phone numbers, fundraising data and campaign ads. watch c-span's 2024 campaign trail, today at 7:30 p.m. eastern, on c-span, online at c-span.org or download as a podcast on our free app. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> book tv, every sunday on c-span 2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 9:00 p.m. eastern, a journalist talked about her upbringing and why she is leaving the evangelical church. and then princeton university professor, author of "we are the leaders we've been looking for" shares his views on black politics and how they move forward in our democracy.

watch book tv every sunday on c-span 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online any time at booktv.org. >> house democratic leader hakeem jeffries spoke to reporters on capitol hill following the house vote to move forward on foreign aid legislation. he said he was pleased the rules for the bill was approved and they'd provide military aid to ukraine, israel, and taiwan. and house democrats wanted action on the legislation for weeks. he also answers questions by moves from some house republicans to push a motion to vacate and oust mike johnson as house speaker. >> good afternoon, or months.

the american people have had their national security interest placed on hold. recklessly. because of pro putin maga extremists like marjorie taylor greene. it's time to support our allies in theaters of conflict like gaza, haiti, and the sudan. house democrats once again have cleared the way for legislation that is important to the american people to be processed and considered on the house floor for an up or down vote.

from the very beginning of this congress we've made clear we will put people over politics. it's not a slogan, it's a way of life. and we have demonstrated it repeatedly. we'll continue to do just that because we believe in achieving real results for the american people. questions? reporter: can you talk to us a little bit about, a how your conversations with the speaker may have happened to get democrats to vote in a larger majority than republicans on this rule? and secondly, the idea because of that you could be losing that speaker from within his own conference? mr. jeffries: what's important at the moment is making sure we finish the job, which is to make sure we take up the national security bills tomorrow and that robust majorities of democrats

and republicans exist in order to meet the national security needs of the american people. democrats will provide a majority of our majority as it relates to funding israel, humanitarian assistance, ukraine, and our allies in the indo-pacific. it remains to be seen what republicans will do in terms of meeting the national security needs of the american people, but it was important for house democrats to make sure the national security bills are going to be considered. i speak with mike johnson frequently. we have an open, honest, and communicative relationship. i did not talk to him this morning. we made a decision last evening that we will do what is necessary to provide the votes

on the rules committee to ensure that the legislation could be heard on the house floor today. once we made that decision, it was clear that he would do what was necessary to make sure the national security legislation was considered by the entire house of representatives. reporter: thank you, mr. leader. i don't know if you're aware but congressman paul gosar has come up in a motion to vacate joining congressman greene's motion to potentially oust the speaker. obviously, if all democrats were to join them, the speaker could potentially be out. i know when i asked you yesterday about the motion to vacate, you pointed back to your previous statements in february and at that time you told "the new york times" for speaker johnson to do the right thing relative to meeting the national security of the american people by putting it on the floor for

an up or down vote, there will be a reasonable number of people in the house democratic caucus that will take the position he should not fall as a result. is that still your position? mr. jeffries: that's a declaration, not an observation but that statement still stands. reporter: to be clear, you would save him? mr. jeffries: that's a declaration of observation. we'll have to have the conversation before the house caucus. first thing's first, we still have to get the national security bill over to the senate. in that statement we made clear that we are tasked to do the business of the american people. we've been waiting for months, unnecessarily, because of gamesmanship and partisanship and brinksmanship on the other side of the aisle. first the extreme republicans said we can't meet the security

needs of the american people until we make changes to border policy. and then the extreme maga republicans killed a border policy bipartisan piece of legislation. then we were told that the extreme maga republicans could not address the national security needs of the american people until a spending bill was completed. democrats provided the support necessary to make sure that we funded the government in a manner that was compassionate and comprehensive and met the needs of the american people. and then we went on to another excuse from the extreme maga republicans. third, we were told that the national security needs of the american people could not be met until we re-authorized foreign

intelligence surveillance act, even though we were promised after finishing the spending bill that the first order of priority upon our return to washington in april would be national security legislation. but we had to deal with the foreign intelligence surveillance act, which democrats once again helped get over the finish line. extreme maga republicans, as we have observed, are out of excuses, and the american people and our allies in ukraine and throughout the world are out of time in terms of our national security needs being met. hopefully we're on track for that to happen tomorrow. we've been very honest in our assessment of the situation from the very beginning, including in the declaration that i made in late february, and at the

appropriate time as house democrats, we will have a conversation about how to deal with any hypothetical motion to vacate which at this point hasn't been noticed. marjorie taylor greene, massie and gosar are quite a group and will play some role in our conversation. but central to our conversation, the prerequisite to the conversation is to make sure that the national security legislation in totality is passed by the house of representatives. reporter: i want to just clarify your answer to all these questions, did johnson specifically come to you and ask, say i'm going to need democratic votes? and second, how much credit do you think he deserves for kind of doing the right thing eventually?

mr. jeffries: we can assess to how we got to where we are once the national security legislation is voted on and completed in terms of the process in the house of representatives. our teams and the whip teams on both sides of the aisle are in constant communication about the whip counts as it relates to both procedural votes and substantive votes and that was no different as it relates to the national security organization. i did not directly speak to mike johnson about the numbers necessary because it was pretty obvious to us that given the growing number of pro putin republicans in the g.o.p., particularly in the house of

representatives, that this was going to require substantial democratic participation. and we had a choice, are we going to put people over politics, because the political thing to do is to always let the extreme maga republicans crash and burn because they have so many out-of-control members they cannot govern on their own. and we could let them simply crash and burn. but when we say we're going to continue to put people over politics we actually mean it especially when it comes to meeting the needs of the american people both domestically and in terms of our national security. and we're going to continue to do just that. reporter: thank you, mr. leader. can you just take one more swing

at that? speaker johnson is of course a very new leader and we have all watched him come in and try to take hold of this conference. can you assess his role for us so far, and what do you mean for him and for the state of our politics here that he has made this choice to put his job on the line and see what he can do with you and democrats to provide this package? mr. jeffries: first i'd like to -- what the american people people have to learn what i think of my colleagues. i think what the american people care about right now is meeting their needs in a very dangerous world in terms of standing by our democratic allies in defense of freedom and liberty here at

home and across the globe. that will be the ultimate test on which speaker johnson, myself, and all of our colleagues in the house on both sides of the aisle will be judged. and that's how we should be judged. if we deliver to the american people. and the threshold, i think, in terms of the task we've confronted as democrats is that we are consistently delivering for the american people. let me reiterate, that in terms of speaker johnson, we have an open, honest, and highly communicative relationship. he has to manage the dynamics of a very unruly house republican

conference filled with pro putin extremists who have zero interest in funding ukraine. let's see what happens on the floor tomorrow on the funding bill for ukraine is before the house of representatives. but it took bipartisan cooperation led by speaker johnson on the other side of the aisle to get us to a point finally where america's national security interests can be considered. reporter: thank you. despite all these delays, there still was a very significant bipartisan vote for the rule at least. but you just mentioned you want to see what happens on ukraine. do you think there is still a significant bipartisan consensus when it comes to these national security issues or do you still have doubt about that on what you're saying about this ukraine

vote? mr. jeffries: i'm very confident that the overwhelming majority of house democrats will stand by our democratic allies in israel and ukraine and the indo-pacific , and make sure that humanitarian assistance is secure for innocent palestinians in gaza are in harm's way through no fault of their own as well as people in conflict zones throughout the world, including in haiti and the sudan where there is massive suffering. that's what i'm confident about in terms of democrats continuing to step up and meet the national security needs of the american people, solve problems, and deliver real results, always exercising common sense and pushing back against maga

extremist chaos. it remains to be seen what a majority of house republicans will do. we'll have that answer tomorrow. reporter: has the biden administration weighed in with you either way on what house democrats should do if and when that motion to vacate comes to the floor? mr. jeffries: no. that's the easiest question of the day. reporter: they haven't tipped their hands either way and that decision is entirely up to you and your members? mr. jeffries: that's correct. that also was the case in october of last year. reporter: you mentioned three parts of the plan, israel, taiwan, ukraine. what about the fourth part of that legislation, on tiktok, the repo act, do you expect your caucus to support that legislation? mr. jeffries: i don't have a position on it one way or the other. i think we have to evaluate the totality of bills in that package and i suspect there will

be a significant number of democrats who will support a fourth legislative item and a number of democrats who might oppose it. reporter: thank you, leader, jeffries. we'll give it one more try. this may not be the only time far right republicans try to oust speaker johnson. so if this happens over and over again, do you think democrats should over and over again step in to save johnson? mr. jeffries: from the very beginning of this congress, the democrats have made clear it was a mistake to hand over the keys to the house of representatives to maga extremists who were simply intent on visiting chaos and dysfunction on the american people. every single house democrat

voted against the change for the motion to vacate. every single one of us in january of 2023. because we believed it was a mistake to take a loaded gun in the form of the motion to vacate and hand it over to any single individual in the house republican conference. that was a mistake. and we voted against it because it is not consistent with common sense and good governance. but now we find ourselves in this situation. and so we'll have to evaluate what is the best path forward in terms 6 -- of the motion to

vacate as a rule. that's a conversation for another day after, after the national security legislation is over the finish line, moved to the senate, and sent to joe biden's desk for his signature. by the way, president joe biden throughout this process has done a tremendous job. reporter: so you think johnson should stay as speaker then? mr. jeffries: i don't have a view on that one way or the other. one step at a time in terms of what is in front of us because what is in front of us is not just a simple day-to-day run-of-the-mill issue. this is a churchill or chamberlain moment. we can confront aggression directed at democracy and freedom and throughout the world or we can appease it. and there are several marks that

have gone by where pro putin maga extremists have indicated they want to appease vladimir putin's aggression. this is a serious moment. the state of the free world is actually at stake. it has issues. it's in front of us. and which direction are we going to go? and so we democrats repeatedly say let's deal with the substance first before we address the process with questions and actually mean it and we'll see where we are once the national security legislation gets over the finish line. reporter: this morning you chaired the congressional black calk justice and they endorsed adam hollier, who are you going to go against the former c.b.c. chair? mr. jeffries: i haven't looked at that endorsement and not aware it's been formalized so i'll cross that bridge when i think to it but i think my track record has been clear in terms

of standing by incumbent members of the house democratic caucus. reporter: several of your members have said in the event of a motion to vacate they would like -- mr. jeffries: we're together to ask more? reporter: enter into negotiations about formalizing this bipartisan coalition that's happening and not in a official sense but they want agreement on bipartisan legislation coming to the floor. is that something you would be open to discussing with the speaker in order to save his job? mr. jeffries: i wrote an entire op-ed on this issue published on friday, october 6. and any thoughts i have as it relates to a bipartisan path forward are contained in that answer. reporter: given the fact we are now in april of 2024 and that is

we only have a few more months until the election, will unison changes to how congress functions in exchange for any democratic votes on the motion to vacate? mr. jeffries: i wrote an entire op-ed that was published friday, october 6, and i commend to you for your reading for a particular piece on any thoughts i may have as it relates to changes to the house of rules. reporter: thank you, mr. speaker. let's say the bill is passed tomorrow, are there any other opportunities for bipartisan legislation from this congress for the election? the farm bill is due and there's discussions around artificial intelligence. is there any possibility any other house priorities could be achieved during this congress after the bill passes the finish line tomorrow? mr. jeffries: we've maintained from the very beginning we'll find bipartisan common ground with our republican colleagues on any issue whenever possible.

as long as it meets the criteria of making life better for the american people and solving problems for the hard-working american taxpayers. we look forward to continuing to try to do just that. with respect to the farm bill, aviation safety, and making sure that we fully fund the affordable connectivity program so that we can maintain internet access to vulnerable communities all across the country, including inner city america, small town america, rural america, and the heartland of america. questions? reporter: i want to follow up on what you said about israel and the votes there. you said you're confident an overwhelming majority of democrats will support that. you and your caucus signed a

letter saying we should suspend aid to israel. what makes you confident an overwhelming majority of democrats will support this and what you expect the vote to send on where the vote stands. mr. jeffries: we'll see tomorrow. thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] >> the house returns tomorrow for a rare saturday session at 9:00 a.m. eastern. members will debate and vote on four foreign eight bills. three provide funding to israel, ukraine and taiwan, the fourth is a package of national security measures including sanctions on russia and iran and forcing china to divest from tiktok or the app will face a ban in the u.s. the house will also vote on border security and immigration policy legislation. watch live coverage here on c-span.

>> will you solemnly swear that in the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> saturdays watch american history tv congress investigated as we explore major investigations in our country's history by the u.s. house and senate. each week authors and historians will tell these stories. we'll see historic footage from those stories and examine the impact and legacy of key congressional hearings. this week the 1950's mccarthy era hearings. they explore whether communists infiltrated the state department and the army and other legislations. it resulted in joseph mccarthy being indicted for his actions. watch "congress investigates" saturday on c-span 2.

>> on q&a, the filmmaker zachary treitz and christopher hansen discuss the octopus murders about the events surrounding the death of the freelance journalist danny casalero in 1991. >> it was called the octopus because he starts looking into one d.c. area, you know, one 1980 scandal and then that takes him over into the iran-contra scandal and the october surprise and bcci and the savings and loan and the same kind of players, nefarious players, their names are popping up here and there. >> the complexity of the story makes it really difficult, the number of names and the access makes it really hard it. so there were just a lot of obstacles being able to both be able to find out what happened and being able to tell that

story of what happens. >> filmmaker zachary treitz and christopher hansen, tomorrow on c-span's q&a. >> the house will be in order. >> this year c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979, we've been your primary source for capitol hill. for unfiltered balance of coverage, taking you where the policies are debated and decided all with support of america's cable company. c-span, 45 years and counting, powered by cable. >> the house has approved the rules guide be debate on four foreign aid bills, three which provide funding to israel, ukraine and taiwan. e fourth bill is a package of national security measures cluding sanctions on