or online at c-span.org. ♪ >> saturdays, american history tv features historic speeches. . watch notable remarks by presidential nominees and other political figures. this saturday, barack obama emerges on the national stage and gives a keynote speech supporting john kerry for president at the 2004 democratic convention. >> we are called to reaffirm our values and our commitments to hold them against the hard reality and see how we are measuring up to our legacy and the promise of future generations. fellow americans, democrats, republicans, independents, i say to you tonight we have more work to do. >> former massachusetts governor mitt romney speaks at the 2008 -- after a strong showing against john mccain. >> we strengthen our people and

economy when we preserve and promote opportunity. opportunity is what makes hope become reality. opportunity expands when there is excellence in choice and education. when taxes are lowered. when every citizen has affordable health insurance and constitutional freedoms are preserved. >> watch historic convention speeches saturdays at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2 and wat c-span's live campaign 202 coverage of the democratic national convention august 19-august 22. you can watch the republican national convention anytime on our website. welcome back to washington." we have andy kroll with us, an investigative reporter with pro-publica. explain project 2025.

guest: it is an effort led by the heritage foundation and supplemented by dozens of organizations and hundreds of contributors to try to lay the groundwork for the next conservative presidential administration. obviously, that would be laying the future groundwork for a trump administration. your viewers have probably heard a little or a lot about the 900 page policy playbook. but project 2025 has put together and it lays out potential policies that the future president could do on everything from education to health care to technology, antitrust and the federal workforce itself. there are other parts of the project 2025. there is a whole piece that flows under the notion that personnel is policy, a phrase that caught on during the reagan years and the idea is that the

new president and administration not only need a playbook of what to do with the functions of the federal government but needs people to put policies in place. a big part is also recruiting people, vetting them and training them are and doing this before the inauguration so that when the next conservative president takes office, he not only has the policy, but the people to put in jobs across the government. host: doesn't heritage do this every presidential election and don't liberals have think tanks for democratic? what is the big deal? guest: yes, heritage, in particular does this kind of work every four years since

going back to the early 80's, the beginning of the reagan administration. they play out a mandate for leadership and it is a thick book can lay out policies. and to some degree they do the personnel part of this. there are also democratic affiliated ones that do some version of this but none does what heritage it does on the conservative side in terms of the mandate for leadership. why are we talking about it so much this year? democrats have chosen to make this much more of an issue and much more of a talking point than they have in years past. the reason they are doing that is because the policies in that playbook for project 2025 are extremely conservative. we are talking everything from

eliminating the department of education, dramatically curtailing medicaid, dramatically restricting, further restricting access to reproductive health care services like mifepristone. and i think perhaps most controversially in the public pulling out there is the plan in project 2025 in the playbook to re-classify tens of government, nonpartisan, nonpolitical people so that they can be more easily removed from their jobs and replaced by political appointees. these are career employees who serve democrats and republicans who would be hired potentially and replaced by individuals who have gone through this training process. host: former president trump and his campaign have been in fact that this does not represent their views and they have nothing to do with project 25.

guest: they have been saying that since it has come under attack from democrats and liberal groups. a spokeswoman said, reiterated the campaign's attempts to distance themselves from project 2025. and she said anyone who wants to read about the policies should go on agenda 47, however, you have to look at the record going back further. former president trump has said great things about the heritage foundation and has appeared at the events and in a speech at a heritage foundation gala, he talked about the great work heritage was doing including laying the groundwork for the future of that movement and how that was important and how he valued the work that heritage was doing.

so before project 2025 became so unpopular, the former president was close to the heritage foundation and the people involved. when it became politically toxic is one that happened. host: what are the similarities and differences between agenda 47 which the trump campaign is saying is their agenda and project 2025? guest: there are a number of different things. first and foremost, the project 2025 playbook policy and mandate for leadership is 887 pages long . agenda 47 is to doesn't bullet points. the project 2025 mandates for leadership is very detailed on basically every possible thing a federal potential administration could do. and we mentioned some of these. agenda 47 is end of top line,

things like defunding a universities that are indoctrinating students to become communists. it is a little more culture were tilted within the mandate for leadership project 2025 which is very conservative and is a fascinating read for anyone who wants to read. agenda 47 doesn't have that much detail. there is some overlap and talk about cracking down on over regulation and creating a more hospitable business climate. it is much thinner than project 2025 and is worth noting the authors of the project 2025 policy blueprints are listed at the end of the document and there are dozens who used to work for former president trump, including stephen miller, the architect of the border policies to name just one.

host: what is the academy? guest: it is the policy part. host: the training arm? guest: exactly, the training arm. people who are interested in serving in the future conservative administration can sign up on line. it is a vetting process that happens. if you are approved, you get access to the 25 videos, 14 hours of content, and you watch this content in there are quizzes and worksheets. it is like a certification course and you get a project 20 25 digital certification if you complete the different modules. it is interesting viewing. it is everything from policy recommendations, nuts and bolts of how the federal government

works and a lot of content drawing on lessons learned, mistakes made and how to prepare better for a second administration based on that collective wisdom. host: if you would like to ask a question of andy kroll, you can start calling in. republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, and independents (202) 748-8002. bringing us to the videos, they are not public. how did you get them? guest: we can't get too much into sourcing because that is the ethics of how we do our job as investigative reporters. every time someone sends propublica, the question is is it real and can we verify it.

and then is it newsworthy. we did the work to authenticate and talk to the people in videos and people involved in the videos and found all kinds of references to the videos online on the project 2025 website. we vetted and verified first and foremost and then we watched the videos. i watched all 14 hours and found that there is a newsworthy information that voters deserve to know. host: so 900 pages out, it is public, so what is new about the videos that is not in project 2025? guest: a handful of things on different themes, if you will. one is, the videos contain policy proposal that i think are not fully articulated in the 800 page -- 880 seven page policy book. one is a former top official

appears in when a video and talks about basically downplaying the existence of climate change and she says that for the intended audios, those being trained to go into the government and they need to "eradicate all references to climate change" that they see. that is something that is new and matters. host: let's show that video to our audience right now. this is about climate change. here it is. [video clip] >> i always understood that climate change meant seasons. our climate shows change all the time -- it doesn't change all the time but that is not what is meant by the left. what do you think about the left's words and definitions in the environment? >> that is a great point. they don't stop.

climate change they allege is everywhere if the americans elect a conservative president, they will have to eradicate climate change references from absolutely everywhere. and according to our intelligence community, the number one threat facing our country today is, drumroll, climate change. not russia, china, not a i, climate change. this is how the federal government is all in on this issue. and climate change advocates wield a lot of power. this is an issue to pay attention to as it has infiltrated every part of the federal government. when i think of climate change, i immediately think of population control, don't you? i think about the people who don't want you to have children because of the impact on the environment. perhaps not everyone will make that connection, but after spending time in the international space trying to protect life, i can tell you that this is part of their

ultimate goal, to control people. host: your reaction? guest: it is an extreme position to take. not only that climate change is not an pressing issue, something that bipartisan portions of people say it and pulling but that the political employees should proactively eradicate, remove, references to this issue from documents in whatever federal agency they are working in is pretty sweeping. host: i want to show another clip. this in dan hoff, a former legal adviser for presidential personnel office under trump talking about the -- being ready to take back the government. here he is. [video clip] >> the next republican administration is the most important in our life. the stakes are too high.

the left views this monopoly over education, media and culture to craft the pillars of american society, free speech, meritocracy, and national space and the unique excellence of our self-governing republic. in the name of diversity, equity and inclusion, the democrats are lowering standards in every aspect of modern life, mostly in medicine and our brainwashing the next generation with the dangers affliction that america is racist and it still looks cast in cities and robs us of self-confidence that we have a civilization worth defending. i mention this because if the next republican president doesn't execute a dramatic course correction, there may never be another chance. if you are not on board with helping implement a dramatic course correction because you think it will damage or prospects, i get it. it is a real danger. but do us all a favor and sit this one out. we only need 5000 administration

position and there are tens of millions of conservative voters. if you're not prepared to be bold, we can manage it without you. i use to run presidential personnel at the white house. host: what do you think? guest: you have to understand who dan hoff is, a former advisor to president trump, someone very close to the operation and would have a second role in the administration. the context of what the 880 seven page policy blueprint lays out. that is a dramatic course correction for the country. to hear dan huff say that and hear him instructing future political appointees on that kind of approach and to see that document as well, i think it contributes to the idea that for all that the trump political campaign says now, distancing

itself, the people that would implement these in a potential next trump administration are preparing people to implement something in that policy blueprint. host: let's talk to ron, republican in fort lauderdale, florida. you are on with andy kroll. caller: thank you for taking my call. when you first started speaking, you didn't make any -- trump didn't make any commitment to support 2025, did he? didn't he say that he was not in any way going to be involved with what they are accusing him of doing, which is 2025 project? host: we will get a response. guest: good question. donald trump has distanced himself from project 2025 or his

campaign has. i would point you to comments he has made in 2020 two, repeatedly saying that heritage foundation is doing great work. he flew in private jet and one of the faces of the event and he endorsed the work that heritage was doing, laying the groundwork and leading the movement. i would keep these continuing pieces of information in mind when you hear the former president say he doesn't want anything to do with project 2025. needs to praise it and support it when it was outside of the political cycle. host: but he praised it before it came out in writing? guest: that is right. it is fair to say that when the 880-page blueprint came out authored by his supporters, they didn't weigh in then.

it wasn't until the attacks on project 2025 from democrats and liberals came in that trump and his campaign staff started to distance themselves. there is a point to be made that the book wasn't out in 2022. host: was their project 2017 when he first came into office from heritage and did he accept those recommendations? guest: heritage,, like it does every four years, laid out potential policies for a future administration. you have to remember that people on the republican side expected a donald trump victory. while there may have been policies in place, where they really were hurting was personnel in 2016 going into 2017. in the videos we published, the leader of donald trump's transition team talked about how

tough it was to run this transition with no one on the bench to staff all the roles. he says, why project 2020 five's training element is so important is because it is something we didn't have in 2016 and 2017 and needed, and it hampered the early work. host: patty, a democrat in pennsylvania. caller: thank you so much for taking my call. good morning, sir. i read the reporting and watched the videos. thank you for the work. i have called in and the first time i called in to discuss project 2025 was back in april and we talked about the guardrails that will not be there. and then i also focused on another call regarding the

acting -- the folks that would be put in places that normally the senate confirms and the plan is that you have the acting. one is the pledge of loyalty. what i want to talk about today and if you could address this, our trump campaign obviously trends to distance themselves from this because it has burst into the open and people are talking about it. so it tying in some of the things he has done that now project 2025 is detailed in. one of the things is personnel. he demands loyalty. that is what personnel, the number one vetting thing. you have to pledge your loyalty to his agenda. so there goes the guardrails.

the people around him that keep them from doing things that are not particularly legal. also, tying in, for instance the other night just with elon musk he said, of course he wants to eliminate the department of education. i read every one mandate that is available going back to reagan. they don't like the department of education and hate the post office. he has said that. in the past he has done with a proposed. host: let's get a response for you. guest: i am impressed that you read those mandates for leadership. that is impressive. i would zero in on a phrase you used earlier about guardrails. one of the more interesting and some would say troubling parts of the mandate for leadership is obviously the notion that the white house should be able to observe more control over the

department of justice. the department of justice since the aftermath of the nixon presidency and watergate era has tried to operate with independence, and that is true under democrats and republicans. former president trump has said repeatedly that he wishes the justice department was more at his whim and that he could direct the doj in ways he sees fit. that is something he has said publicly on social media and elsewhere and something you see in project 2025, another overlap moment. he may distance himself from what project 2025 lays out but in some ways these are policies he stated he wants. host: wasn't there a proposal called "schedule f" that would do what you talk about which is replace a career presence in the government and the able to fire them so he could put in its political appointees in their place? guest: that is right, it got

lost in the larger public debate because it happened at the end of the administration and there was a lot of chaotic events happening at the end, at the least of which was the event of a january 6 and the fight over the 2020 election. this was something the trump administration has already tried and to put schedule f into plain english, using some federal authority to reclassify government employees so that they don't have the protection typically afforded to career civil servants, they don't serve one party or the other but carry over from administration to administration and if you reclassify them, it makes it easier to fire them at the will of the executive, the commander-in-chief. project 2025 lays out how to do that and within that how to replace those people with more politically loyal appointees who

would do the work of the president. host: let's talk to david in new jersey, independent. caller: i think for undecided voters or independent voters who tend to vote democrat, issues like project 2025 are not going to drive them away from voting republican. it will be the choice of tim walz that drives him away. he is a choice based on fear. josh shapiro was by far the better choice, but the democrats fear their volatile left so much that the volatile left is so reactive and thankfully cori bush lost in my hometown of st. louis. but tim walz's views on unions and israel and the issue of josh shapiro being jewish. so tim walz is going to drive the undecided and independent to

vote democrat further away. and once additional note, a much bigger threat to our democracy and our freedoms is the alliance for defending freedom. they are doing more than anybody in this country, issue by issue and going everywhere and fighting things relating to transitioning and taking on the cases quietly. josh hawley is doing nothing like his wife. we need a good investigation of the alliance for defending freedom. guest: david, we take tips from our readers in the public all of the time and i will take that tip from you as someone who clearly follows the news and the diverse stories under the news quite well. 1.i would make about independent

voters and project 2025, if you look at polling on some of the high profile subjects including the department of education and the schedule f of government workforce reform, they pulled -- they poll poorly. a poll had this saying they disapproved of these kinds of policies. so is that a large number of democrats and independents as well? the issues if you pull them out are not especially popular with large majorities of people. host: we have a text from denise in mneta. has the conservative ser majority on the supreme court emboldened them to believe that many of the policies of a project 2025 can actually be

pushed through with trump's win? guest: i think the answer to that is yes. if you listen to conservative litigators and activists talk about, maybe not specifically project 2025 but broadly the policy landscape and how the judicial branch fits into that, there is without question confidence and almost a bit of swagger in conversations i have with sources and the reporting that we do that they have shifted the judiciary in such a way that they have a much more favorable audience, certainly with the supreme court in the 6-3 majority but moving down through the appellate courts and into the district courts as well. host: jolene, a in pennsylvania. caller: thank you for taking my call. with this project 2025 being

something to look at, what about the critical race theory project and the 1619 project? that is it doing more harm to our country than project 2025. trump is not a politician, -- he is a businessman. like you said. democrats and republicans when they get power, they try to bring their own people and set up people in position that will help them get to their mission. what is the harm in that? when trump was president, there

were obama people in key places that would slow down things that trump wanted. he learned a lot from the first time in office. guest: thanks for the comment. you make some good points. one i will zero in on is the project 2025 training program for political appointees who feel these particular openings that turnover every four or eight years, a new president has the right to appoint those people and it is the job of those people to do the work of the administration, to take the policies that the president wants or their executive orders, executive actions that the president has signed into legal existence and to implement them at the agency level.

project 2025 is training these people to do that normal work. where things are different is the notion that not only is a future conservative administration going to appoint both people to those slots but also try to politicize career government positions, reclassify, fire the nonpartisan appointees and that would be a change from past residences -- presidencies. caller: good morning mr. kroll. can you hear me? host: go right ahead. caller: i want to say thanks to c-span for having you because a lot of people need to hear about what is going in the project .25. -- project 2025. i am a veteran.

i have a lot of time on my hand. i am on page 722. it starts on page 641 where it starts talking about disability benefits and running the v.a. in general. there is scary wording about targeting significant savings from resizing disability ratings , also some heinous stuff about, as far as the far right conservative stance on abortion and reassignment surgery. i want to know if you could make any comments regarding that. thank you. guest: thanks for your call and thank you for your service as well. if you look at policies toward the v.a. both in project 2025 and also if you go back to the first trump administration, there are some pretty dramatic policy ideas and previously

actual actions in place to try to privatize or streamline the work of the v.a.. that is not to say that the v.a. does not need reform. there is a lot of great investigative journalism showing that. but it has to be done with veteran quality healthcare and efficient healthcare in mind. not with putting private businesses in place to benefit. when you think back to the first trump administration there was this trio of trump aligned businessman, private individuals who had become this quasi-defective leadership council for the v.a., de facto leadership council for the v.a. that the trump administration had put in place. i think project 2025 bringing the the regulatory mentality, the private industry approach that the v.a. could raise some

eyebrows about the future of veteran care as well. host: let's go to virginia for michael on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. the previous caller stole my thunder because i am a retired veteran and i am looking at the same paragraph that he just spoke about. it seems to me that i really am not going to believe that trump would not be part of this project 2025. if he does get reelected, because of his past history and the fact that he tells a bunch of stories that are not true. it is extremely difficult, anyone who is a veteran knows to get a disability rate of any kind, i can understand about the changes that need to be done in the veterans administration.

but it is already all kinds of steps you have to go through to get a disability rating. it is very tedious and it is very hard. i don't understand why they are targeting it and going back and i guess they will do another override of a process that is already pretty much to make sure that the people who are getting disability ratings are actually eligible. host: let's talk to william in wilmington, north carolina. republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to recap what jolene said a few calls back that were discussing project 2025 but it is a think tank. d.c. is full of folks who jump ship from senate representatives into these think tanks.

biden came to office stating a bunch of stuff. i would like to know did he bring people in with all of these deals that were done with electric cars and all of this stuff to influence that he himself has brought in people from think tanks around him that have given us the policies we have. we don't seem to be talking about any of that. project 2025 as far as education , if we don't think our school systems are doing so great and our children are falling so far behind in the regular world and we are importing all of these people with no education to take jobs supposedly. where are we going? the think tank people are everywhere. trump was there for four years. he did the best he could. now he is more experienced when

he comes in. we will have a lot of stuff. the education has to be fixed. host: we got it. guest: william makes a good point. thank you for calling. think tanks are a dime a dozen in washington. there are at least three or four big ones. it is totally normal and commonplace for a democrat resident to hire people from think tanks -- for a democrat president to hire people from think tanks. it is commonplace for republicans to do the same. that's why i think the connection between project 2025 and future trump administration is a plausible thing. i would add one bit of reporting from our story at propublica in the videos we reviewed, there are 36 different speakers. of those, 29 of them are alums of the trump administration or

they worked on president trump transition team. they have some connection to him. one of them even works on his current reelection campaign. there are a lot of overlaps here. host: want to ask you about the director of the heritage foundation for project 2025. he stepped down from his role as month. what has been the impact of his departure? who is in charge now? guest: after paul dan stepped down, kevin rodgers put out a statement saying in effect that project 2025's policy book would no longer go on. we talked to some sources. that story was done by my great colleague who said that the policy work was already winding down. you are not putting out policy briefings in the last couple of months of the campaign. the statement that he put out also said the recruiting, the

training will the vetting would continue. the videos that we published, the reporting we have in this latest story is very much related to ongoing work at project 2025. paul dan's may no longer be in charge but that work is, according to kevin roberts, very much alive and well. host: gary is in baltimore. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. can you say something about these parallel organizations along with project 2025 like sick leg -- ziklag. i have not heard anything about the greater idaho movement. these organizations are on the same page as what you are talking about. i'm interested in hearing more about them.

guest: thanks for the call. i would imagine you are a propublica reader because ziklag was the subject of a big investigation before this project 2025 story. these groups are part of this larger conservative coalition that is very much close to president trump and his political sphere. they are all taking a piece of the pie to try to get voters, mobilized and excited for the trump campaign and to turn them out in november. they are taking different pieces of the pie. ziklag is very much about mobilizing the christian right. the center for renewing america is much more of a policy group tied to a former aide to president trump who could be in his next administration bringing an intellectual piece to it but very much through a make america great again lens. all of these grew from -- all of these groups have detailed

missions but the larger goal is to get a new trump presidency. host: christina is in iowa on the independent line. caller: hi. i am sitting here and i have the reprint of the declaration of independence as it appears in 1878. i keep hearing everyone say we are a democracy. we are a republic. i am not really sure why everyone keeps saying we are democracy. in here it says that the truth is self-evident that all men are created equal and we are endowed by our creator with certain unavailable rights and among these rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. these rights are instituted and derive their power from the consent of the government. that means the people. i was never in politics before the pandemic but they are

working altogether. they keep promising these things but neither side is anything. our country is at a dire point. can you tell me truthfully whether we are a republic or democracy? i have the constitution and it does not say democracy once. host: does this relate specifically to project 2025 which is our topic? caller: it relates to the american people and the project 2025 and our future. if we have both sides lying to us and they are manipulating us and it states right here that whenever any form of government becomes destructive, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute a new government. i don't think our government has our best interest at heart. i want to know if we are a republic or democracy. host: do you want to take that one? guest: i would just say that i

have heard that talking point that we are a republic and not a democracy. i would encourage you it is possible to have both of those things and hold both of those at the same time. we can be a democratic republic. i would urge you to read the federalist papers and some of the other writings of the founders. you will see how these two play together and how democracy is so critical to the health and future of our republic. host: louise in virginia, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to ask about the wilson center, the miller center, the hudson institute, these warmongers who are constantly pushing us into war who almost always push us into war. i would also like to say that disabled veterans. there are disabled veterans and

then there are disabled veterans. i have a nephew who served in texas and south korea. he is on full disability. he never saw war. he never was wounded. he was never anything but now he is on full disability. this is a guy who sniffs paint. he got into the military. he is a bum essentially. now he is riding around with a car that says v thiset. -- vet. this guy does not deserve disability. how many people are on veterans disability who do not deserve veterans disability? they do not dishonorably discharged you anymore. they less than honorable discharge is what they call it now. guest: thanks for the call.

anyone who signs up to serve our country in the military and they deploy a broad or they are just stationed domestically, i thank them for that. i have interviewed veterans in the course of my job. is pretty clear that the v.a. disability process is cumbersome and quite thorough. it takes a long time. i think it probably leaves more veterans frustrated at the pace and the level of detail, the level of bureaucracy than it lets many people in who are not deserving. hopefully that process is as efficient as possible. that is important to serving our veterans. i cannot speak to the individual case of your relative. that is what the veterans i speak with tell me about getting access to critical care for them. host: andy kroll, you said

earlier that you reached out to some of the people who were in the videos. what was their reaction? what was their response? from the heritage foundation, knowing that propublica has access to these videos that they never intended. guest: the heritage foundation's press office did not respond to us. i reached out to them half a dozen times over a week and they chose not to comment. we reached some people in the story and none of them -- i don't think they expected the videos to go public and to have a reporter asking them about it. one of them, david burton, economic policy expert at heritage, he talked to me several times. he said, i am in the video. the video is real. i have watched the others. i think it is real. roger severino, the vice president for domestic policy at heritage. a very senior trump official. we confirmed he was in the video. we spoke to others, a few i

cannot name because of the conditions of our interview, which have also talked me through why they appeared in the video. the trump administration in 2017 was hampered by a lack of people they could dispatch to different parts of the federal government and they hoped this training program would accelerate that process. from day one, a potential future trump administration would get to work. host: denise in kentucky says, "how does project 2025 as a blueprint differ from the green new deal is a blueprint from bernie and aoc?" guest: good question. the project 2025 blueprint is much more detailed, much more lengthy.

887 pages, hundreds of authors contributing. the green new deal, you can go online and find policy prescriptions. it is more a tagline and slogan. different organizations have different ideas of what they think the green new deal is. it is much more of a rally cry now than it is a specific set of policies in the way that project 2025's mandate for leadership is a very specific policy. host: mark is in fort lauderdale, florida. good morning. caller: good morning. i am so back -- glad to be able to talk to mr. kroll. how do you do mr. kroll? i will try to be brief. i will not be like any other type of caller. c-span says washington journal

had a lady on in the past two days whose job was to talk bad about black people, why they don't deserve any dei or anything like that and that they brought their problems on themselves. the way she talked was so similar to the training tape that you had that this stuff seems to be out percolating among these people. here's the second subject which is one i think usually -- i think you should be interested in. not long ago they had lauder who used to be with pence who now runs the america first policy institute. he was talking very maga which i thought was very strange for a pence guy. i looked him up. i looked up afpi. those guys have something going on that is every bit as frightening as project 2025. they call it the america first

transition project. it is the same thing. everything is laid out. all the people running it are slightly higher level executives in the trump administration. one of the things on the front page that really grab my attention, i could not read into it because it was so scary, something called personal planning. it says identifying personnel positions that need to be filled on day one and developing training a new administration to use it to ensure it can fill a qualified team on day one. the article on project 2025 is fantastic. here is something you might look into as well. it is every bit as frightening. host: he was talking about ann colter who was on the program earlier. guest: the second good tip from

a c-span color today. thanks for the information. you are pointing out the afpi project. it is interesting for a few reasons. one is the use of louisville, a term -- the use of lo yal, really trying to find loyal people. the ones who may not be as loyal to the cause as they should be and train them if they are not asked. -- train them if they are not experienced government workers. this personnel policy theme keeps coming up. it is a big thing that has come out of the first trump administration that his allies are trying to push into a potential second administration. they have thought out every step

of the process in donald trump wins in november so that when he takes office january 20, 2025 and ozone -- goes on to implement his policy, there is a laser focus on trying to master that transition, have people ready to go so that the oath and he is the commander-in-chief, these policies can be put into place. host: the videos are 14 hours as we mentioned. are they public at this point? are people able to go onto youtube and find them? how would someone watch those videos? guest: they can go to propublica .org. announcer: you can continue watching this program at c-span.org, as we did you live to asheville, north carolina where 2024 republican presidential nominee donald trump is