nt rowur y avoid -licy ♪ host: good morning. it is 20 24. three hours from now, the supreme court could hand out its first ruling on a major case. the court announced today would be decision. the timing would mean the decision would come down just a day before super tuesday. on the washington journal, we are asking you about the supreme court and do you trust the court when it comes to cases that could impact the upcoming election? phone lines split by political party. democrats, (202) 748-8000. 1. independents, (202) 748-8002.you can also send us a text, that number (202) 748-8003. if you do, please include your name and where you are from.

otherwise, catch up with us on social media. at x, it's. on facebook, it is face good monday morning. start calling now. the headline from usa today from overnight. the supreme court coruuld p' colorado ballot eligibility as soon ide ifanti-iti--kick trump off the ballot. colorado and maine are two of the satesecisions from the high court, and they are among the many states holding primaries tuesday, super tuesday. the court heard oral arguments february 8 on donald trump's challenge to the colorado supreme court's decision that he is ineligible to return to the white house because of his role in the january 6 2021 insurrection act attack at the united states capitol. thatory on usa today. asking you your level of trust in the supreme court when i cases having to do with elections 2024 or rel back to january 6.

it was lastle on wednesday that the supreme court decided to take up the question of presidential immunity, a claim former president donald trump is making when it comes to one of his federal cases. they will hear his presidential immunity claim case april 2 delaying the start of that federal case. this is the headline from last week after the court made that , delaying his trial in that case, a picture of donald trump there. cnn with a pole asking this same question, do you trust the supreme court when it comes to elections 2024 cases? he is the of the answers to that response. just 11% saying they trust the supreme court a great deal when it comes to on legal cases relating to elections 2024 all 25% saying they trust theome, 31% saying they trust the court a moderate amount. wondering what you think ahead

of the expected decision coming down. it is 10:00 a.m. when we are expected to hear from the supreme court, and that is when this program ends this morning. jasper up first out of cleveland, ohio. caller:host: what is your level of trcaller: i have a bad feeling about it, because i do not think he will -- hello? host: i am listening to you. caller: oh, ok. i think thomas wife's situation on the case about the january 6 case and everything. i really do not think they will give him the right opinion on that. we will see what happens. host: what is the right ending? caller: it would need him to recluse himself to get a fair chance on it, and people should

know what happened, that his wife was involved. i think you should be on the ballot to be truthful tohost: from new york independent. caller: good morning. i believe the supreme court is working properly. i do not think politics believe colorado, president trump, will be on the ballot. there is no reason why he should not be on the ballot. my feeling is, if we go on this road and -- ded supreme court will decide on the merits and keep him on the ballot. host: you think the supret-minded? caller: i do believe, because i follow them. people told me this and that. they make decisions on their

merits. why do you only -- the judiciary is not independent? then it become a battleground in politics. i hope it will remain independent for a long time. host: this is ann out of ne: good morning. i do not trust the supi do not think that, after trump three supreme court justices, i think they are political. i do not trust clarence thomas. i think c needs to recluse himself from january 6 because of his -- i think he needs to recuse himself from january 6 because of his wife. host: one was the last time you trusted the supreme court? caller:ile. even when obama was president, mitch mcconnell would not let obama, bring up merrick garland someone on the

court. so the court has become political for a while, not only now. i do not trust the court. i think of our becoming -- i think they are becoming too political. the last three before think they have really been too ow are very, very political. i would t host: that's ann in new york. a favorability ratings are any indication, the supreme court becoming more unfavorable over time, according to public polling. this is pew research with their chart, dating back to 19 back then, the favorability ratings of the supme crt would bounce from 80% to 65%. n see those numbers tightening over time, from 2000 7, 2017, almost 50-50, just unfavorable ratings then favorable ratings that

dating up last year, and some of the latest numbers from the gallup organization as well their numbers the supreme court, the latest polling from september of last year saying 9% they have a great deal of trust in the supremesaying they do not have much trust in the supreme court, and 19% saying none at all at this point. you can see the gallup polling continues over time every few months or so, things with approval ratings. t of new jersey, independent. caller: good morning. sadly, after all the years i have watched the supreme court i am disappointed. i will tell you where it started. when the federalt societ judges. how does that happen? any time before, they would go

to -- the judiciary committee would always submit the name to the american bar association, up or down, tell us what kind of person this is as a judge, up or down. oh no, we do not want the want the federalist society to choose care that is when we went downhill. host: presidents get to choose their nominees. are yous from that conservative -- caller: they literally chose for president trump, the names, because he was not a lawyer. he had no clue. they chose them here they did not go to the american bar association, which was the itthey literally chose who was to be put on the court. then when you find out that the three people, billionaires putting the money up forcourt, i am sorry, i am just dismayed this has been allowed. i do not care whetheryour background is, but at least the american bar association was a neutral party.

the federalist society is not. host: chuck out of farmington hills, michigan, republican. good caller: good morning, america. call. number one having served in the marine corps for many years and gone to foreign countries, wake up, america. you cannot deny people from being on the ballot that has never been charged wh anng independent. let's look at what the situationwhat will happen is, if you allow this then why shouldn't the republicans close off all the ballots to the democrats? thank you very much. host: what do you think the supreme court is going to say today, less than three hours from now? caller: indeed, if it is the supreme court, and indeed, i think that they're going to have

to trump on the host: and you think it is a good thing they make their opinion known, handed maine vote? and those are two of the three estates, along with illinois that this -- two of the three states along with illinois that this ballot caller: number one, the 14th amendment doesthe supreme court is going to vote in favor of keeping donald trump, or anybody, on these ballots. host: that's chuck in michigan. to the bluegrass state, thiss gina. good morning. caller: yes. first of all i blame congress for not doing their job. ould be and yet, they bring it to the supreme court to be the final decider. if you will notice here lately,

have more supreme court cases than we have ever had in history. it used to be a dynamic case to be brought. now look how much money it cost us, for someone to take a case to the supreme court. therefore that case, only the rich can afford to take a case to the supreme court. we cannot decide -- we cannot say "i don't want no press," because the press is whateas and the information out. i am confident in the supreme are rulings that have never done so good. that is in the eye of the beholder because you cannot get everything your way. host: what was a good ruling by the supreme court, any recent one that you would say is a good ruling? caller: well, there was a number

a lot of times, the supreme t, when they decide to not even take a case -- and right now, the case they have with the internet people -- i just think that -- a lot of people were disappointed when the gore v. bush thing happened. but when they t god on the cross, the roman but he said we have to believe in government. he had the power to ovid there are things we have to endure. as long as we live never put more than what you can take. host:k to new york, this is john, independent. good morning. i watched the beginning of this, and you you presented the question do you trust the supreme court regarding the selection thing,

and then you showed a chart saying how many people have faith in the supreme court? you showed a chart, some people do, some don't, some people are in between. but they were two different questions. we do not know what context those questions were put in. you said today we have a question that possibly could answer the election results, and anothe -- host: so stick with whichever you want to answer. the question we put up this morning, do you trust the supreme court when election 2024 cases? we have alsooval ratings over time and that sort of thing, but stick with that question. do you trust the supreme court when it comes to election 24 and for that election 2024 cases -- do when it comes to election 2024 cases. today they will likelythe decision on the ballot access. caller: so the question you asking is setting up the audience to answer this question.

how many people who are calling in no the constitutional, what is written in the constitution? the supreme court justices are put into those seats by the american people, whoever, and of these are theand you're asking a question -- wouldn't it be nice if you did what they used to do in the old days and have a constitutionalist represent one point of view, a constitutionalist on the other side of the table represent another point of view, having questions asked -- host: i promise we will havgyat we do is take an hour questions, taking your calls about the news of the day. so do you court? that is my question to you. caller: on what? on the election?

i have my own opinion, yeah. i trust them, we, as a voter, i can vote for a person i want to vote for and not have him removed or removed. what is going to candidate from a blue state, then the red states say, hey we will pass through our legislature and all that we'll ban the blue candidate. what kind of country are we going to have? why don't you have someone on to explain this, that way people are not calling up and just ripping each other apart -- host: appreciate it. thank you. i promise we will. on this 14th scholars talk about it, especially when it was being argued in front of the supreme court. today's the day the decision is expected to serve, down we do not know for sure, the supreme court making that su announcement yesterday that there will be decisions, at least one, being handed down and the timing, with it

coming right before super tomorrow, the expectation is it will be that 14th amendment case. this is marked in maryland, republican. in maryland, republican. caller good morning. making the court political. i think both parties d definitely, democrats do. people need to look in the mirror and think of what their party is doing when it comes to th just try to blame the republicans, since we have court. i have a couple extraers brown was a conservative black justice. she had potential supreme court justice, but joe biden and barack obama held herco back several years to a federale bush administration, to prevent he supreme court. the reason is because they did not want a female conservative justice on the court. host: on making the court

political, it is a question thnique to this time. it is certainly a questionha do you think, in a day and have more access to the media, social media, do you think the justices do a good job today, or a better job today, of staying above the political fray for protecting that image of not being political? do you think they do that well today? was there a time in the past you think they did that better? caller: i mean, i do trust the court today. as far as very difficult to try to do that. but i think theyome of them are, anyway. do not see amy coney barrett out ther much talking. -- out there much, talking. you do not see i just want to make one point.

judges do not put the law first. that judge in illinois last week, george tracy porter, she made a comment, when she accepted her federal job, my motto is impacting lives and changing communities and that is going to be my approach to my new position. that is an activistat is where most liberal judges fall, is acting, being an activist before being a jurist. : thanks for the call. this is wisconsin, teresa democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a comment regarding court, and i definitely do and trust theiri would also like to say that wnt sic seal team six on far right wingers. host:that is teresa in wisconsin. phoenix arizona independent. good morning.

caller: good morning. i do not have a whole lot of faith in the supreme court. there's been too mucháu whetherr liberal. whatever is proposing these individuals to be justices, it seems they come from their camp. the big concern i have now is one of the cases before the supreme court, on the presidentiality. the only real questionwonder if they are asking themselves, does a sitting president, who is also a candidate for elected office, have ability to say an election has been stolen or is fraudulent, and therefore, the right do things, to notit proceed in the fashion it has for decades?

is the question i think will be answered by their decision now, and i think it will have a far-reaching effect in the fact that it would increase the power of thec and the judiciary, and that is not the way it is supposed to be set up. host: have you thought much before about the idea of presidential immunity? decided wednesday of last week, that they would take up on april this federal case on january 6 is going to wait until that decision is made in april, will delay that federal case. in think presidential immunity is important? a pre be free from prosecution so they can do their job? how muchpast? caller: as far as presidential immunity is concerned, they should have immunity, but when

it com election, i think that is a different set of circumstances. functioning as president, yes, they should have immunity, so they can do their job. th of course, within limi.my thinking on that is that, in this particle instance, even if they are not going to hear it until april what happened on january 6 and stuff like that, it should not have happened?it really should not have happened that way. even if it wast a delay, as far as actually not certifying the votes, even if they were just trying to delay it and that type of thing. my point is why wasn't it brought out cases were filed before january 20? host: these are a few of your comments from social media to this question we asked -- do you

trust the supreme court when it comes to election 2024 cases specifically? joseph in nevada at writingon. k, a leslton county to bring charges against him, why wouldn't we trust is up in court to do their job? gerald on cares who they trust. sandy any branch to do their deleting needed delineated job. hour "washington journal "washington journal left in this first segment of" with this d it is likely going to be on that 14th amendment case in colorado, the ballot access case. we are asking do you trust the supreme court when it comes to election 2024 cases? this is gloria in virginia republican. caller:thank you for taking my call. o trust the supreme court 100%, in making these decisions. i take that from the bible. i am a christian. when moses appointed the judges, he specifically told them, in

deuteronomy one, 16 and , the underlying criteria they should judging any calls bring me up to 2024 and trust in government today. caller: i do trust them, because they are not a respecter of persons. trump is not on trial. want to call it that, is the call. the calls relate to the office of president. it does not relateesident himself. that is gloria out of virginia this morning. donald trump has had plenty to say when it comes to these cases against him while he has been on the campaign trail. on saturday, he at special counsel jack smith, who is leading the federal investigations into donald trump and leading federal cases, one in florida and one in

washington, d.c. this is soident had to say over the weekend. [video clip] >> we had the thing in washington, deranged jack smith. he is eight arranged human being. he has a huge record of failure, out, and people and up not being convicted -- not being convicted. he gto terrible human being. he is at arranged person who wants to hurt p hurting him. that's not the kind of people -- being a prosecutor is a very imaning. being a fair prosecutor is a ortant thinking about some of these animals, they are bad. i've done is all coming out of crooked joe biden. he can't campaign, he can't speak, he can't walk, he loo like hell. and i will say this. before indictments, i talked much evenly about him. front rows know. i had respect for the office of

the president. if you sent to msnbc and cnn ratings now, which is great, but if you listen to them -- if ywere all saying, you can never indict trump on this.you can never indict trump on january 6. they indicted me. you can never indict him on that document a hoax. i come under the presidential records act. i am allowed to"fate new york times did a story. please please, please, mr. president, could we have our boxes? and if t no, he does not have to give them. host: trump on the campaign trail over the weekend. speaking of the gop primary over the weekend, nikki haley winning her first primary, the republican primary here in washington d.c., a city of some 700,000 people. a little over 2000 people participated in the republican primary in d.c., as you can see from the washington post story today.

haley got 63% of the vote compared to 33% for donald trump, winning washington, d.c.'s delegates. nikkiey last week, after the supreme court decided to take up that presidential immunity con an intervieth nbc, she talked about that case. here is a little from nikki haley. [vid i think voters are going to want to know what they walking into a president who is still going to have to be in court or if they walking into a presidency where he can get rid of a court case voters want to know that. that is this -- that is apart the supreme court has to spell you going to give this verdict? what does that mean for people will they have answers before the general election. th about trump. i want it for biden, clinton, trump. we need to make sure a president knows they are never above the law. >> you deserve to

know the verdict if this case trial in the generous sick case before election day? >> i think he dese tht to defend himself. i think, unfortunately, court cases take a long time, and lawyers can drag them out. that is probably going to happen. think voters are going to want to know what happens before it get the opportunity to know that, but there is a likelihood they will >> you have said no one deserves tono one is above the law. do you think there is any iodecides that mr. trump has total immunity? >> i do not know. i am not a lawyer. i do not know how this will fall out. but i think this needs to be clarified. we have never had to clarify it before, but i hope it clarifies it going forward. >> but based on your opinion you do not think anyone should be given total in unity? >> i think a p should have to live according to the laws too. younot just assume anything and everything you will get full immunity. presidentsaccording to certain standards as well. host: nikki haley talking about that presidential immunity case. it is a different case if that

14th amendment ballot access case that we are expecting to hear a decision on today, the supreme court announcing late yesterday that they will hand down at least one decision at 10:00 a.m. today. the supreme court heard that case not too long ago, back on do about access inmary is tomorrow, super tuesday, 15 he primary tomorrow. a busy. week here in washington. thursday is the state of the new address. and there is a shutdown that could happen congress giving itself a littlek to do its budgeting duties before a potential shutdown. here is the story from today's washington post, the last-ditch funding bill heads to the house a 460 billion dollar package would find six agencies. those agencies include the department, veterans affairs energy, agriculture, interior housing and urbanpé developing,

environmental protection agency, the food and drug administration. an continue funding for those agencies and staving off a potential partial government shutdown. that is set to playch in the house and senate here on c-span and c-span 2. back to this question, do you trust the supreme when it comes specifically to election 2024 cases. this is mark. caller: good morning. thank you i do not trust the supreme court when it comes to the 2024 election. i can tell you all kinds of things about the 6 jurists, but let's concentrate on thomas, because there is no time. he has taken all kinds offrom billionaire republican and not only that, his wife was involved in organizing the january 6 insurrection. if he is not recusing himself from any cases involving january

6, then he is totallypt which i believe he is. he should be investigated. but unfortunately, he is in the top court, so they will just let these 6 unelected monarchs do whatever they want. it is a real shame for thi host: do you trust the court specifically less on election .24 cases -- on electoin 2024 cases or is it a blanket lack of trust? caller: my trustas destroyed in 2000, when they did bush v. g ore. that was the most ridiculous decision i've ever seen in my life. they told florida to stop counting. trump got three of these judges on with mitch mcconnell's help through cheating. come on, mcconnell would not go to pick for three

months, but he gave -- i have no respect for the six conservative justices. i believe they are in trump' pocket. host: even the three conservative j trump did not appoint? caller: i biased. they are more like political operatives than objective justices to me. i do not see the three women on the left making the kind of crazy decisions that the right-wing judges, especially clarence thomas, but kavanaugh barrett, alito, roberts -- they are all doing things that will help trump. yo cases to the point he will be in the mithere will be no decision. that is my prediction. i hope i am wr we could have a decision today, head of super tuesday come on that colorado ballot access case. this is dawn.

caller: thank you for taking my call. i am an avid c-span listener and i did watch the full esenta argument to the supreme court on this situation -- host: back on february the jackson and sotomayor both asked a very good questions, and they are on the left, and they said, if we were toe in the favor, then that means, going, all states can pick and choose who they want on the election. the personhe federal government had no reply. believe it is going to come out total nine or eight for this to be torn down. because this is not a red or blue decision. this is an american

anybody. and right now, trump has not been found, on any of these cases, so therefore, anybody could go on the ballot, and that is what i hope all american people look at -- host: is the immunity case and american decision, nblue the presidential caller: yes, i do. vote, i vote for the person. i've voted out of tick i voted for obama the first term. but i am just saying yes if we are to talk of unity on these, president biden had no authorio take one piece of paper, prior to his elon, out of the white house. and he took papers as a

senator. what if all our senators do this? i do not think it is an question. when a president leaves office he does choose what goes they just pack up his stuff and send it. was not president when all those boxes were removed. so i do not think it is fair, but that is for the courts to decide on that issue. host: to william, this is a become independent. -- this is william, mississippi, caller: the woman who just was vice president. first of all, it is a states the state did a hearing. he was indicted for insurrection. that gives that state the right to remove him from the ballot. that is what you people do not understand. for any other state to arbitrarily remove someone from the ballot -- without any kind

of crimes being committed -- is her state can do that. no i don't have confidence in this because the last judge that donald put on the supreme court never sat on a trial. -- host: to this questionaccess, a couple cal have brought this up today. if you allow colorado and illinois and maine to remove donald trump from the ballot, down the road, you could have red states removing the democratic candidate from the ballot, and then you hlthese different ballots in different states around the comes to a presidential primary, and it becomes even more political. whato you make of that argument? caller: io is removing this command is because he was involved in the insurrection, and that was ground for them to

remove him. states do that, it is illegal. they had grounds t's right. if you do this, it is a problem because you will say it states do not have rights. let me say one thing, then i will get off. c-span used to be really good. you had news programs where people debunked this a thousand times. then you double downn this show. ishe chaos is coming from. you need to cut it out. thank you for taking my call. host: this is peter, new jersey. you are next. caller: good morning. ot have any trust in the supreme court. even if we do not have a 14th any man that invokes an insuor office. what theì did in delaying the decision on immunity was a de facto move to prevent him from

having a court case. if you say you do not want him to be on the ballot, what you should do is allow the public to be able to decide who they want to vote for. vote or somebody who was convicted of insurrection? so. because they have all been supreme court justices for the republican federalist society. host: kathy, new york republican. caller: isupreme court. the last two callers talked about conviction of insurrection, buand things they do nolike the dignity of the court and we are innocent until proven guilty. he was not found guilty when it came to the trial in the senate. as far as the supreme court goes, they are looking at a lot of people have brought that up, if there has been that. i know what it is like to be on

jury duty or even be in a court. i still and dignity for it, and i think decisions need to be made not politically through prosperity, and i see regular people, like the founding fathers believed -- we are told to put aside our theories, opinions beliefs that -- before we are allowed on a jury. i have certainty that the way a lot of supreme court judgments come down with what they call conservative liberal judges, them all. when you are in a room and you have a lot of people and lives are at stake, they come to their rational mind. if they don't, they are not doing icorrectly. in a group even if one person is super listening, i thin good chance at justice. that is all i expect from them. host: do you think it is inevitable that the supreme because they are being asked to

decidewhether it is this case or abortion or, go back farther, obamacare, gun cases? is it just because the country is turning to thdes that they are inevitably going to be called political? caller: think it is inevitable. the sense i get when they speak with no anger, no animus, i think they have to make the decisions. the fanieither way he goes, he will have a lot of people upset. i hope he will remove himself that, because the only way you get to the rational mind is out of that. th's the eye at the top of the pyramid. i trust them more than i trust a lot of the callers. host: the judge in thatreme court judge, but certainly a lot of attention on, being asked to decide the direction of the trump case in georgia. there is the front-page story there from today's washington

times on his decision. this is wisconsin independent line. good morning. quick couple things. with the nikki haley thing, she won in a 98% stronghold -- host: about 2000 people voting in the republican primary in out of 700,000. that tells you where you are sitting leans totally left, so i do not know how donald trumcan even get a fair trial there and get an unbiased jury. either way let's get to the supreme court. the supreme court, i kind of trust them. i have both wayse. i do not appreciate a lot of the voices. i will and up being -- end up being, like a

lot of the callers said, i list the arguments and judge sotomayor and judge brown sound like they will vote for every time i watch msnbc and cnn -- i watch all stations -- insurrection, insurrection. donald trump was never charged people currently sitting in jail that stormed the capital and did do things to charge them with insurrection. he should not be removed from the ballot because it sets a precedent for red states to do the same thing, to remove the runner it is a slippery slope. it really is. as far as the thing in georgia i think the evidence is going to prove, has pron, that those two, fani willis and mr. wade lied under oath.

host: do you thinkt= residential immunity is a slippery slope? caller: yes, i do. not 100% immunity. that i agree with you on that aspect, but like the other callers, joe biden took documents out. and one callers while he was vice president, which is true, but hetor. we need to get all the facts right. smith -- the democrats could have brought these charges against donald trump years ago. the second pe hmenot in office. they illegally impeached donald trump because he was not president when they brought the charges. we have to stop this. this country is swirling down the drainif it keeps going this way -- we need to come back together and try to get back to regular order of some type.

i see they passed -- you were talking about a budget to try to fund the government. i have a budget i have to follow every year. you get a bill in the mail, you pay it off in full pair that is what i do. i try not to go into debt. host:n regular house executive branch, the legislative branch congress, who of those branches do you think does the best at getting back to regular order, of operating the correct way? caller: you know what? as an the federal government, all they do is take my taxeng to protect the southern border and protect us from being invaded -- the senate bill came out for the border bill. i read it. i got to page 300 out of 600 and then they said they would not pass it,d, but they had a bunch of stuff that

was garbage. the same thing in 2 came out of the house. it was better, but the senators -- schumer sat on that bill 10 months and never even looked at it. then they come out with a bill to fix the bordeo weeks ago we have to pass this right now and the republicans are obstructionist. i love divided government, because lessne. the less laws government quick thing, with the case. i do not think colorado in these can tell anyone they cannot write a name in. i should still be able to write a name in, and they should count it, because that is my vote. decrats talk voter suppression in georgia and all these cases. that is the ultimate voter suppression, taking my right to even write a name it. host: lessment of the washington journal. getting your views on the supreme court. do you trust the supreme court specifically w

election 2024 cases? they are being asked decisions this supreme court term. and, ohio. what do you think? caller: state -- the democrats should play by the same rules the republicans play seat the supre court and appoint four republicans and four democrats. host: how would joe biden unseat the supreme court? ller: by the same rules the republicans play by. they have no regard for rules. their extreme. let me make one more comment. the great tony bennett -- the last 20 years of his life, he probably couldn't find his way across the street. but when t him to the stage, gave him that microphone, that dna kicked in. biden has political dna.

he's going to save america from itself. thank you for host: this is another john, florida, republican line. good good morning. thanks for taking myi am a historian, basically, and i think the last 30 years, the supreme court has been backed by republican presidentsyou will have to excuse me, i am 74 years old. and even though i am a republican, i think trump is a clown. he shouldn't be in office shouldn't have been in office, excuse me. he's not -- not --

at host: do you to bring it back to the supreme court and your level of trust? caller: yes. evel of trust in the supreme court is nil. they're doing their job. the've been backed as i said. they just aren't up to the job that the supreme courts in the -- host: we will take your point. five minutes left. bob, michigan, goo morning. caller: how are you? host: doing sir. caller: i do trust in the supreme court at this time. i think they will rule my point.

i do not think it will be a secret. as far as i am concerned, the supreme cou, the justices themselves, some of them do not even read the constitution themselves. they talk about the 14th amendment. i do not know how bad they can dissect it. just read what it means. donald trump, these people say he has not been accused of anything. well indicted for insurrection. so, i don't k now. i just don't believe in the supreme court right at this moment. host: guest: -- host: bo in michigan. the 14th amendment section is the key that the super court, colorado, maine, 1,linois and other states have focused on when it comes to ballot qualification. section iii says no person shall be a representative in congress or hold any office, civil or military, under the united states or under any state who

havi oath as a member of congress or a member of -- to support the constitution of the united states, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. it is expected to behis 14th amendment case decision, the correlative case!;, colorado and maine holding their primaries tomorrow. dkwe will see, and 10:00 a.m. eastern, that is when we will know when the supreme court will make a decision. they could make a case on multiple decisions. they do not telegraph muc time. bob, democrat. caller: thank you for taking my call. dence in the court -- actually in the constitution of the united states. however, the supreme, i've

lost quite a bit of trust. there are many, many reasons but i want to dwe on one, and that is the recuse ability believe clarence thomas definitely should be generally, i think he is taking way too manyt that aside for a moment his wife was actually lobbying in the west wing, in the office of the presidency. if that is not a case for recusing themselves in this matter i don't know what is. as much as i love the constitution it to the integrity of individual supreme court justices to recuse themselves. i don't see that and i'm very, very reticent of decisions by this supreme court. host: in california.

one final call in our final minute or so. this isinnesota. thanks for waiting. caller: call. this question today, they are making a vision for the whole it states. so if that were to go through it would have a huge effect on local, county, state, and federal elections, for a state or county to throw somebody off the ballot that they do not like or a front-runner or something like that. if throw clarence thomas off, it will be, i believe 8-0. it will be that simple. host: this person walked journal. stick arou more to talk about this

morning including the fact that ño just days away from another potential partial government shutdown. update toward keeping the government open. later we will talk about campaign 2024, the future of the republican party with ethics and public policy center fellow washington post columnist --. we will be right back. >> this week on the c-span both chambers planned of federal spending bills to fund the government before the midnight deadline. tuesday watch our campaign 2024 live coverage of super tuesday with 15 states and american samoa casting their vote in primaries orre as s president biden give the annual state of the union address before a joint session ofcongress to outline his priorities for the country. watcalso head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or

watch live and on-demand anytime. your unfiltered view of government. a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work, where citizens are truly informed. our republ get informed straight from the source on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's caer you are. because the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse our latest collection of products apparel there is something for every fan. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. op now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. host: on monday when congress is

in session we like to take some time to look ahead in washington and this week is probably more help than normal even because whole lot going on this week in washington. turning us to take a look at it is a congressional reporter with the hill newspaper. y;let's talk budget first. congress passed another short-term funding deal at the end of last week to buy themselves more time to remind viewers what the new deadlines are that are hanging over congress. guest: congress is staring down a march 8 and march 22 deadline. march 8 is for agriculture commerce interior. that is kind of seen as one of the easier. they just announced a package that would entail bills coming up for the deadline. ing up. deadline, funding for homeland security, pentagon, labor, health and human services

education. that is going to be really interesting to see. host: to members think they have enough time for that larger package on the 22nd? what are the sticking points? guest: members have definitely started to look ahead. 've been working on crafting these bills for the past few weeks. i think the problem is just it is a little bit harder com to agreement on. at the same time, homeland security, state department even the state department l is something that is seen more as a policy delvin it ending bill. there's a lot of different now. different types of provisions thle for, we will see what ends up coming up. s early they've already been talking about irs funding, social sety they've been pretty harsh about specif details but i'm expecting a lot more to come out in the weeks ahead. host: there's a potential for a

1% across the government shutdown. budget cut if congress can't come to a deal. how would that happen and when would that kick in? guest: that would kick in after april if congress failed to pass a spending bill in time. congress already has technically kind of trigge it just hasn't taken effect yet. there's also a lot of confusio that would take effect if they were to do something like al which isn't really possible but is something that conservatives wanted. that is diffent than what is expected to happen after april 30. but how it has been explained to me is it would take us across the board and it would be kind it's not like if you work for the e'm going to do 1% and decide how this is going. it would be program by program but there are still a lot of different hesitations around how this cut would be implemented if they were to come to that point. host: short-term spending deals

more deadlines, that potential for 1% across the board cut. what does it all meanpolitically for speaker johnson right now? guest: people talk to conservatives even about he is doing the best job he can right now. the bells that are coming out are more in line with what was already brokered. that is in line with a deal that was already brokered byen and kevin mccarthy last year. i think after a certain point people feel like the writing is already on the wall. conservatives have already written off these bills before they came out because they don't like the top line. this is just a time where republicans have at least some shot able to shape government funding in some way and having an influence on crafting these levels in a way that is last they controlled congress. but there istag to get all of this in. it seems some cons

see what happens when we talk about homeland security funding. host: go ahead and start calling in. plenty going on this week on capitol taking a look at the week ahead. 02 for republicans. democrats, (202) 748-8000.independent, (202) 748-8002. evening. what we know at this point, has there been any assertive telegraphing this far ahead from the white house? guest: i think there is this expectation that democrats are hoping that the president is focusing in some way on trying to comlative achievements. being more effective in communicating bipartisan infrastructure bill, inflation reduction act. irs how has that helped impact service? i think they also feel likecould

be doing a better job when it comes to the economy. there are a lot of peoplei of course americans are happy that we are not in the recession currently but at the same time i think there has still been a lot of americans with rising inflations. how do you communicate these gains? host: there's also all the pageantry that we w the other stuff that goes on that night. whenile guests, have you heard anything on that front perhaps sitting with a member of the other party or e? have you heard about any of those efforts yet? guest: not yet but i'm sure that will come out i the next few days. i think a lot of focus is on government already trying to line up what passage might look like in the house and then the senate i definitely expect more of those details in the days ahead. host: super tuesday is tuesday

stated the union is thursday. government running deadline friday. on, taking your questions here in washington. this is edward out of michigan democrat, your up first. caller: yes, i was wondering a couple of things. is this the longest time i guess in monthswe've gone without a budget? the budget was supposed to have in past last fall. you are supposed to pass an entire budget. is this the record longest be gone without a budget? is to be divided up and passed in 14 different spending bills connecticut many. that hasn't happened either. they are supposed to be spending bills and they haven't. they've only gotten four or process and are we ever going to get a real budget passed? guest: technically, congress is

suannual funding bills on all of the various -- federal government operations. the senate did pass the funding bills. the house did not. but the house did pass more bills on the floor. i think it was just a lot of difficulty with the fact that these votes are more partisan in nature and you have such a narrow margin publicans in getting these off the board. side, partly if you are a republican due to whatever suspicion you have but we will just say this is not the long that congress has. i am pretty sure we had stopgap bills before which eti level and we

can't work out an agreement on a new funding level. host: a this is from the pure research service. this is a chart of congress passing its spending, 12 appropriations bills by october 1. the longer the line, the more spending bills have passed, getting up to 100% here means the congress passed all 12 by october 1 in that year. a last time that happened was 1996, and you can see a very few number of spending bills passed in recent years. usually it becomes an omnibus package or as you are saying, a full-year continuing resolution. but it was 1996, the last time the congress passed all 12 spending bills 1 that deadline they are given each year. a chart we will refer to again in the future. this is glenn, independent. caller: good morning.

yes, hi. host: what is your question? i think the main concern, you are talking about the upcoming vote on the budget.the main problem that every time youg it. it is like using a credit card and raising the limit. i think it is a major thing that you have to balance your budget, if the debt under control. you had biden and trump and they both tremendously raise they. the problem is this is the future of the country. an do is a corrupted because that will cause major economic problemso for the future of the country it is really not biden or trump. that is basically what i have to say. host: u.s. national debt currently at -- and counting. i+members talking about getting the debt control right now.

cast: that is been a major focus certi just think they have very different ways. republicans are always at least focused a lot on bringing down overall spending. demore funding should go to areas like the focused on going after what they say are wealthy tax cheats, or corporations that have foundare not accessible to the average american. some experts say that a combination ofe changes on the tax side the tax side in conjunction with the bank cuts would probably be more effective approach. but the bill that is expected to be pd, the funding bill that

are coming too it is more in line with the government deal bthat would help reduce projected deficitsst: $460 billion package this week that we are focusing on. six agencies that are the department of transportatioculture, interior, housing and urban developments. also the epa and the fda. we are talking about it, one of many things going on this week on capitol hill. georgia, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. i've just 50 about t you know, random thoughts go through myfter the republicans killed the border i was thinking isn't that very much like this analogy.

you have a republican and a democrat in a boat and if the boat starts sinking because there are 10 holes in the boat, e democrat said hurry and live as many holes as we can and they don't have enough to plug all 10 holes. and then the r well, it is not all 10 so we are just going to let the boat sink. isn't that sort of what happened with the border bill? epublicans just said well we aren't getting everything we want so we are just going to let it totally die? that is all i have to say. host: thoughts on that analogy? guest: i think there are a lot of democrats who would agree with that. andf course some republicans with the border bill. there was a lot of politics at play. a lot of different pressure. that we are in election season, and you have one of the negotiators who by no

means is what you consider a moderate republican se supplies that he was able to negotiatend actually produce something that fell apart in that way. i think the hope is that at least for republicans, if trump does when a second term, they be able to put forth what they feel is a more robust package?very different schools of thought around this debate. the state of the union, the republican from alabama set to give the republican response to president biden's state of the union. you had a chance to talk to her about what she will talk and thoughts on members of congress giving the state of the union response? guest:guest: i haven't had a chance to ask her, but i'm very interested. i'm assuming -- both sides have been think that will be the bigger issue. senator katie britt is also the

top republican on the ap subcommittee for homeland security and she has had some prettykids to talk to her about what democrats feel like to put more pressure particularly homeland clear funding bill and she has been facing sharp criticism from democrats. something that in her opinion democrats could have done a lot more and the president in particular in his 2023 budget. she has had a lot to say about that so i wouldn' surprised that is something that both sides are talking about and i think she has been trying to ounter, her and other republicans, democrats talking on this matter. host: independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. how are you both? host: well.

caller: say there hasn't been a balanced budget since president clinton was in office. this figure of the house was a republican called newt gingrich. th budget was passed. today, politics is purely politics. they don't care about us, the american people. they are worried about their next election. when is the last time you saw a democrat crossover to oust kevin mccarthy and to get rid of j that was it. that's the last time they they do not crossover, there are very stern, they will not budge. to them a bipartis and nothing a republican wants. the democrats will never ever

crossover. same witthe supreme court. it is always 5-3, 4-4, 4-wh but democrats never crossover. host: erican votes, crossing of the aisle. guest: i think it depends on who you talk to. i am by no means an expert but i definitely know there were a lot of democrats who were very upset and advocates with the border nd democrats still voted for it. at the same there are republicans whohagdemocrats are a bit more effective at being unified and voting behind certain measures and some conservatives feel like the party bdoin to get behind a more conservative agenda. but at the same time, it depends .

measures particularly in government funding wherements are not particularly happy about everything in the bill. the same would be said for republicans. government funding you can see both sides have wins declaim and also losses against the other side. host: i think the caller about two different things, a balanced budget and the last time congress completed all ofhis 12 appropriations bills on time. 2001 wit time there was a balanced budget and it was 1996 the last time congress completed all 12 appropriations bills on does t me. jive with your memory of it? guest:s right. going to be after the initial deadline? probably. host: this is the 2025 coming up this october. so have they started that process yet even while they are trying to finish the current year budget? guest:hey have definitely said

they are looking ahead and there are a lot of republicans who that 2025 is going to bring resch, new start i've already -- so have already been writing office assets because they are not happy and they feel liktheleverage to democrats and sometimes kind of said that they feel like they're in the senate. e the majority and still have to -- it has just been a difficulty for leadership to unify its members in this way. host: west virginia, republican, good morning. yes. i think the main reason they are having trouble passing these is beca opening the border. in to come to the border. this is all on the democrats. what happened to the billjust laid

there under schumer and they never even passed it? if they need money, all they have to do is take -- just figure out how many government employees and state employeesgetting paid holidays. just give them their holiday anddon't paving. use that money for something. host: i think he's referring to hr2. can you update us where that is? guest: right. !that bill definitely passed the house. i don't think that was any expectation at all that that was going to be something at passed the senate. that wasn't a bill that was that was a bill that was designed agendaborder and asylum. that wasn't a bill that was meant to pass the senate. and one that comes up in conversations, if you were to

ask a democrat do you guys want ukraine funding? want israel funding, why not just pass hr2? i don't think you would get an answer because i guess it is not something that would pass -- i can't see why democratic leadership would bring up something that would get at most maybe one. i don't know. i can see how that would work in the upper ch it is just not something that ever seen as a starter. in may of last year, party-line votedinwiddie, virginia, democrats good morning. caller: i think that the senate laws run very good if they get rid of trump trump controls this republican party. so instead of going to the congress to give anything back,

you might as well forget about them and go to trump. the best thing that could happen in the united states is for trump to jump off of the trump tower. host: that was a viewer in -- i forget what state he was in. auburn, new york, public and. good morning. spending and government funding of everything. and the creation of programs and the bureaucracies that come into all of those things are tax liabilit they'll come from someplace. the funding comes from the private sector. this contest between the spending and governmen , pensions a holidays like the guy in west virginia mentioned there's fewer and fewer people and now we borrow money because either you -- or you put it in a

big $34 tri lagoon of demand that --he idea. a government job is to test liability. it has to be paid for. theme y create, the more tax liabilities you create. host: do you have a question? caller: well know, that was more of a comment than anything else. i just wanted the length of these bills. mi still on? host: yeah. caller: you get a 1400 page bill and you have to read through this it nobody reads it. should be a rule somewhere on any appropriations that it can't be more than 10 pages long. you break it off, you vote on that, and if you got more to do, keep raking it down. but nobody knows wtheir except the special interests that write the bills. host: the point. extremely long bills.

guest: the caller shares a criticism that many members on both sides of the aisle probably have, as we are prepared to see congress vote in the coming days on more than 1000 pages. but this is a package that includes six funding bills. it is expected to be long. they are not a different program andfunding levels for each one program five program. so thengress eventually moves through forest tap process through what they would call regular order. you are not doing again for shutdown deadline, you would be i approach -- they are already looking to fiscal year 2025 and they are already acknowledging th are leaving part of the heinlein that process starts.

they are still going to be bills the rest of the month for the current fiscal year. host: call, mary out of the buckeye stcaller: trump put us a $.3 trillion debt. trump. and trump does not care about the american people. trump runs the republican and wants, he does it. soe that he wants to get done because johnson is too far up heiney to want to work with the american people. so trump wants us to go into a recession which he said for america to lose everything, everything. pensions, social security and everything because he wants to co in and act like he is going to save us, but he's not. take down america and i wish american people would realize that and they wish that your reporter would report things about that. and it has nothing to do with

the democrats not wanting to work. host: got your point. on donald trump, speaker johnson dynamic. guest: i mean, what the caller is saying, that is something side, something that democrats have definitely pointed out. they were still also significant spending under truspeaking to the johnson-trump speaking to the johnson-trump johnson has been supportive of trump, quite different from the dynamic between mcconnell andand republicans would like a second trumpi'm not sure what else to divulge their. host: a lot going on this week in washington, a good place to go to track it all ertate of the union

to budget negotiations, the hill newspaper. appreciate themorning in washington. guest: thank you. host:t about 9:15 a.m. eastern this morning, we will be joined by henry olson of the ethics and public policy k ahead at the future of the republican party. but until then, it is open for them. any public polsue that you want to talk about, the phone lines are yours. go ahead and start calling in, the numbers are on your screen. we will get to your calls right after the break. >> democracy faced its greatest threat since the civil war and our democracy remains unbowed and unbroken >> thursday president biden delivers the annual state of the union address during a joint session outline his priorities for the country. tcrage beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern with our preview all of my president biden's then alabama senator katie britt

will give the republican response and we will get your reaction by taking your phone calls. watch this to did the union address live thursday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-spa-snow, or online at c-span.org. >> friday night, watch c-span 2024 campaign trail, a weekly round up of c-span campaign coverage providing a one-stop shop to discover candidates across the country are saying to voters, along with first-hand accounts from po reporters, updated phone numbers, unreasoning datawatch c-span 2024 campaign trail friday c-span, online or download the podcast on c-span now, our free mobile apps or wherever you get your podcasts. tered view of politics.

>> for c-span's voices 2024 we are asking voters across the co orton to you in the selection and why? >> season is immigration. >> i think that homelessness is that should be addressed. >> we invite you to share your voice by going to our website. select the record your voice to have and record a 32nd video telling us your isc-span voices 2024. be a part of the continues. >> it is time are open forum, letting you lead the discussion. phone lines as usual, it is republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. . we will take this until time super the previews are already in today's papers for tomorrow's super tuesday at the wall street journal noted 15 states set to

cast their votes for the party nomination.d also t. more than one third of all gop delegates are up for grabs in most of the states. here are theac castates senate to vote in gray on that map. ny topic any purichard is in augustine, georgia. morning. caller: good morning, sir. your recent session that you just had the lady it exactly right on the congreand the budget problems. as i've said onjournal a little while back, if congress would in august instead of recess, they would get things done. my congressman rick allen never came to the districts of the black communities to discuss issues because they all vote along one party line. that has got to stop because

they have gbipartisan and if they we have the term limit that we have with a former presidentso the lady from ohio, she was ridiculed out of what she was saying about the deficit that trump created and that when they work, things can get done for the american people. host: from the lone star state this is steven, republican, good morning. stephen, are you with us? caller: previous exam caller, there is a lot of slander out there in the m trump general sla specifics of which he has or is being accusedkrussia, russia russia, things are made out and then they are determined to be true before proven true and the president

has been slandered for many years and yeer real meat on thethey've made a real business out of slander and i wish the mainstream media would be held accountable for the actions they've taken and the destruction of our country for which they are most responsible with their constant slander of republicans. that is all. >> manhattan, this is joseph. democrat, 4ggood morni i just wanted to about why they can't get those past. part of it iial medialooking to act extreme in front of the camera and then they cut that up and put that on their instagram or their twitter or whatever so they can get so many hiso the more extreme they act the more followers they will gethe other reason gerrymandering. until we get the to allow

determine the districts, we are going to always have extremists on either side, right? and then part of the reason we couldn't get this border bill passed is because the former president trump said that for campaign misuse. of the house went by that. it was their own bill. can i ask you what should be the goal when it comes to creating a district? do you think a nonpart should do it? is the goal to make 50-50 republican-democrat? is the goal to make entral districts, districts that look like they have arms spreading around the states that pickup different groups of people? you think that process should work? caller: it is up to the states to decide, but it should be approximately 50-50.

this is part of the reason why so many people are becoming independent. the horserace on both sides. this is part of the forever because they know they are in a state that is going to be gerrymandered. again, it goes off both sides. host: michael also in new york, and dependent. caller: for taking my call. host: go ahead. michael. caller: oh, hi. ng it live too. i don't know which to watch. host: best to just listen to your phone. caller: i'm just wondering why all these people keep on saying he was an why wasn't he charged with insurrection there were no weapons there? host: going to happen today with the supreme court we are expecting is inon on this 14th amendment allen access case? caller: you mean with the

colorado and maine and illinois thing? host: that's the one. caller: well if they are common sense people, let the voters decide. mean, this country is in the toilet right now. no longer called the swamp, is called the cesspool. host:is michael in new york. .m. in hawaii yet. good morning. caller: is getting very close to 4:00 a.m., i stay up all night waiting for you and you are the best, that's all i can say about you.the gerrymandering is a huge, huge issue. i think they need to have a methodology of picking a board or a group or like the senate dole group so they can't be gerrymandered too far out of whack. if there is a watch group to watch how they, they can gerrymander fair, and that is what we believe need. host: wto make as many districts in

ntry 50-50 as possible, should that be the goal? caller: it is done by the state so it should be fair. they need to elect a group to do the gerrymandering so it is not gerrymandered wrong. maybe 50-50 would be good but every state has control of their own gerrymandering, if you want to call it that. they needve a group, a bipartisan group that could gerrymander in a very fair way so it could actually no longer be gerrymandered. decides we can come to a sane conclusion of this method of non- gerrymandering if you want to call it that. we need to chang system so they can't rake it. it needs to be fair. itto require a watchdog from that state to make sure it doesn'te is going to be a difficult thing to do, but we need to change what it is now because it is nhost: thanks for the call,

thanks for staying up in hawaii to watch. thisrepublican. morning. caller: you don'tch the rallies very much, do you? [laughter] host: which rallies? caller: trump rallies. earlier in the first segment we talked about that. what do you watch her when you watch the rallies? caller: i watch them on isbn. i like his rallies. he speaks the truth. you are not speaking the truth right now. that is janice in new hampshire. bernard, elk grove, california. independent. caller: you all do for great service. love your seats. -- suits. it is all about accountability with the p l let donald trump stuff, so they

didn't convict him. but now the supreme court is in a pickle because they are saying wow, this is a mess. but somebody has got to stand up to the sky because what he did was against the 14th aand we all saw it. admit it, but it happened and we saw. n america to vote against this guy and don't give america a way out but legally insurrection and thoses that you read earlier so he should be held accountable. are you still here? host: yes sir. anything you want to end on? caller: like i said, the powerful holding them accountable and just like in georgia. they talk about these people in relationships and stuff but what does that ha us

seeing these powerful people iound with machines, tampering with the machinesnd talking to their friends on the phone? we all saw tswe're talking about people in reon relationships and dating and married in all thes and counties. you can't stand up and say somebody here is in a relationship. they will ask you about it in court. host: that is bernard in california. allen, silver spring maryland, democrat. caller: -- democrat -- community outside of d.c.. under: because my experience and the experience of --lex things based

on my experience and the experience of my colleagues between the ages of 80 and 85. president biden being president at age 85. host: you might be interested in a front-page story in york times today a chart that is voters opinions about the age of the candidates. biden is 81 and the question is asked, is he too old to be an effective president? red some 47% saying they strongly agree he is too old, 26% saying they somewhat agree. just 11% saying they strongly disagree. 14% saying they somewhat

disagree. donald trump, 77 years old 21% saying they strongly agree that he is too old to be an effective presidenthp and 21% saying they somewhat agree. that new polling out from the new york times. did you want to say something? caller: at age 80, he seemed a lot better than i was at age 85. i think that president biden has done a very goodhost:host: thanks for the call from silver spring, maryland. about 45 minutes your left an open forum. in about 10 minutes or so it will take a deeper diver tuesday primaries that are coming up.

15 states, as we said, set to hold their elections. 9:50 eastern really joined by henry olson from the public policy center to discuss theture of the republican party. m withrg spend them the lab. c-span2, a conversation on current local issues. live coverage here on c-span two, c-span.orgalc-span plenty going onu can watch on the c-span network. back to your calls an open forum. franklin georgia,. caller: you doing this morning? host: doing welt wha few topics. think we are still going

to listen to -- host: what do you think, robert? caller: i don'tlet's go to another topic. trump had it going on. let's go to another topic. we ain't got -- in reserve. if you take the whole world's gold reserve trillion. what are you going to do about that? host: what do you think we should do about that robert? caller: let's moseyto on let's go with the abortion topic. everybody is fighting they are pro-abortion, everybody is fighting they are pro-life. why don't we give everybody one abortion p let's give everybody one free pass. you come back again, -- host: that was robert in georgia. independent, good morning.

to tom in baltimore, marand. democrat. caller: morning. i would like to compare it to 1915 and today. in 1950's, some were legitimate fears and some were illegitimate fears. that fear of flying saucers. people were afraid of atomic attack. today people are afraid of the other. they are afraid of their neighbors, with their political leanings are. they are freed of immigrant and most dangerously they're afraid of the united states commitments to our partners and the security of democracy and freedom in the world. it makes me afraidople were just afraid of everything. i would like to see that attenuate in some way. host: how can we get over the fear? caller: we have to be educated. we have to understand that not everything we see or hear

true and we should check out the facts ourselves. that people are trying to persuade us here and there and in order to bee a legitimate argument and they have to be fact checked. we should not take what people say like immigrants are going to invade our country and take all of our jobs, which is not true. we don't have to be afraidthat commitment to freedom and democracy. wemit ourselves to taking care of that not just in our country, but in the rest of the worlwe have a responsibility. we are the greatest country in the world and we have responsibilities for freedom and democracy. we stop fighting for that. host: that is, of baltimore. david, independent. good morning. caller: number b listen, i hate to break the routine with all the hate.

i saw the news, a billionaire donated $1 billion to a medical school inan paid for everyone's tuition. that seems l where the money is, that is where you get it fr they are always on here talking about trump being a dictator. when trump was president, every single day he would try to something and some judge in california or hawaii would stop him, so i don't know how he's going to be dictator. and if he did try to break constitution anyway, i would be the first want to help me drag him out of there. but you talk about january 6 ok? for five years or more everything in the book. he gone that night in the next morning before dayli ku klu

xer and a nazi and everything else. how are you supposed to those kind of relentless attacks? they called and everything in the book. you are fixing to see here in another day or so. trump will be the next president. host: david in louisiana. virginia, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. and a question. you are old enough, but do you remember a news organization called united press international? i wonder whatever happened to that because every new story in the newspaper either came from the associated press or united press international. host: upi, one of those services. caller: right, but it seems it is disappeared when you read the newspaper, everything is associated press. host: upi.com and they have news upi.com.

" her service that use or if they choos service but certainly whatever the associated press sees as akey one. caller:caller: my comment i know your show is aimed at letting people get things off their chest and their opinions being, which is a good goal, but it seems to be devolving. my comment instead of turning into an hour every morning, and our hate liket how much they hate trump and why they keep making comments like it will be the end of democracy asand i know you're not supposed to interferecomments, but i think sometimes you should probably when they make a statement like that say well what makes you say that, o t on instead of having them say well, i heard it on msnb or cnn. maybe they could give you a

reason. tlaib the other day was screamingknow it. another onet caller hired was jim jones. host: do you think we are close to the end of democracy as we know it? caller: i am to wonder. did you read 1984 when everybody was ju screaming at the tv for an hour about how much they hated somebody after mark is what c-span is turning into. that is john in virginia. illinois, good morning, you are next. caller: good m i want to focus on the union and what i think biden should do to address the nation and crazies that america as a whole are facing. housing in every community across the country, whether it is red or blue, i think it is

time for us to get ourselves together as americansnd focus on our future and see what we want ameri t like 50 years from now. host: you think housing is one of those nonpartisan issues? caller: absolutely. the young generation, the homestead act, we can get the young people to participate and we can come to american homes and invest in community homes. host: t terry in illinois. itju a we want to step aside anfocus more on super tuesday. 15 states holding their primaries tomorrow. joining us to talk about is hannah knowles via zoom this morning. hannah knowles i guess the first question is, competitive tomorrow?

sweep for donald trump and joe biden? guest: we are really expecting another sweep for donald trump. nikki haley is still in the race, and she said she is going to stay in the ractil super tuesday. she has kept it big after that so we could see a quick exit here potentially but we don't know what her plans are. host:what will be the storylines you are watching tomorrow? whether nikki haley can keep it close in a few states? caller: not even -- guest: not even keep it close really. haley the d.c. primary this weekend. that makes her the first woman to win a republican presidential primary, but it is 15 states, e territory of american samoa as well. trump is pretty much expected to get them all but we will be looking the margin is sort of interesting and it gives some clues about who is already in trump's camp and wlition might be hesitant about him and might need some persuading. host: on the democratic side of

last week we saw the uncommitted campaign in michigan that racked up about 100,000votes. is joe biden facing more than other states for super tuesday? gues that was really concentrated in michigan where there is a high concentration of arab-american voters who spearheadedn gaza. i don't think will probably see the same level of organized effort in the same high percentage of uncommitted but does still have vulnerabilities in all of general election polling that shows his coalition that helped him wincracked, and there is very low enthusiasm. we expect him to sleep as well but that does not mean there are not team has. host: what is the expectatio thursday for the state of the union, how joe biden seeksoaddress the vulnerabilities that you talkthe polling in the national stage in the national spotlight on capitol ? guest: yeah.

so i don'tit is fair to expect he will try to talk a lot about the policies that he has delivered on that he and democrats are very proud of in terms of the infrastructure bill, for example, these things they think a lot of examples like -- a lot of americans like and woul like, but the pressure is really on to kind of showcase his competence as well. americans feel like this man is too old to do the job, so here is this opportunity to show that he is ki command and he does not have a lot of other high-profile opportunities to do that. he didsuper bowl interview so that makes this appearance much more important. host: that appearance this thursday and super tuesday is tomorrow. alaska, arkansas, california colorado, maine,, virginia, and as he said american samoa also set to vote. we know where presdeand donald trump will be tomorrow night.

they are expected to give statements as a result i coming in? guest: -- that is a good -- go that issh, -- guest: gosh, that is a good question. i don't know where biden will be but t will have a watch party. host: are they expected to make an announcement on whether they will run an independent campaign in 2024? one is that announcement expected? have you heard anything aboutguest: yeah, so they set this deadline for themselves a while back to say we will make al at this point on whether we will move ahead with this third ticket as an option for democratic candidate or the republican candidate, and i don'they don't really have a plan. s right now as far as i know so i can't imagine what they would announce at that meeting to go forward with because basically everyone

that we know of has just been like, i am not being part of this. lot agree worry that this helps elect trump for people who are of trump and opposed to trunk so it is tough for them to get anyone on board. host: are looking for a place to watch the results tomorrow night, check in on the results and storylines at washingtonpost.com. hannah knowles on the national political reporting team there. i your time on a monday morning. guest: thank you. host: back to your phone calls with 10 minutes left on an open forum. any issue you want to talk about, the phone lines are yours. this is jason inassachusetts. good morning. caller:hi. i just want to talk about the cynicism with the budget negotiations. they say because of national security andndications with the border but the only way mathematically to stop a suspension is to make the chair.

mike johnson is on strike. there are two or three more cr's. they said they would take all of the rules that came through but they only tanked one. they let mike johnson talk out of his mouth as to what the top line numbe was and they let the rules pass. team, the freedom caucus, that wants to fail. they want to not get their priorities and came to be outraged. mike johnson came halfway through. he is the backup quartif a backup quarterback those interceptions, he gets pulled also. host: do you want to see mike johnson no longer speaker? if so, who would you like to see house? caller: i if it is a policy stance, they should have a moderate. mouth, says something different every faction. i am not a freedom caucus supporter myself. i think they are built to fail

on purpose. that is their political role. host: that is jason in massachusetts. to matt in washington, blican. good morning. caller: hey, good morning. l. a couple of things i wanted to about the speech yesterday on how focused biden was and people like lucy saying have laser focused he is. the american people's intelligence is beingulon a daily basis by the mainstream media. becaus happened january 6, there were no guns found or but yet there was an assassination that was never reported, ashlijust look at the news. he is going to win in a landslide at least 80-20 unless something crazy happens because test tells me a lot. pelosi about him laser focused we are not stupid. that is my comment for today and thanks for taking my call. host: this is in maryland, democrat.

good morning. caller: good morning. i had a couple of comments. massachusetts, i agree a lot with what was said. i go along with that. i know it is hard out here. i have friends in democratic states like mine that are struggling just as hard to feed their families and themselves. nds in the red states that are up for the voting today, and they are struggling even harder. is, are these leaders in the states going to be willing to work with both sides of the aisle so that everybody has a fair shot and a fair shake? ebecaus housing being taken off of the inflation those are some of the main things we all have tohost: what do you mean taken off the inflation list? caller: it seems as though housing and food and gasoline

andn taken off the list. h down yet. you know? the prices for basic unleaded gas gallon. ok? it may be cheaper in some other states, but the food is still the same price. they switch the it look like it is falling in price, but it is actually not. it is still just as bad. when you have to feed a family of four or five with budget and you still are not guaranteed any kind of food security and the food banks are running dry, it is a problem.

wke tacx9anesda