♪ host: good morning. it is super tuesday, march 5. win a major win donald trump can appear on the ballot. the decision states the constitution makes congress, not the states the enforcer of section 3. we want to hear your reaction and the first hour the program. if you support the decision, call us at (202) 748-8000. if you are opp. if you are unsure, call us at (202) 748-8002. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. include your first name and your city and state. we are on social mediaok.com/cspan

and x at @cspanwj. the supreme court decision is on the front page of the major national papers. here's the wall street journal. supreme court keeps trump on ballot. states cannot borrow gop front-runner over his role in the capital attack. here's the washington times. unanimous ruling to keep trump on the ballot. states have no power in federal elections. the washington post. supreme court keeps trump on ballot nationwide. usa today. 9-0, supreme court keeps trump onother states cannot invoke insurrection clause. here is the new york times. states must keep trump on ballot. justices rule 9-0. colorado loses the case. while you are dialing in we will speak to a reporter with the wall street journal jess freeman.

welcome to the program. c legal questions did the supreme court rule on yesterday? guest: there were a number of arguments donald trump raised in his appeal. the supreme court honed in on one of them, which is only congress can enforce section amendment which bars former officials who engage in insurrection or rebellion from public office. the supreme court said only congress can set out the rules for enforcing the provision against a federal candidate and officeholders. that was the question. colorado's supreme court is a state no authority to make that determination that donald trump was ineligible for engaging in insurrection. host: were you surprised it was unanimous? no, because of the many trump cases the supreme court is hearing. this one seemed pretty clear the court was going to go in this

direction. it was clear at the oral argument and the consensus view of many observers of the court because the applications of 11 each state to make this kind of determination were pretty severe. the same candidate could be qualified in some states and not qualified and others. even based on the same conduct or record. this was not really a shocker. host: the nine justices all agreed with the opinion. the three level justices -- liberal justices offered a concurring opinion. can you explain what their argument was? guest: to use the sometimes exotic nomenclature, all night agreed with the judgment but not the opinion. there are only five that agreed with the majority opinion, which was unsigned. we know they were because four did not have enough they are. process of elimination let you

know who was in the majority. three liberal justices authored an opinion that initially according to some indications was a partial dissent. somebody noted the metadata on the document the supreme court published used the word 'descending' in parts. they decided to frame it more diplomatically as the concurrence. it's an indication the court was pretty divided about how far to go in ruling for donald trump. that is what the issue was. how far should the supreme court go in saying trump stays on the ballot? the majority went pretty far in leg at a specific way to enforce section 3 of the 14th amendment. the three in the contrary opinion said we agree only federal law can enforce this when it comes to presidential candidates. you are closing the door to many other situations where federal law could step in. for example, let's say someone

was prosecuted by a. could you raise that as a defense in court? you have no right to bring charges because you did not legitimately hold the office. that possibility apparently was opinion. amy coney barrett, who is a trump appointee [inaudible] -- the final months of his term. she did not agree the majority should go so far. the majority should not go so far, she said. they all agreed on the bottom line. she basically the right time to heighten division and point out divisions. americans should note they agreed on the outcome of this specificthe digger's agreement with justices about how to get there. host: does this decision put it end to all other similar remove former

president trump from the ballot? guest: it does if they are in state court. ane last week agreed with the colorado courts and said trump cannot be on the ballot because he engaged in insurrection. at comes to an end and so will pretty much every other action at the state level. host: remind viewers what else the supreme to the former president and january 6. guest: donald trump the court a lot of work to do. the most important case coming up will be argued in april. that involves h r court decision team must stand trial on charges that he attempted to subvert the 2020 election. trump has argued unsuccessfully so far that because he was president when he took these actions that are allegedly criminal he enjoys a constitutional immunity from prosecution. to do otherwise would subject

anything a president does to potential prosecution or litigation after he leoffice and would hamstring future presidents who would be trepidations about making bold decisions for fear of being prosecuted in the future. that is his argument about why even a former president should not be exposed to potential prosecution. the supreme court will hear the argument in april and make a decision we would think before the end of june. th goes on trial in washington d.c. the charges were brought by special counsel jack smith. er cases including ones that are more amusing. there's a trademark dispute over the phrase "trumpll." he wants -- a man wants to trademark the phrase and sell t-shirts and knickknacks displaying it. the biden administration is opposing him and says he cannot trademark the name of a political candidate against that candidate's wishes.

he have the administration defending donald trump's interests in the use of his own name. we have a range of cases from the amusing to the deadly serious involving mr. trump. host: jes, thank you for joining us. guest: thanks for having me. host: we will go to your calls now with walter in washington d.c. caller: good morning. how are you? host: good. caller: i support the decision that the supreme court did. they correctly interpreted the constitution for what it says. what people need to understand the 14th amendment, section 3 the president and vice president are clause because the president is the executive of the government. he cannot be -- insurrectarge of.

republicans wrote the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments of the constitution. it was democrats who opposed those three minutes because they wanted to keep slaverythey took away state rights. historical context. even justice jackson browne pointed out that the president is not mentioned, even though we have these constitutional illiterates like jamie raskin who say he is also the court. no. playerwi language. charge him with things he's actually guilty of. this keep trump off the ballot does not do that. if you going to be trump at the ballot boxes, do with the right way. i'm not for all this stuff they keep doing to him.

he guy but they need to stop with this foolishness and perverting our laws and constitution. as for presidential joe biden could be sued for all these illegal aliens committing crimes on americans. he could get sued too. host: good morning. caller: thank god for c-span. i support the actions of the court. they were unanimous. we don't appreciate the fact these are people who dedicate their lives to the law. the integrity really is a shame. they have integrity. they gave their lives for this. it was a 9-0 was great. later on if something comes up with the immunity and there's a sporhatever, people will accept it.

trump was singing the praises of the court. it would be hard for him not to degrees. he can sometimes but i hopes it helps everybody a little to unite. i was done with trump after january 6. once this stuff came with everybody charging him with things, that's a greater threat to the republic that donald trump will ever be. they made a mistake approaching this on him and i wish you would stop. host: you are voting today? caller: no. i'm in california. yeah i will be voting today. you were throwing me off. caller: i will be voting for trump. host: ok. let's hear from the former president who is outside his home in mar-a-lago reacting to the ruling. [video] >> i want to start by thanking the supreme court for its unanimous decision today. it was a very important

decision. very well-crafted. i think it will go a long way towards bringing our country together, which our country needs. they worked long and hard and frankly very quickly on something that will be spoken abou now, 200 years from now. extremely important. essentially you cannot take somebody out of a race because in a, -- an opponent would like to have it that way. it has nothing to do with the fact it is the leading candidate. you cannot take somebody out of a race. the voters can take a person out of the race very quickly. court should not be doing that an supreme court saw that very well. i do believe that will be unifying factor. while most states were thrilled to have me, there were some that did not. they did not want that for political reaso. they did not want that because

of pull numbers because the poll numbers are very good. we are beating president biden in almost every poll. the new york times came out with a very big poll for us. they did not like that and you cannot do that. you can't do what they tried to do. hopefully colorado will unify. i know there is tremendous support. they brought our support of strongly because people thought in colorado it was a terrible thing they did. host: we are taking your calls on that decision by the supreme court 9-0 to keep former president trump on the colorado valid. %fchuck in lakewood, washington. caller: i think in a way it's a bad decision but it's also a good decision. the way the politics are playing out right now, giphy was b -- if he was there would be several republican states, especially florida and texas that would do the same thing to

biden. it would be a whole affect of dominoes with the whole country fighting over who should be able to run. that is the good thing about it. the bad thing is the guy is pretty much guilty. howeven running for president, i have no clue. we will see how the rest of the court cases play out for him. hopefully not good. i don't know. he's gotten away with so much it's ridiculous. that's about all i can say. host: trish in seattle, washington. caller: hey, good morning to the neighbor i just talked to from washington. i think he just kind of said how i'm feeling about it. it would just add so chaos to the whole voting system as it is going through now. i don't know we need that much

more. people need to educate themselves and say what th do. this back-and-forth blows my mind. i would like to give a -- go ahead. host: what do you think about the immunity case? caller: yeah, like the guy said before me down in lakewood. it seems to create so much chaos . put him on the ballot. people, educat yourselves. i don't know what else to say it to that. i would like to do a slow clap to the supreme court for passing i have absolutely no faith in them. particularly i felt that thomas at the least should recuse himself. it would not have been a bad idea for alito to do the same. they gave us citizens united and took away roe.

my final statement is i would like to thank all of our militaryheir families for protecting our country. thanks everybody. host: let's take a look at a opinion from the supreme court. on disqualify persons attempting to hold state officio.ndment does not aff because the constitution makes congress rather than the states responsible for enforcing section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates, wei want to show you a section from the concurring opinion by justicic o ncase. yet the majority goes o.the majority announces a disqualification for insurrection canfeuahewe cannot join in opinion that decides momentous and difficult issues unnecessarily. concur only in the judgment." you can watch the oral arguments and listen to the oral arguments on c-span.org if you woulmichael, tampa, florida. good morning. morning. i'm so divided because for about

seven years i have heard congress say that state rights should be left up to the individual state. now i am hearing that -- i'm sorry -- the supreme court can override that decision. in america we are taught in school what is true and what is a lie. i feel it is time our leaders stand up to truth in america. that is why so many of us have no faith in our government. i think the decision was wrong. thank you for listening to me. james is next in louisiana. what you think? caller: thanks for taking my call. when had the bush versus gore thing, the supreme court stepped in and stopped the counting of the votes.

now they are saying let the states -- let the voters vote in colorado. they are all mixed up on that. you are looking gorgeous this morning, always ready to smile. host: let's look at some of the member tweets reacting to this. we have adam schiff f false claims of immunity so he can appear in court or will justice be delayed -- justice delayed to be justice tonight?" -- is never any doubt. dems elected who have heio loophole the republican supreme court carves out." we have a couple of republican responses as well. we will take a call. sheronda and virginia. -- in virginia. caller: i just wanted to say if anybody has paid attention.

all the presidents besides donald trump are related. they were al chosen for prophecy recent. we are in the end days. i suggest everyone repents for their sins and turn away from worldly things and turned back to the covenant of the most high. we are in the end days and there will not be an election this year. i'm not sure if anyone knows but you will see eventually. host: let's talk tolina. caller: good morning, mimi. farmer bob here. host: what you think about the supreme court? caller: well, i expected this to be a it. it would be tough for it not to be a 9-0 decision. federal government overrules the states and a lot of things. to me this was expected. i am really looking forward to hearing the arguments on the --

i hope you folks carry it on tv. see how that goes. that is coming up in april. host: the 22nd. we will definitely carry that fisher. -- fornk about the immunity case? caller: that will be interesting. the reason i say that is let me giou examples. if you go back far enough a few oked at --was president, remember when qaddafi was overthrown because we bombed a few different places? then they had him in the street. that was never anything such as a congressional decision to do that. that could be something like that. he is immune. he can do that apparently. the other thing was also there was that one terrorist.

american. host: that's right. caller: again no decision but he was killed and he was a u.s. citizen. let's take that to the next level. if he was a family member of mine i might want to see the president because -- sue the president because he killed my son or my brother or something of that nature. how would that go over? that he has presidential immunity to kill a guy that is a terrorist without a trial without due process. kind of interesting. host: are you voting today in the primary? caller: yeah. i will vote for nikki haley. host: why did you decide on nikki haley? caller: i was actually expecting her to be on the ballot sometime in the past.

i think she has good expense. she was a governor of south did a good job, particularly hitting business into the state. on the democratic side, the democrats put the rebel flag up over the south carolina state capital and she took it down. host: brendan in south carolina -- brenda in south carolina. caller: how are you? i oppose the opinion because this is my mindset. first of all the states should never have had to do house republicans in the senate with republicans had done their constitutional convicted him for impeachment of trying to overthrow the election. the way i look at it is they take an oath to uphold the constitution. we as americans don't take that

oath. they took it. what was the backstop? colorado felt like because they did not do their duty the only choice they had was to step in and do what the congress and senate should have done. if the supreme court says it is up toafraid of the king, the demagogue, what happens to us? there is no backstop then. that is why i oppose the decision. they needed to look at it based on why they threw him off, tonot the fact they threw him off but the reasons for throwing him off the ballot. host: all right brenda. here is some tweets from republican members. it would have undermined our democracy and the will of the americanices adi unconstitutional. the left's n in fund, cutting behavior should take notice and leave it."

thomas in houston, your next. -- you are next. caller: if anybody has any relatives in europe, especially in ukraine, you better get to the voting booths. if trump comes into office he will take over probably ukraine poland, and the rest of france or wherever. i was calling about decisions from the supreme court. what they decide it is this. can you actually call for the hanging of the vice president and get away with it? one moreteif the supreme court will override states rights, go into texas and say we will ban all machine guns or ar's? listen. take care of yourself, america. lower the hate please.

take care. host: let's hear a reaction from the colorado secretary of state jenna griswold yesterday. [video] >> i would say it is good that the court issued a decision. americans have been voting all across the nation in early voting in the super tuesday states, including colorado. coloradans and americans deserve to know if trump is a qualified candidate. my larger reaction is dippointmei do believe that states should be able under our constitution to bar oath breaking insurrectionists. this decision leaves open the door for congress to act to pass authorizing legislation. we know that congress is a nearly nonfunctioning body. ultimately it is up to the american voters to save our democracy in november. >> this was a unanimous decision. it seemed clear where it was

going after the oral arguments in front of the supreme court. is there anything that surprised you? >> after oral argument i am not too surprised. i would have liked the decision a little sooner. as of thursday night cast in the republican primary for president. i think the larger picture is that is clear as day what donald trump did. he incited the violent mob to rush onto the capitol to stop the transfer of presidents of power. his attacks on our democracy have not stopped. there lies andsive voter suppression efforts, two threats against election workers and attacks on the election infrastructure. they are laying the groundwork to undermine 2020 for. work -- 2024. american democracy permits very much under attack and the

upcoming election is crucial for democracy survival in the united states. host: that wassecretary of state. we are talking about the supreme court decision that came out yesterday about that colorado ballot. steve in s caller: thank you for taking my call. this should remove all doubt that there are those in the democratic party that are ignorant of the u.s. constitution and have no respect for the supreme court, even though there are three extremely left-winging progressive levels on the supreme court -- liberals on the supreme court. he was never accused of an insurrection. he was never tried. he was never convicted. he said let's go down there peacefully.

nancy pelosi turned down his request0 troops to protect the capitol. my only question is, what motivated these justices in colorado and other states to bring about this lawsuit? y perspective if ever there was another vacancy on the supreme court in essence they are raising their hand to say pick me, pick me. i will do any stupid do. host: michael and washington, d.c. -- in washington d.c.

caller: i agree with the supreme court ruling 9-0. i'm an educator in washington, d.c. i wish they would bring civics back to the -- we only have history twice a week at high schothe kids are not learning civics. you have to go by the law. a lot of people with their emotions. regardless of the judges being left-wing or whatever, they followed the law. donald trump regardless of how you feel about his rhetoric or whatever cavanaugh told him, he told jack smith get him for insurrection. go down there and get him for insurrection. you have not done that because you cannot do it because there was no insurrection. insurrection is a militia in

military uniforms taking over the capitol. peacefully. look at the transcripts. the american media has a twisted. go down there peacefully to protest how you feel. host: what kind of educator are you? do you teach civics or history? caller: i teach the constitution. in a public high school? caller: in a high school, yes. we don't have the civics tests. you used it to have to have that test the past high schools. they took it out. people are not aware of how thehost: i'm curious. how do you teach about january 6 to your students? caller: there was a riot. he was upset about the loss. -- laws. a lot of people challenge elections. that is part of democracy. you have the right to challenge

anything in court if you don't believe something is right it in the gore case and the hillary clinton case. when some people do what they don't particularly like it. when they tried to impeach trump the first time, the democts and republicans jumped to due process. they went straight into impeaching him. they did not follow the process. there is a process we have to follow. that is what people are upset about. like what is going on now, everybody is jumping straight to the supreme court. it takes seven to eight months and they are trying to expedite this. the supreme court does not want to get involved in all these things. they want to leave it to congress. congress is so tied up -- host: the stream -- the supreme court is involved and they are taking the media case in april. caller: you cannot be totally

free to kill everybody. look at the obama case where he distantly killed a family. when he gets out of office can he be prosecuted? he was going after a terrorist. it hit the wrong place and kill the family. host: got it. also thursday is the state of the union address. the president will be addressing a joint session congress. this will be the third state of the union address for president biden and likely his last speech in front ofbe election. ahead of the president's address we are asking you to participate whr next few days leading up to the president's address. our live coverage of the state of the union begins thursday at 8:00 a.m. eastern with a preview followed by the president's

speech. will have the gop response by alabama senator katie pritt and your reaction. that will be here on c-span and honor app, c-span now, and online at c-span.org. allen in euclid ohio. caller: good morning. host: what do you think about the supreme court decision? caller: i support the decision. it goes beyond the politics and whoever is running for president. what i think when you hear the reaction froabout it the disdain they have for this. what is poignant about this whole t like debbie wasserman schultz and these folks. it goes to show to you the extreme arrogancselfishness that is beyond the arrogance. it is the selfishness.

i talked to friends about on both sides of the aisle. they agree some of these people if they can get away with it they would kilis. they hate thei have a liberal arts degree. i'm not your typical trump voter. i cannot wait. sony people like me that are pretty much liberal oriented, college backgrounds that voted for trump in the past and are going to again. it is unbelievable to see the selfishness of these people. host: you did vote for donald trump in 2an 2016? caller: i did. i have a liberal arts back in from cleveland state. i was involved in housing and affairs. don't try to pigeonhole the trump voters. that is what i'm trying to tell you. host: buffalo, new york. eric. good morning. caller: good morning. i totally disagree.

when it comes to laws and the constitution everybody knows anything can be twisted with words. that is what the court hthat last caller, second to last caller from washington, i could see it in your face. it is scary he's a teacher. it is a good thing he is just a high school teacher. sad. very said. you have clarence thomas on the bench. he could have -- taken himself off because of what his wife does. everything about him is against affirmative action and his skin color. ronald reagan choosing him was a form of affirmative action. he is a total embarraiy thet's done all the time. hands up. don't shoot.

michael brown. let's hear from former president trump about his remarks about presidential immunity. [video] >> iid have full immunity, you don't have a president. nobody that is serving in the office will have the courage to make it many cases what would be the right decision or a could be the wrong decision. they have to make decisions. they have to make them free of all terror that can be rained upon them when they leave office or even before they leave office. some decisions are very tough. as president some decisions are very tough. i took out isis. i tory big people from the standpoint of a different part of the world. two of the leading terrorists. probably the leading terrorists ever we have seen in the world. those are big decisions. i don't want to be prosecuted

for it. another president would not want to be prosecuted for it. it has a tremendously positive impact and stopped everything cold. sometimes they were tough decisions. you don' your opposing party or opponent or somebody that just think you are wrong bring a criminal suit against you or any kind of suit when you leave office. host: let's go back to the phones. douglas in arizona. good morning. caller: good morning. as far as this decision by the supreme court, i'm fine with that. the upcoming decision -- what is coming up in april is what i'm more interested in. trump is not charged with insurrection. if anybody read the indictment, it is for to fraud in the united states of trying to --

defrauding the united states are trying to have a legitimate election. to me the question is, can a sitting president or candidate for the office again make a unilateral decision to stop and election and have himself declared president? that is the question i want to see answered. host: what do you think of the supreme court taking up that decision and not letting the lower court ruling stand and the timing? caller: on which decision? host: on immunity. presidential immunity. caller: i think it is absolutely appropriate. i think we need to know can a president overturn an election and just a quick himself the winner -- declared himself the

winner. that is the think i'm most interested in. host: douglas that is what senator durbin of illinois was talking about on sunday. he says, the d -- it's a decision for delaying the case. here are his remarks on cnn from this past sunday. the supreme court will hear arguments in april over donald trump's claim is a former president he should be immune from prosecution. do you agree with the court's decision to take this up and how quickly should they rule? >> their delay in considering this critical issue, this time the issue will delay their resolution of these cases by months at least and perhaps beyond the election. i think that is a disappointment. i think the court has acted

quickly in the past when they realized presidential timetables were at risk. i'm really with what they have done. >> you say the court the late -- delayed. if they don't rule, trump is not immune or cannot be prosecuted for a and the federal election interference trial and it will not start potentially until september or october. the question is whether or not this started earlier with the doj. politico reported president biden expressed frustration that the trump trial might have concluded by now if merrick garland had moved quicker to bring the case. do you share this frustration with the attorney general? i don't know all the circumstances. when you are prepare a case of this gravity and magnitude you want to make certain you are doing the right thing and have all the evidence that is necessary. i cannot second-guess the department of justice on that. it is certainly an issue that she resolved before the

election and this decision by the court makes it more difficult. host: we will take your calls for the next 15 minutes on the supreme court ruling. al in clearwater, florida. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. iwashington journal and i said the incident on january 6, the 14th amendment applied. i don't know why they insisted on using the term insurrection when you could use insurrection or rebellion. no doubt what happened annually six was a rebellion. -- january 6 was a rebellion. i wanted the courts to rule the other way but i cannot argue the logic of the ruling. you can have states having him on and off the ballot. i understand the logic. this think about what everybody is calling saying that he was not convicted of insurrection, no. he did a rebellion. on top of that, if a

presidential candidate committed a crime in front of everybody and he's running for office, do we have to wait until the court determines he was guilty when we all saw what he did? gic behind that really baffles me. we saw what happened on january 6. everybody saw what happened on january 6. he led a rebellion. people say he said march peacefully down to the capital. he also said you have to fight like hell. that is what the obvious. we all saw it and we all heard it, yet everybody is saying he has not been convicted. he is guilty of leading a rebellion against -- what you call it -- the election, for trying to prevent the election. host i want to ask about what a caller brought up about presidential immunity. the argument that president ordered the killing of an

american citizen who was overseas. he was by all accounts a terrorist and responsible for killing americans and continuing to incite against americans. what do you think that? caller: i believeo after terrorists no matter who they are or where they are, because they are not representing americans values are things like that. they are killing people at will. i don't believe in killing somebody but in a case like that of president would be immune for that. can a president be immune for everything? n' so. under certain circumstances yes, he should be immune. host: cheryl in california. caller: hi. i wanted to say that i think it probably was a wise decision

that the supreme court made. a lot of the prosecutions and indictments that are being made against president seemed to many people to be politically motivated. for democracy to work you cannot use the prosecution against political enemies. i think within the context -- within that context it would have been very upsetting for a lot of people for him to be taken off the ballot. host: you have your primary today in california. to if you don't want to share. caller: i think i will keep that to myself. host: got it. ronald in louisiana. caller: morning. how are you doing this morning? host: i'm doing good. caller: i want to savor this -- what the supreme court did yesterday by not stopping him

from being on the ballot, i think that was wise. then you open a chain of states doing certain things if they get angry at someone. but my issue is they are college graduates on the phones talking certain things. the lady in georgia had a relationship. you have trump and his team charging millions of dollars questioning her. you have clarence thomas, his wife. they are known to take money for other people. you are telling themselves? all i can say is there are two presidents working right now. one that was duly elected in the white house and another one outside the other 50% of america

are fighting. this is a bad situation. host: in other news vice president harris called for an immediate cease-fire in the middle east. remarks from yesterday. [video] >> i will repeat. the threat of hamas poses to the people of israel must be eliminated and given the immense scale offe s gaza there must be an immediate cease-fire. [applause] for at least the next six weeks which is what is currently on the table. this will get the hostages out and get a significant amount of aid in. this would allow us to build something more enduring to ensure israel is secure and to

respect the right of the palestinian people tofreedom, and self-determination. [applause] hamas claims they want to cease-fire. there is a deal on the table. as we have said, hamas needs to agree to that deal. let's get a cease-fire. let's reunite the hostages with their families. let' relief to the people of gaza. host: that was the vice president on sunday, going back to our topic of the supreme court and the decision in the colorado ballot case. joe in south carolina. caller: g you for taking my call. i think the supreme court is totally rigged. they only side with trump when it is in his favor. he knows he is guilty. he knows he's going to jail. the supreme court is just

stalling the inevitable outcome. with the justices -- they should recuse themselves. especially thomas when ginni thomas is all over this. i think it is wrong. host: when you say trump knows he is guilty. guilty of what? caller: guilty of everything he's been accused of. ion. he is guilty of the charges against him for the defamation. the fraud in new york. the ballot case. he's guilty and going to jail. this is just a point to delay everything. with him it is delay, delay, delay. he thinks he will get off and win the presidency and just dismiss these cases, which is totally wrong. the supreme court is just siding

with trump because he appointed a couple of them. thomas is way off and out of bounds. he could recuse himself. host: philadelphia next. caller: good morning. i am confused, because i was under the impression that the supreme court was ruling that the state court of colorado did not have the righto bring the suit against donald trump and remove him from the ballot, because the states don't have that right. impression it had nothing to do with an insurrection, even though colorado brought the suit because they said donald trump was ahead of the insurrection. given that i think he was. host: they did not rule one way are another about whether or not he is an insurrectionist. caller: exactly.

they was ruling because they thought the colorado court the state court did not have the right to bring that lawsuit. the supreme court overruled colorado and said that they don't have the right to bring the lawsuit. therefore, they allowed trump to stay on the ballot. host: let's hear from arthur in michigan next. caller: hello. how are you doing? good morning. host: good morning. caller: i would like to say that no state should have the right to choose who you should vote for. the voters should be able to vote for them. there are so many trump haters and so many biden haters. let the people decide. like it should be. that is all i remember. you don't stop and election.

the way they are going after trump is wrong. host: you have had your primary in michigan. did you vote? caller: yes, i did. host: do you want to tell us who caller: that is mine. ok. i voted for trump. i don't care who knows about it. you know what? i grew up in a -- the democrats have gone too far and too socialist. what bothers me or the people coming here, the immigrants. they will come here and make this one? no. too many good men died for freedom. if you remember the protests

against washington, a lot of them protesters are in office now. host: all right arthur. let's talk to russalabama. caller: i am voting trump today. i'm calling as an independent. my point is extremely concise. i think trump misspoke becau indicated blanket presidential immunity. we know in this country nobody can be above theident. with trump, he is saying immunity to make proper decisions on behalf of the general welfare of the united states. he would not think of any thing else. what we have with biden is somebody who abuses presidential to

make anti-american decisions under the cloak of executive order. people need to understand something about executive orders. first of all, the cossoverturn executive orders. also the president is commander-in-chief only in times executive order is from the executive branch to execute actions in furtherance of the constitution and furtherance of duly enacted laws. host:rough me off. the president's only commander-in-chief if there's declared war? so right now he is n we don't have a declared war. he's acting as the commander-in-chief. that is kind of a necessity because we have

police sections. -- actions. we've got to go because that is the end of the segment. coming up next we will be joined by tea party patriots -- to discuss campaign 2024. of course, today is super tuesday. later, a discussion on the house goption resident biden with the congressional integrity , a former staffer for the january 6 committee. we will be rig c-span live super tuesday coverage of 15 states including the american samoa territory and primaries or take your calls and get your social media reactions to the live results as they come in along with candidates. want to live coverage tonight beginning at 8:00 p.m. turn on the c-span network, c-span now our free mobile app, or online at campaign 2024.

c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >>wo years ago democracy faced its greatest threat since the civil war and today, though bruised, our democracy remains unbowed and unbroken. >> thursday, president biden delivers the annual stated the union address during a joint session of congress to outline his eye ortiz for the country. watch our live coverage beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern with our program followed by president biden's stated the unions each. then alabama senator katie britt will give the republican response and we will get your reaction by taking your phone calls, texts, and social media comments. watch the stated the union address live thursday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now, c-span.org. get contact information for members of government right in the palm of your hand when you preorder your copy of c-span's

2024 congressional directory with bio and contact information for every house and senate member of the 118th congress, important information on congressional committees the pr cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. the congressional directory cost $32.95 plus shipping and handling and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. scan the code on our right or go to c-spansh to preorder your copy today for delivery the spring. washington journal continues. host: welcome back. we are joined now by the cofounder of tea party patriots. welcome to the program. guest: thank you so much for having me. host: telus a little bit about your organization and how you are funded. guest: we are tea party patriots action. we also have a super pac t party patriots citizens fund and in our super pac we have endorsed donald trump for president.

as we are funded, we are funded mostly by small donors but we also have a fwhen we first started we were exclusively funded by small donors. we are 15 years old, we just began the beginning of our 15th year at the end of february, and on tax day eight will be the 15th anniversary of the tax day tea parties which began on 2009. host: and why did you start the organization? guest: back in 2009 we had the stimulus will passing. well, at the end of january and february of 2009, but that was on top of tarp and the bake sale out in the fannie mae and freddie mac bailouts that happened in 2008. and if you recall during the presidential election in 2008, john mccain suspended his campaign to go vote the exact

same way that then-senator obama did and people were very frustrated by that. where i lived, the campaign chairman who were became-palin in my area people would take the bumper stickers and cut mccain off. in the stimulus started moving through after obama became president obama and rick santelli had a cnbc and in that rant he set our founding fathers would be turning over in their graves and we needed 18 party like our fathers did about the out-of-control spending. and we heard that and we decided we were going to have a tea party like our founding fath did. so michael patrick lahey who now has a star on the star news networkhrough twitter, he organized a conference call.

about 24 of us were sober on that first conference call on bk later we had the first round of tea parties. we had 4018 parties with 35,000 peop attendance and then six weeks later on tax day we had over 850 tax day tea parties with more than one million people in attendance across the country. host: it's talk about the election, today is super tuesday. i know ydo you want nikki haley to drop out of the race at this point? guest: yeah, i think nikki haley should drop out of the race. it is clear that trump is going to be the nominee and this time for us to focus on the differences between what trump things are the solutions that the country faces vs. what biden thinks are the solutions to the problem the country faces and to go ahead and begin having that larger debate which we will be having throughout the year

heading into the general election and it is time for us to focus on that. host: what to do not like about nikki haley's platform? guest: it was much less about what i did not like about nikki haley and much more about what our supporters like about what president trump proved that he was capable of was president. we had an amazing economy, the standard of living was better for everyone across the country. we were in energy exporter, we were not dependent on foreign energy the bor and crime was under control across the country. and that is not what is happening right now. and what we face, in most elections what you normally face is either to people who have never been president running for office or an incumbent president running against someone who has never been presi have a proven track

record vs., in theory, what the other person can do. what we are actually going to troven track record of two people who have been president. it's not theoretical we know what president, we know what we are experiencing as biden's president and our organization we endorsed based on what our supporters want, and they wanted trump and they know what he is able to deliver and they want those kind of results agai if you like to join the conversation, ask a question, make a comment for our guest you can call us on our lines by party. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, 02) 748-8002. thehill.com has the article of your organizatio conservative group endorses trump. you are quoted in that article

by saying this -- our grassroots understanding that the american experiment is at risk and the man most able to save it is donald trump. can you elaborate on why you believe that the american experiment is at risk? hink when we look at what is happening with the open border when we look at what is happening with a government that sensors so many we look at how we have had a two-tiered system of government where one set of rules seems to apply to trump and his supporters and a different set of rules applies to biden and his supporters, there's just a lot at risk. then you add onto that the national debt, we are almost $35 trillion in debt and there is justi think that when you talk to people across the entire country, they feel like america is on the wrong track.

the real clear politics average for right track-wrong track has it at 23.6%. it is almost 24% to 66.7 were %, 24% for the country is on the right track 67% think the country is on the wrong track. americans said something is wrong, something is not working with the country, and we have to get it right because if we don't get it rthe future of the country is at stake. and that means that the american experiment is at stake itself. host: you mentioned the national debt. one of your organizations is a debt-free future. nikki haley points out as she has pointed out many times that former president trump added $8 trillion to the national debt. guest: he did add to the national debt and some of that

was due to covid spending. i think that arica never should have shut down in the first place, we were one of the first organizations calling for the country to be open, calling for schools to reopen and doctors who were trying to reduce fear and help alleviate the fear that was paralyzing the country because of covid. what we also saw under president trump is that the economy actually grew. and it is something that, as an adult, live through president reagan being president as an adult. i was a kid and a teenager when he was president so i never really understood what happens when the economy really grows. but when the economy really grows than the pie is much bigger so you get a slice of the pie. even if you're getting the same percentage, it is a much bigger slice because the pie is so much

rigor. the economy has grown so much. so if you're going to have government spending, and it seems that what we've got in the country right now in both parties, the republican party and democrat party desire to spend a lot of money you've got to have the economy that is big enough that it actually can pay down the debt and grow the economy and address the problem. so we can address the problems by reducing spending, which is what our organization typically calls for. we think that spending needs to be cut. the other way to handle it is to grow the economy so that you have more money to be able to apply to pay down the debt. either way, we do hagetting to a point where we've got a balanced budget again. the are about to have another

spending bill that is going to spend more and more money. republicans and democrats both vote for this. i just know that that is not the right thing for the country and we have to be responsible. host: in addition to cutting spending and growing the economy there is also growing revenue which is increasing taxes. guest: dso you decrease taxes, you still have more revenue because you have increased economy. when you have people making more money, even if they are paying a slightly smaller percentage in taxes, they may wind up paying ul because they have actually increased their own wealth. host: got it. russell is up first ondemocrats in south carolina. caller: it seems like if you were really interested in the om you would be supporting biden because biden actually has

agents to increase the amount of revenue that the government is putting in. you also stated that the economy is not doing well. notrica pumping more gas than they've ever done in the history of america, but the economy is at an all-time high. it is amazing how republicans continue to paint in america that is so downtrodden. republican states lead america when it comes to climate change. he would never hear that from the president, you would never hear that from the tea party patriots. and the economy that trump inherited from obama is why the economy was doing great. it didn't have anything to do with trump and it is amazing that you guys continue to support someone who has sexual someone who almost destroyed america and someone who was inviting -- next week to a conference who is a dictator destroys

his government and he wants us to do the same to america. comments? host: a lot there, what would you like to pick up? guest: thank you for calling in. i think that it is very importanto understand that one of the biggest things that we are concerned about right now is the border. the border is wide open. it is creating a situation where there is more crime in the country and it is harming americans. and we can take a look at chicago. chicago is certainly not a conservative area of the country, and yet votersn chicago and people in chicago understand their government services are being impacted, their schools are being impacted, the quality of education that kids are getting is being negatively impacted, and in some cases they closed schools and told kids to go back to beingy do not think needs to happen and we are again one of the first organizations calling

for schools to reopen while they use the school buildings to accommodate the people who are here in this country illegally. so that is one of the big things and you mentioned several different thingsocused on. host: he also mentioned the argument that trump just inherited a really good economy from obama. guest: if we look at what happened after the trump tax cuts passed, the economy grew, unemployment was at historic lows across every single demographic including for african-americans, for women every single demographic. it was at historic lows. people have the ability to go and get jobs that they wanted and if they weren't getting the kind of jobs they wanted, they were able to go and negotiate either a better salary or get

another job, so it works very well for americans across the country. the economy grew and flourished under trump until the world stopped with covid. one of the other things that you sa is that things were working under the biden economy. i hear democrats who say that and yet the fact of the matter is ameri this economically in their own personal situations that they are better off right now than they were four years ago. so while you can look at statistics, you also have to look at is it better for the average american family? and right now americans simply don't think that it is. and we know that because we can go back and look at the polls and 67% of americans think that america is on the wrong track. host: publican line, colorado, good morning. caller: yes, my comment is

really toward the issue that isn't it true and i ask all of my fellow republicans to recognize that the money that has been put on the table by this organization regarding the ira is in fact stimulating the economy to the point where we have historic low unemployment? and also, isn't it true that if we go back and look at the 21st century, the clinton administration had a $4 trillion surplus which the bush administration turned into a $4 trillion deficit and obama came in with two wars across the economy and had to move to printing money at the fed. he turned that and added $16 trillion to the deficit, trump piled on another a trillion dollars to that and then biden in four years has brought it to a total of $34 trillion deficit.

i point out at the end of lascentury we had a surplus. so i know it is the tea party but my question is can we recognize that right now, the stimulus is being provided, $2.5 trillion is actually putting the majority of the country back to work. i think we have historic lows of about 2.3% unemployment. thank you. guest: the now with the stimulus is it is causing inflation. so the cost of everything that we purchased is more now than it should be. that goes for whether we are buying groceries, something that costs the same amount as the amount that you're getting the package as a smaller package. you can look at the price of cars, you can look at home prices right now, and also the

interest rate with home prices. the economy is sluck with ar right now and they want to have a change in that. i think that is one of the big problems with printing so much money. you are right that at the turn-oth while newt gingrich was speaker and clinton was president, we got to a balanced budget, we had a rplus and we have completely blown through that. the debt is completely out of control and that is the fault of both republicans and democrats. host: let's go to george on the independent line. caller: border. trump -- congress with the border bill?

two, the immunity decision. and then three, inflation in my view is not being caused by the administration it is being caused by corporations who are price gouging americans. at one point thecause of covid that has long since been over. they haven't brought their prices down. thank you. guest: hello fellow georgian, thanks for calling in. as far as what you call price gouging, it is inflation. prices have gone up. i think that covid still plays into it. there were places across the country, for instance, hotels that were completely empty for months and i notice when i am booking hotels i have to travel a lot for work, the cost of hotels right now is just out of control.

it is so expensive. and i think part of that is because they are trying to go back and make up for lost revenue from the time the world have at all coming and or very little revenue coming in. i still traveled when covid was happening and sometimes i would be one of the only customers in the entire hotel and the cost of the room for nice hotels was very, very low. now it is way higher and i think some of that is because his nieces right now are trying to make sure that they level out and get leveled back out. and also when you print money and there is more money in the supply and more money is going around supply and demand makes it where prices wind up going up, and that is one of the laws of economics. you asked about immunity with

the supreme court. i'm not an attorney, it will be very interesting to see what happens with that case. what i do know is that presidents have to be able to t and to know that they are able to act as presidents and make decisions as presidents without fear of being sued when they get out of office or fear of being arrested when they get out of office. we are very close in this country right now to being at a point where presidents are afraid to make any kind of decision because they are going to be afraidt post-presidency they could be sued arrested, the next administration could target them, there could be a two-tiered system of government. we've never had that before now in america. it is a very dangerous precedent that we are setting, that the biden admini setting and it will be very harmful if it continues for future presidents.

just think about a future president whether it is a republican or democrat, liberal or conservative, it is not good no matter who that president is the kind of things that are happening right now to happen to a future president who is acting in his capacity as president. i forgot the first thing. 0 host: they were talking about the bipartisan border bill that was killed in the senate. guest: secure the border, and it would've codified a lot of the things that are happening in the water right now that are part of the problem. hr2 from the house would have solve problems but senator schumer has not brought hr2 up for a vote on the floor in the senate. whether we passed a new law or not, president biden has the ability right now to secure the border. he inherited a secure border and through executive action he changed several things that he could change back through executive action. reinstating title 42, not

tearing down the wall. reinstating remain in mexico and also ending catch and release so if somebody comes into the country claiming asylum, rather than releasing them further into the country you could keep them and detain them which is what should be happening. i am in cherokee county, georgia. lake and riley's funeral who is here in cherokee different high school and my children and i don't know her, i don't know her family, i did not know her but she is a year older than my twins, she went to the same elementary school as my twins and have the same first grade teacher as my twins. her death was a vicious, vicious horrific murder committed allegedly by a man who entered the country illegally and also

committed other crimes while he was in this country. he never should have been in the country in the first place. unfortunately, her family now is what is known as an angel family. these are families who are by the death of a loved one due to crime from illegal immigrants and every single one of those deaths at least in the manner in which they died -- it can't be that every person who died would still be alive, but what i can say is the manner in which they died, encountering death from a person who never should have an in this country if our laws have been upheld was a preventable death. and our government is failing all of those families and failing americans by not securing the border. host: you did mention title 42, which was the public health provision for covid. do you believe that president trump can reinstate that, given that covid -- guest: you are right, because

covid is over, he cannot reinstate that, but they could look at other mechanisms that they use through that to see if there is anything else that could be done. ended, along with changing catch and release ending remain in mexico and cutting holes in the wall, the surge was already bad and it skyrocketed after that. host: got it. larry, new jersey, line for democrats. caller: good morning. whom do you believe legitimately won guest: thanks for the question. but i'm 2020 -- what i believe in 2020 is there were irregularities at the very least. caller: yes or no? guest: i'm going to answer the question. there were irregularities in the election that cast doubt on the election. that is a huge problem in the

state of georgia. if irregularities cast doubt on the election and it has other provisions as well -- caller: so no. guest: but even with irregularity, if there are enough irregularities that cast doubt it is enough to overturn the election. there were enough irregularities and other problems in the swing states in question that according to the laws in those states that had the evidence ever been adjudicated in a court of law, which it was not i think that we would have a better answer to that question. what i can tell you is that biden was sworn in as president and biden is the president of the united states of america. host: you said the irregularities were not adjudicated in court? guest: the evidence was never adjudicated. in georgia, president trump's case related to thethe court date,

the hearing for the court date was set for friday, january 5. on january 4, he wound up withdrawing the case -- i'm sorry, the fourth with the election -- i guess it was the eighth, january the eighth. it was friday after congress voted on wednesday. and then wbefore that in georgia. so on january 4 on monday, the judge set the date of the case for friday, ar 8. then congress voted on january 6 and once that happened they did not send any of the electors back to georgia for any other reconsideration's, trump went through -- withdrew his case. so thatr was adjudicated in georgia. the evidence was never adjudicated. host: james in mt. juliet tennessee. republican, good morning. caller: i have a question.

hello host, i forgot your name. but my question is do you think that now after the events of january 6, covid people are beginning to see trump in a much different light than they saw him up against the conventional establishment of hillary clinton, which you can even say is much different than the establishment of joe biden? guest: i think that people are seeing trump differently for several different reasons first the more that the lawsuits and the indictment happen against trump, the more people are looking in a sense that something is not right, but there are political motivations that are happening with these cases. we just had supreme court announced a zero decision. in a 9-0 decision, they ruled

that colorado did not have the right to remove trump on the ballot saw that what was happening in colorado was politically motivated. in georgia right now, in fulton county, we are seeing again that it was a political motivation happening in the case there and we are hearing that the hearing is ongoing at the moment and the decision will be coming out in the next week and a half or so as to whether the prosecutor and the district attorney had misconduct involved in the case. so there's a lot of political motivation from people sensing that that is unfair. on top of that, they understand that the border was secure under trump. the border wall now has majority approval from americans around the country. when trump came down that escalator people weren't even talking about a border wall except a small minority of people.

we did a documentary on our border in 2014 but most people weren't even talking about the border in that manner. now we have the majority ofericans who think that the border should be secure. the death of lake and riley i've heard from mom's in my area who are sayit, what is a sanctuary city? i never even knew one existed. you mean college towns have sanctuary cities? y than they did before. and a lot of that is because there is a huge, striking contrast between how biden rules and w trump ruled as president or governor as president, we are not supposed to have rulers, we are supposed to have people who are more a gov capacity, but there is a striking contrast in the two. and now those two are going to be head to head in an election rather than an incumbent and the theoretical person who may or may not do a better job. host: cofounder of tea party

patriots, you can find out more about them online. thanks so much for joining us today. and coming up next, house republicans are investigating president biden and the congressional integrity project who served as a staffer on the january 6 committee joins us next to discuss those investigations and what they produce. later we will have a visit about super tuesday and what it means for president bid, omer president trump and republican candidate nikki haley. we will be right back. ♪ announcer: as president address c-span encourages you to engage and express your opinion. we want to know which issue is more important to you as the state of the union address approaches. >> i'm from new jersey in one of

the most important issues for me that i'd like to hear president biden touch is the gulf crisis. and also the mental health what he could do to address those problems. >> i a postdoc fellow at johns hopkins university. i've seen research in intellectual history and social theory and i think the most important issue that i'd like to see the president address in the state of the union is the danger that artificial intelligence poses to our civilization, particularly in a way in which i think it might undermine our ability to have a fully employed economy and might threaten our culture. >> i'm from st. louis mystery and i'd like the president to close the border because we are

giving too many illegals in here and it is just getting overwhelming and a lot of crime. >> i'm from new jersey and what i'd like to see the president address on thursday is gaza and palestine. it is very important right now and it just to see a parent's and people not talking about it in one way. announcer: watch the state of the union on c-span, c-span now or online at c-span.org. washington journal continues. host: welcome back to washington journal. we are joined by the senior communications advisor for the congressional integrity project. welcome, hannah. tell us about the congressional integrity project and how it is funded. guest: the congressional integrity project really started with this congress. so 2022.

we saw that republicans that were going to be leaving some of the top investigative committee is like jim jordan who is now leading the house judiciary co were going to use these investigations in order to shore up 2024 and help president donald trump. what the congressional integrity project did was make sure that we are looking at what these leaders of these investigations are doing and that they are held accountable for telling ththat was a part of the january 6 select committee. i feel really strongly about investigations going on in congress to really serve to do a lot of public good and shed a lot of light about what is happening in washington. we had a few doubts about what republicans were going to do because of what they said. that is what the congressional integrity project has been focusing on for the past 14 months now. host: let's start with the impeachment of secretary mayorkas, article one charging him with willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law.

article to charges him with breach of public trust. why is organization against that impeachment? guest's been very clear from folk from both sides of the aisle book, credit and republican that the impeachment of sec. mayorkas is political. that it is not based in high crimes or misdemeanors or any evidence. that is based on what republicans have policy disagreements with the secry. impeaching a secretary is very rare. the last one happened over 150 years ago and soh the sec. mayorkas impeachment with no evidence of high crimes or misdemeanors what we saw were republicans and democrats former republican secretary of homeland 30 under bush came out and said this is ridiculous. this is a political stunt. there is no evidence of high crimes or misdemeanors and if we want to solve the crisis at the border we should be looking at this bipartisan senate order deal that is being negotiated right now which the republicans in the house said no, instead we

are going to go and impeach the secretary for no reason. so the project saw this, saw it as an opportunity to lift up both democrats and republicans. this is not an impeachment based in evidence, and really hold their feet to the fire. host: i guess what republicans are telling you is it does put immigration front and center and according to polls and is the biggest issue for the election. are showing that you are derelict in your duty. you told us the border was secure, that was a lie. what do you think of that argument? guest: i think that there can be policy disagreements between democrats and republicans. policy disagreements are probably what a lot of people wish washington could be right now instead of talking about saving their democracy from donald trump who said he is going to be a dictator if he is reelected. i think when it comes to immigration and the border, you

have two different realities. you have president biden who is trying to get past the finish line with a bipartisan border deal but both democrats and republicans came to negotiate because he knows that the border is an issue, and then you have donald trump who instructed senators and house members to say no and say no to this deal so this could be an issue for the 2024 election. we need to solve these problems. president biden actually invited former president trump to talkthe border but we see two different realities about who actually wants to solve that. host: let's talk about the investigation into president biden, his son hunter biden. 14 months of the 100,000 bank statements over 12 people who talked to these committees associated with hunter biden business dealings, no evidence.

14 months of no evidence. and a couple weeks ago we saw everything for the crumble. alexander smirnov who the republicans faced the majority of this investigation on was arrested and indicted for lying about the claims he made about president biden and his son. and on top of that it was found that it was probably part of the russian disinformation campaign which is extremely scary whenyou think about however foreign adversaries might use some of these republicans who are aligned with donald trump in congress to try to sway our elections. so it was about time. james comer had all the witnesses again and again who provided no e was frankly long past time for us to call an end to this investigation. host: if you like to call him and asked a question, make a comment, and conducive. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002.

you can also text us and we are watching our social media feeds. ation launched a campaign. there is a mobile billboard, there is a website called comerimpeachmentfail.com. national digital advertisement. who is this targeting exactly and tell us more about what is involved with the campaign that you've got on. guest: we want to make sure that the american people know the truth. the digital advertisement you just mentioned is a short video clip calling some of the facts i just mentioned the attentions of whether it be the reporters covering this or that lawmakers that are walking into these questioning sessions and not finding any evidence, it is time to end this. there's also a group of what we would call vulnerable republicans, republicans were in districts that joe biden won in 2020 who we want to make sure know that we are watching what actions they take and what steps

they are taking in congress because we don't think that is what their constituents want them to do. it is time to stop wasting taxpayer dollars on this and start solving things like the crisis at the border or trying to make the economy better. these are things that congress should be doing. host: and hunter biden was in front of the house committee. tell us what came out of that testimony. guest: hunter biden last week spoke to james comer and the oversight committee which they have been wanting him to do for a while and he said that he would do that, he would come and answer their questions. and what they found was no evidence that joe biden benefited anything having to do with hunter biden business dealings. james comer after the witness interview, came out and said nothing, nothing to the press. this was a fail for them if they

wanted to find any evidence of impeachment. hunter biden actually got up a few good points about if you want to investigate any sort of family benefit from being in office, let's look at the trump family, how jared kushner any ivanka trump benefited from their businesses by being senior officials in the white house. let's look at that instead of what you are doing with me which is coming up with, again, no evidence. host: we've got the full transcript on a website of that ussion with hunter biden. it is on our website c-span.org. going back to informant smirnov how did here become a trusted fbi informant if he was possibly a russian asset? isn't this the fbi's fault, for accepting his intelligence? guest: the number one thing to remember here before i get into the kind of crazy story that is alexander smirnov is that the

fbi arrested him for lying about joe biden and hunter biden. when it comes to the world of informants, i'm no intelligence expert. but just like dan golding who was on the oversight committee has edtath warman's, sometimes these are people that are involved in crimes and that is why they are able to have are going on. but when it comes to this informant and this specific allegation, when it was brought to the attention of the fbi there is no way to verify or corroborate it and the trump justice department actually looked into this and said we don't want to move forward with looking at this because it is unverified and we cannot verify it. these facts were known by the republicans in the senate and the house when they were trusting alexander smirnov at their biggest piece of evidence here, and that is dangerous. so not only do we need to make sure that this impeachment investigation ends, but we also

need to hold these republicans in congress accountable for taking off on a wild goose chase that was probably born of russian disinformation. host: let's take a look at oversight committee chair james comer from last after hunter biden's testimony. >> this is about public corruption. the american people do not want their public officials families to peddle access to their leaders to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. you may think that is okt. i've traveled from connecticut to arizona campaigning for members of congress that are seeking reelection and running for election and everywhere i go i hear the same thing. thank you for trying to find out the truth. thank you for trying to stop this industry. this is what this investigation is all about. the purpose of this investigation if youba conference

was to get the truth to the american people. they didn't have the truth. the median narrative when we started this investigation was the laptop was russian disinformation, the bidens have legitimate businesses, joe never talked to any of the people who sent him money and none of this happened while he was president. all of that we have proven is false. we've been very effective getting the truth to the american people. now my job is to prevent anything from happening in the future and that has always been the purpose of this investigation, to create legislation, hopefully it will be bipartisan, that stops it from happening. we need to stop the menendezes and the bidensinuing to enrich themselves in our public offices. host: what do you think of that? guest: i think it is important to look at who is trying to use their position of power to influence or get money. you have to look at the trump family. that is the big unspoken peaking. it sounds like he is talking

about the trump family. when he ivanka trump went to china and then received patents for some of the businesses that she was trying to execute there. the other thing i will mention isthat comment came right after the interview with hunter biden. you notice he said nothing about finding any evidence about what hunter biden about joe biden enriching himself or hunter biden enriching himself. let's read between the lines here about what is actually going on. host: let's talk to callers now. veronica and pennsylvania, republican. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. on: regarding hannah saying trump was a dictator. and no time did mr. trump ever say he was going to be a dictator. he said he would dictate and i don't know if you know what that means, but he never said he was going to -- never did he say

that. yet everybody said he did. he never did. and i wish she would play what he actually said. thank you very much for taking my call. i think it's very clear with double drum has done in the past and what he said he was going to land to do in the future. i was on the january 6 committee. donald trump was behind the multipronged plan to overturn our democracy. this wasn't just january 6, but also in the months leading up to it. you've also heard but donald trump has said since then, where he said that he is going to implement policies that are antidemocratic. we need to also call out comments about what he said he would do in the future to know what we are going to get when he is going to be in office. host:host: i want to ask you quickly about january 6 because we often get callers who say what happened there could not have been an insurrection because there wereyou don't plan insurrection

and whatever without weapons. what do you say to that? guest: one of the witnesses that we called who is probably one of the most prominent ones that we called republic hearing was actually what we heard from her-- one of the reasons she was so big because of what we heard from her. donald trump knew there were weapons in the crowd. when he was getting that speech before the january 6 attack on the capital he was looking at the monitor is behind the screen and said let's bring more people in and he was told that they couldn't because people had weapons in the crowds, tha they had to stand beyond that. trump said they are not going to hurt me, they are my people, let them in. that shows that trump knew there were weapons in the crowd. host: actual firearms, not just pepper spray and baseball bats. guest: weapons that would not allow people to come into the inside. host: let's talk to tom in

illinois, democrat. caller: morning. my question is what is the status of the mueller report? i mean, i think we would get a lot of information out if we could read it. it should be made public. host: the mueller report? it is public. guest: i believe the mueller report is public. what we remember from that was that the justice department came out and bill barr specifically came out and tried to get set of a summary of the report that was more political than what the report actually said. host: joseph next, michigan, independent. caller: good morning. ious what element of the biden corruption in ukraine is russian disinformation. i mean, hunter had a job he wasn't qualified for.

biden bragged about firing the leveraged against $1 billion. you might not like the conclusion, but that doesn't take any russian input to come to that conclusion that it is cono russian information there. guest: so where the russian disinformation comes in is with this informant, alexander smirnov who was just arrested and knighted he was arrested and indicted for lying to the fbi this attack, that joe biden -- this fact, that joehe told the fbi that he was lying and it was part of russian disinformation so that part specifically is what we are talking about. and the reason why it is a is this is a big piece of corroborating evidence that jim jordan said, that they had for this impeachment investigation. so it comes to why republicans are trying to impeach the president. these claims are just not true and we know that specifically

because what we learned about alexander smirnov in the past host: let's talk to morning. caller: good morning. i want to ask about why are you doing this? who is paying you? the evidence doesn't link to the big guy. there was one billion-dollar that was given to fire the prosecutor in ukraine, we all know that. january 6, there was over 200 thugs seated in the crowd. if people were going to take over that government, they had no guns, no weapons. yoknow iand you are sitting here lying to me, little girl. i'm old enough to be your mother. host: we are not going to make a personal attack on the guests bualk about the firing of the prosecutor in ukraine and then she had that january 6 comment as well. guest:the reason why i am sitting here in this and the reason why the

congressional integrity project is looking into this is because he want to make sure the truth is out there, so people know what is going on. donald trump in 2020 attempted insurrection on what we call the big lie, a lie about what happened in the 2020 election. and he's continuing to lie through his teeth that we learned at least on the january 6 committee through over a year of investigations, we laid out the facts for the american people. i believe it's important that we keep laying out those facts. i think i democracy is worth it and i think we need to try to say that democracy through facts, routes of investigation and through working at least in congress through the american people and not for a bogus political stunt investigation. host: she talked about there were 200 thugs in the crowd on january 6. guest: that's not true. the january 6 committee investigated that, that is not true. host: dorothy in baltimore morning. caller: good morning ladies, and

please give me a chance to say that i do want her to enter this, this is very important. the democrats and the real, true patriots of america, the republicans need to know this, and you all need to push this further. number one is every witness that was with donald trump on january 6 were republicans. t one democrat that was witnessing. they were in his administration, they were working with him. they are the witnesses that are telling what trump did. it is to republic to her doing this. and number two, i don't understand why they want to take something -- the vice president cannot do anything without the approval of th president and congress also has to approve certain things that the president does.

biden can't control no money. only congress can. they never said anything about because they approved it before biden even got upset. pence couldn't doáw anything, harris can't do anything. it only can come from the president and congress. so biden host: you are talking about the firing of ukrainian prosecutor? caller: exactly. congress and the president already knew they approved this. they knew they weren't going to get the money unless congress approved it. so biden could do nothing and a vice president does not have that much power. guest:guest: i think that is exactly right and i think one of the points that was made right up top is that the republican witnesses and republicans are the ones that are saying these things. you mentioned that republican witnesses were the only people

that came forward on the january 6 committee. that's true. these were republicans in donald trump's own party. his supporters even, that came forward and were telling the truth even when he might not like what they say. this current investigation, the biden impeachment investigation in the house, you see right wing media hosts on fox or newsmax come out and talk about how this investigation is over. so this investigation at least now against president biden is losing support from republicans even those in the media landscape. host: florida, republican. caller: good morning. very interesting conversation this morning. it is funny she just mentioned and newsmax because i was calling about that specifically. newsmax has two documentaries. one was called shame of the

nation and the other was say it outright. it would be very good for viewers to go to newsmax.com and get a different perspective by looking at these. thank you. host: and let's talk to samthank you for taking my call. i get my news from the wall street journal and i prefer data analysis. with president biden, the investigation was based on the false presence. -- premise. and his son had no role in government so i think this should come to an end.

ho we talk about ukraine and russia and there is the situation with chinese influence what do you have to say about that? guest: what part specifically? host: impropriety and taking bribes from the chinese? guest: there have been many claims made including money from china that came in biden, we found any money that exchanged hands was a loan repayment and happened when president biden was not in office. these are claims that have been made and not substantiated but are continue to be pushed by republicans trying to keep these investigations relevant when be over. host: but speak to leona in

florida. caller: i would like c-span to play the clip where higgins asks christopherre there federal agents in the crowd and he refused to answer the question because he knows that there were. play it so that the truth will be told because this lady is not telling the truth. guest: there are a lot of reasons why people can't comment on investigations. from the investigation of the january 6 committee we found no evidence of that but donald trump was behind a multi prong plan to overturn the election. and capital. a lot of those individuals have

been prosecuted and that is what we know about the january 6 insurrection. host: i want you to weigh in on the supreme court. we had the announcement of the ballot case in the immunity april. guest: there are a lot of interpretations on why different justices wrote different opinions but what i want to remind people here is the justices made no comment on whether this wasn't insurrection or not. the facts of what the january 6 committee presented. those facts are still there but s next case with presidential immunity, i believe it will be a cut and dried case,

he does not have immunity. this a distraction from what we have with donald trump. this person has 91 counts against him and has serious crimes but he will held accountable for this year and no matter what happens with different rulings we have to remember those facts and who he is and who he says he will be. host: one more call from karin in california. caller: donald trump stalled my property for 1000 dollars. ind out he took over my

property and didn't put his name on his deed. i only had deutsche bank donald trump used my words in his campaign as if it were his lawsuit. host:l3 it's a little bit off the subject but we have a question about the funding of your organization. guest: is funded by folks who want to hold republicans in congress accountable. people who are interested in holding republicans accountable throughannah muldavin from

congressional integrity project thank you for joining us today hannah. coming up next we will talk to hotline's curt vedo. means for president trump and nikki haley. stay with us we will be right back. ♪ >> watch 2024 super tuesday coverage. we will take your calls and social media reactions. watch live coverage tonight beginning it 8:00 p.m. on the

c-span networks, c-span now. c-span your unfiltered view of politics. friday night watch c-span 2024 campaign trail a weekly roundup of campaign coverage providing a one-stop shop to find out what candidates are saying to voters. watch c-span's 2024 campaign trail friday night at 7:00 eastern on c-span or download in the podcast. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. two years ago democracy based itbut today our democracy remains

unbound and unbroken. thursday president biden issues his state of the you and thethen alabama senator will givewatch the state of the you and address thursday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now or c-span.org. "washington journal," continues. host: kurk bado. it is super tuesday today. ttuestion of if but rather than when. nikki haley after

state and in michigan vowed to stay in the race until super tuesday and this could be a litmus for a future campaign. all of the polling has trump leaning in the best case scenario is to pull off a few delegates, eight of the 15 the reward delegates at a nal level and she's not favored in any statewide races. it's now a question of when does trump have that delicate threshold? after last night in north dakota , 273 delegates. the number i am washington nine is 1016. he will be on pace to

map manically switch the nomination in seven days. host: about one third of the delegates are awarded on super tuesday. guest: minnesota has unbound delegates but for the most part, results after today. all of the statewide races but we will be watching that were consistently on the congressional level. what we are looking for our high educational level beats. about districts have an education level of a college

degree of ab 40% and those of the areas where nikki haley has performed the best. delegate it will be in those districts. host: she did when did d.c. primary. guest: it tells us more about republicans than it does nikki haley. it was conducted in a hotel ballroom. there is that diploma divide d.c. is highly educated who are not trump's bread and butter. if you look at the other district, south carolina's first is very highly educated in the one county in iowa was to the

home of the university of iowa. virginia is, look for northern virginia to break for nikki haley. host: if you have any comments or questions for kurk bado you can dohe line five party for republicans (202) 748-8001, for democrats (202) 748-8000 for independents. can nikki haley stay in the race if she does not do it today? guest: she has been fundraising while in the past few weeks and she vowed to stay in the race until super tuesday but no promises after that.

it would not be surprising when the dust settles tonight and if she does not do well in those areas we were talking about that in the next few days she could conclude her campaign. host: you mentioned congressional races song and ask you about california specifically. guest: california and new york are the front line for the bottle of the house. we will look at california's 27th where a moderate republican , he had challenger and among the democrats because california is an all party primary. they could divide the vote and

you could have a republican and a challenger advance. a general election it will leave races on the table. every race manners. we are really paying attention to the senate race there. adam schiff is the favorite and this is a race for second. katie porter is a well-funded representative with steve garvey . he has not done a whole lot of campaigning but adam schiff who entered this season with 30 million has spent a lot of money boosting his republican opponent

. this is the tried and playbook to choose the turnout. host: there are some incumbents i could be on the chopping block . who are the people you're looking out for? there is tony gonzales and sheila jackson lee. guest: with those races it is two different sides of the divide. tony gonzales is a moderate republican who represents the 23rd ' nd he voted for an independent committee to investigate january 6 and got in

the ire of a l he has challengers now. sheila jackson lee is an interesting case. one of her former staffers, she was going to run she ran for the mayor of houston. she lost that race on the saturday and all not monday she filed for reelection and it's been a bitter race. of the two we mentioned the most vulnerable incumbent. host: thetion. sth

let's start with paul in new york, and independent. caller: as the new york motor i feel disenfranchised. i would like to be able to vote for nikki haley and feel it my vote matters. i would like to ask the guests opinion on why the primary elections are so fractured with different rules and etc.. just a few states get to decide who is a candidate. it seems like it is set up that way towhat could be done to get the whole electorate involved or do we just want the status and with the states deciding? guest: that's one that democrats

have been grappling wit president biden won the white house he rearranged the primary candidate to be more representative of the party as a whole. there are different ways that the party isrytosentative. as part of this system which is why different states have different rules about filing deadlines. there are certain rules, you have to be 35 years old to be president. but the states of control over their system. in new jersey you have the county line that andy kim is railing against.

it's a complex system that's supposed to make it difficult for anyone person to control the entire thing. we have two pseudo-incumbents running. all of these nominating contest on the republican side, are not very competitive because trump is already running like an incumbent president. host: we anyone estimated the number of democrats that voted for haley in the primary? guest: we have it run those numbers yet that's an interesting question but we have a reporter on that. host: bill in connecticut and independent. guest: this gentleman keeps using the word highly educated

and i think that's the wrong nomenclature. i think it should be highly indoctrinated. our public school system is left-wing propaganda. guest: i'm not sure thus the case here. host: we have a text saying that wisconsin, alabama and new york are three states redrawing their districts. guest: we covered a lot of the redistricting stuff. wisconsin is not going to change their congressional alabama did they have to make anotack voter opportunity district. the new york to change but not in the aggressive way they tried.

they shifted a few thingsbut the battlefield will remain the same. there are four members in districts that bind in oneden won. caller: i was interested in the idea between us being a democracy which is being touted by the democrats compared to what we rlly are which is the republic and how that fits into our voting system. 50.1% would rule over everybody and that would not be very good. illinois, new york and california running things. do we need to understand about

how our election system evens that out? guest: the state of civic education is not the best. it would help to understand if these esoteric rules help but the system is there to prevent the tyranny of one small how many delegates does haley need to open up the convention and challenge trout? guump. guest: zach on our team did an analysis where he asked if it would be impossible for haley after today?

she would end the nightafter march 15 when we get to the winner take all portion. it's not a question of if but when. i think haley needs to ask yourself if she has the resources to do that. the stomach for the contested convention. host: george is in missouri on the line for democrats. guest: if the trouump. we are looking

at a dictatorship. that's all about to say. host: state of dean phillips who is challenging president biden. what did we expect to see there? guest: not a whole lot. his performance in minnesota will make nikki haley's loss look like a big three. i think he's going to really struggle. he finished third in the two person race. host: linda in texas wants to will win in texas? guest: paul allred is a popular

former nfl player who is challenging ted cruz and a lot of people hope he can capture the beto o'rourke momentum that he had in 2018. roland gutierrez is from the uvalde area and he has made gun-control central to his campaign. colin allred has led the primary. he will be well-positioned to give crews a tough race. but all the competitive senate races texas and florida are the biggest pickup opportunities that are on the low end.

host: roger in massachusetts, and independent. caller: i have a question about how our congress functions. it's a shame the way that ukraine is going to be defeated shortly because of the lack of governments to continue their fight. the speaker of the house is the one who determines bills can be voted on on the floor. it's my understanding if it were

brought to the floor it would pass because there's enough support between democrats and republicans. host: we're really just talking about super tuesday. is the same story any legislation but because the house is so divided and conservative members of so much power they can kill any legislation there. host: washington, d.c., on the democratic line. caller: my question is geared towards the younger voters. we see a push to vote independently to stop biden to

ensure he does not run in the next election. is that something you are seeing across other states as well. i'm kind sheltered where i am. guest: that's a great question and one that has caused a lot of handwringing. in the new york times poll 73% of voters said that biden is too ol and you saw a little bit of pushback not so much on the age question but his policies in the middle war in israel where 13% of the total

e