to know who is in charge of security at what all the speaker of the house ays. can you run through that? guest: u.s. capitol police reports to the leadership of congress. the speaker of the house a the senator cash in the majority.

there has been this aument that donald trump has perpuated. nancy pelosi, responsibility for failures to be six. the most primary of whic is mitch mcconnell was the senate leader and shared responsibilies with nancy pelosi, so both parties had oversight january 6, 20 21. if you want to ascribe laying to the leadership of congress for what happened that day. host: good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. the -- this is very interesting. what trump did with those writers, letting them go peacefully, he uses the wordne

time. if you listen to the word, the antagonistic word -- he uses those words multiple times. i think he can be charged for aiding and he also uses words of comfort. but last but not least, but i want to y about the judges that will be hearing his case coming up, his argument is that he is immune and has presidential immunity, but that means he can do whatever he wants. which one of theudges are willing to support that idea when the president can then order the judge that he does not like anybody in the government

he does not like and then get away with it? which judge is willing to support that idea? guest: the are aoints that are quite relevant to arguments that we are going to hear. he made a january 6 2 having been in the courtroom, we have heard defendants through defee lawyers. the argument has not secured the equivalent trial. you e your own manager own woman in the last court syste 100%. 100% of the defendants to go to jury have been convicted. some of them have made that argument. the other issue is the issue of,

if you have presidential immunity, can you do just about anything? it sounds like a preposterous notion, but the most recent filing brings up those kinds of contingencies, if a president gets immunity from criminal prosecution. if he is not convicted at an impeachment trial. jack smith paints a picture. one if that president who commits a crime in the future mobs the capital to kill members of congress so tt the impeachment vote ends up differently. he lays out the scenario in his latest appeals court filing. it seems intuive to me that he would make that. these arall theoretical at

this point theoretical and the distant future. he imaking that concept. if you have presidential immunity, does that ensure future presidents to do what they want? host: before we leave the january 6 prosetion, remind the viewers what we are taing about and are there one or two that your keeping an eye on? guest: three yearsark for january 6 is on saturday. it would have been impossible. 1200 criminal cases in three years time into one courthouse in america. they do not see that tonnage of

cases. they have secured guilty pleas in roughly 700. they have gone to trial against dozens of defeants. everyone whoas gone trial by jury has been convicted. note that last charge. obstruction an official proceeding is the same charge that dald trump faced. a unique type of charge that donald trump or the defendants arged with that crime obstructed the certification of the electoral camp, the congressional meeting to certify the election. dozens of guilty pleas or convictions on that charge, but the supreme court has agreed to review that charge. the supreme court has agreed to

review that. in the meantime, there have been defendants to ask that their sentencing be put on hold. thateen defendants who have asked to be released from prison while the cot reviews that charge. they have put some cases on hold and it is noteworthy for several reasons. donald trump is facing that charge. it is likely the -- likely before june, but it could be untilune that the supreme court hammers that out. host: are there arguments in the courtroom th we can hear afterwards? guest: there could be oral arguments but the review procs can take different forms. but it could take time. could that complicate the prosecution of donald trump? he is accused of different things. one of the things that we noted was that he is bringing a

january 6 charge against donald trump because so my january 6 defendants have faced the same things and been convicted or pled guilty for the same thing. host: what are the cases that you are watcng? guest: they haveeen litigated in their convictions. late 20 thirtieths wire 20 40's. huge case is looking next, who is next? the department of justice has brought an urecedented number of charges and looking for hundreds me people. there are hundreds more possible. this could go past the next presidential election and dold trump is on the same defendants, which will be a distinctive issue as we get closer to the election. a mass releasef defendants and one other ne, i mentioned this, three year anniversary of

januy 6. who puts the pipe bombs outside the headquarters? which police and knowledge was a significant and painful distraction tohem ojanuary 6. theyeem to be nowhere on that. host: what was the latest on that? guest: the last interview that talked about the pipe bomb -- they stop taking interview requests on that. they stopped releasing new videos, ringing that be again. no indication of any leads. it was such an impactful thing. it was discovered as the rightist mom -- mob was attacking the capital. just in a vacuum. if somebody puts pipe bombs and u.s. capitol in that case has

not been solved, it is a pretty big thing. host: ohio, republican. thank you for waiting. caller: have a l on my mind. i think all these trials, they are trying to get dald trump out for so reason or another. i'm just wondering why there is a double standard. joe biden had claified documents when he was a u.s. senator, but had no business having them. they just -- donald trump won in 2020 and you ha hillary clinton, joe biden, all these top-ranked mcgrath. trump stole the election this and that. they are not charged with any of this. they know most of these trials are going to be overturned at the appellate level. they just want to drag this on to maksure he does not get elected again.

as far as jack smith, jack smith, the high percentage of his cases are overturned because of things that he did during trial that were questionable. i want to know why there a double standd. host: we will take up those questions. guest: there is a lot there. i will try to keep my thoughts stight. taking the argument that it is an attempt to get him out of there. every indication so far is anecdotal, but these appearances and the mugshot of donald trump have been campaigned in the polls. that is the intent to impact trump politically with a boom impact for donald trump. the classified documents investigation -- that is still

under investigation. by a different council that used to be the u.s. attorney in the district of maryland. that case is not closed. a judge was going to have him or not have him because it is still ongoing. it is a special counsel who decis it. he questions jack smith's accessories and a hi percentage that are overturned on appeal. buhe mig be luding to is donald trump's criticism that a big jack smith case was overturned on appeal. that was the corruptio case of the then governor mcdonald was convicted in trial along with his wife for trading favors for gifts. thatas overturned by the u.s. supreme point. i have n seen any metric. host: out of indianapolis,

independent. just abo five minutes left. caller: i have a question. i wonder, do you ever have any ill feeling about keeping a man like donald j. trump? all of these trials an stuff, i think it only keeps them relevant and keeps him in the news. w i see it i it is very simple. of course he did it. of course. but you have to prove in a court of law, which is going to be the same, that most importantly, as long as people make him stay

relevant, men like mr. mcfarland, men like you keep him in the news. host:ou want to see the prosecution happened, but youo not think the media should cover it as much as they have or at all? caller: i think you should just show him in the courtroom. he cannot control the narrative. as soon as he gets out of that couroom, the firsthing he is going to do is grab a camera or a microphone and attack everybody. guest: there are a few things to unpack there. some of the coverage of crinal cases isust oxygen for a political candidate trying to crystallize his image as a

disruptor. it is the donald trump mantra. each time he comes out of the courtroom -- sigh. he gets the o.j. simpson caravan news coverage where we follow his cavalcade back. is that oxygen to donald trump? channeling the voices of some amicans when he says that. there is a peculiarity with corage of kona cases and to a degree donald trump. he recognizes that. the january 6 cases are part of a larger prosecution in american history. theyre historic by nature and

a warrant coverage. they are hpening inside the federal court system where audio feeds are prohibited. they have to capture any glimpse of what is happening. we are speaking to america about a case that otherwise would be invisible. we snt a lot of our time raising the profile of what is trying -- what is happening. host: it is not one of the most high-profile trials. how often is the public there? howften are they watching one of these run-of-the-mill cases? guest: there is a handful of

folksiligently attend these things. there are those who recognize the scope and size. there is a group of family members who have made it their mission, making an argument. they believe these people are overcharged. they are going to track what is happening and argued that this is going too far. holidays, weekends included. they are in court each day. we cannot watch the federal courts in amica. you have to be on the wooden bench to see justice happen or not happen. it is a real vulnerability.

host: le for democrats. thank yofor waiting. caller: this is very informative. i want to review an argument about january 6. that only trump could have called in the national guard. when he got back to the white house, it is going down. he could have treated right away, everybody stand down but he sat down, eat his popcorn and watched it all transpire in front of him. you are correct about him having the power. not nancy pelosi or mitch mcconnell. he could have wrought in the extra guard and ended it quickly.

guest: the committee that investigated did a whole hearing before donald trump reased a video telling followers to go me. what happened during that has tarnished democracacross the world. they made that argument uneqvocally. host: congressional correspondent. you can follow him on social media. we always appreciate your time. coming up in about 30 minutes, we will be joined by larry, the director of the center for policy. we will take a look at campaign

2024. just over 300 days away, but first, more of your phone calls. any political issue he went to talk about, the phone lines are yours. the numbers are on your screen. ♪ >> c-span's campaign 2024 coverage conties with the presidential primaries. watch on c-span network as the first votes are cast in the upcoming election along with candidate speeches and results, beginning wi the iowa caucuses . campaign 2024 on c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> a healthy democracy does not just look at this. it lks like this where

americans can see democracy at work. our republic thrives. get informed, straight from the sources on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word from the nation's capital to wherever youre. the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. >> in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interaction and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government.

>> c-span documentary competition is back on the celebrating 20 years. looking forward while considering the past. addressing one of these questions. and the next 20 years, what is the most important chae he would like to see in america? or over the past 20 years, but has been the most important change in america? yeah giving away $100,000 in total prizes with a grand prize of $5,000 and every teacher u.s. students participate has the opportunity to share a portion. theompetition ddline is january 19, 2024. visit our website at studentcam.org.

>> friday ght, watch the campaign trail aeekly undup of campaign coverage providing a one-stop shop abouthat candides are saying to voters. is along with firsthand accounts, fundising data and campaign acts. watch friday night at 7:00 eastern come online at c-span.org or download the podcast on c-span now. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. washingtonournal continues. host: it is time for our open forum, the time where we let you lead the discussion. the phone lines are yours. it is (202) 748-8001