2:00 p.m. on american history tv on c-span3. working with our cable affiliates has explore america. >> c-span for history unfold daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies and today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court and public policy events in washington dc and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. >> we talked about the criminal justice system and the role of prosecutors this morning. this washington journal segment runs about half hour. >> lauren is at our table the story, founder and president of the national association special assistant attorneys.

>> it's an organization thatt represent our nation's medical prosecutors. it's about 5600 assisting united states attorneys across the country and 94 us attorney offices in our association represents those join our association's members. >> are you affiliated with the justice apartment? >> no, all are members are assisted attorneys but i'm not mbhere as an and nothing i say should be considered to be the representation of my office or for the department of justice. i'm here solely of my capacity as the president of the national associated. >> what is your association do? what is your goal? >> our goals represent the interest of attorneys across country and to be a spokesperson for them on issues that impact on what we do day in and day out as our nations federal prosecutors and we prosecute federal info cases. any case the ghost for the 19th district court judge isth going to be in it and assisted

attorney whether it's k-uppercase-letter's are civil case. >> in one of those issues is criminal justice reform we get to that your thoughts on the florida shooting and a call by some lawmakers and others for stricter gun control. >> guest: terrible tragedy of something we absolutely have to fix isin the country. we feel deeply about these types of situations and these are could be potentially federal crimes and they tend to be more a test of the low-level and i think we need to look at the frequency of the kinds of weapons thatd are being used and limiting those weapons and were not going to eliminate the problem because there will always be people who are drains like this man who do terrible things but we should be able to limit the ability of them to cause the death and destruction by illuminating weapons

available to them. >> host: where you see this possibly been a violation of federal law? >> guest: they move into state and the weapons are clearly and probably not made up for in this instance but it would be the next day to give us federal jurisdiction. >> host: what happens then? >> guest: we would prosecute them for firearms. >> host: was a? >> guest: they been those who use weapons illegal. they been the assistant us attorneys and the government would prosecute those who violate our firearm laws. i don't know all the facts yet whether we could go forward federal prosecution or leave it to the states. >> host: who has committed a violation -- the company, the guns, explained that. >> guest: well, the actual possession of a weapon in the way it is used if it is manufactured in state other than where the offense occurred would give us federal jurisdiction. >> host: what would happen if the federal government to take over thisat case. >> guest: probably fbi would conduct the investigation and they would present it to an

assistant attorney for prosecution and we bring the matter to a federal grand jury under the amendment and the federal grand jury found probable cause to indict the matter would be set up for trial and go for a federal district drug and the defendant would get all the rights to six amendment right to counsel and trial by jury et cetera. >> host: how long those cases typically take? to well we have a speedy trial, 70 days from the time the crime occurs in the law requires us to bring it before the jury within 70 days and with some exceptions. but basically within 70 days. >> host: when it comes to criminal justice reform i want to read an article from "the wall street journal" to you and our viewers. the headline is attorney general pieces multiple battles. one of them is a fight over sentencing legislation. the issue that sparked the o chuckudiciary committee grassley's comment on thursday and one of the most personal for mr. grassley. he spent years pushing changes

to the criminal justice system producing legislation to cut mandatory minimum sentence for nine violent offenders and establish programs to help reduce recidivism. what do you think about this legislation what mr. grassley is working on one of the provisions in it in your thoughts on it. >> guest: the association start on it with regard to the letter by the attorney general we agree with them one 100%. the system is not broken at the federal level there's a lot of people confused and conflate our's date system with our federal system of justice. review our federal system of justice at adequately addresses the crime problems, especially the narcotics level of the

international trafficking or drugs in your country in mandatory minimums are a very essential and vital process prosecutors to be able to move up the foodas chain and prosecue those who are major traffickers in dealers in heroin and methamphetamine and those kinds of drugs. the attorney general is absolutely right. the system is working very well and there is a lot of confusion and misunderstanding about how the system works and only about 30% of our federal prisoners actually are serving mandatory minimum sentences. many more are charged with mandatory minimum crimes but as a result of those men and more mandatory minerals they cooperate get the sentence reduced or we have what we call a safety valve so if you're a first-time offender you didn't use weapons, you're not an organizeravav or leader of the g transaction you avoid the mandatory minimums to a start with. >> host: what are the myths and misunderstandings because there is a m bipartisan push on capitl

hill to do something about the nation prisons and alleviate the population and some sea mandatory sentencing as way to do that. >> guest: the myth is the misperception that many of our federal offenders are serving mandatory minimum sentences and that is simply not thend case. the other method that is out there is we have what they call these low-level not violent drug offenders and we don't prosecute low-levelow drug offenders. our prosecution for possession is 4% of her cases and most of those cases occur on the border of what we call kilograms amounts of marijuana and the numbers of those peoplelo are so great that we pay them down to simple possession. possession that occurs on our parts are federal highways and those people are put in diversion programs and no one is going to jail so 96 to 97% of the people prosecute our drug traffickers and some saw the

poison drugs p for money. >> host: what is the smith coming from and this is an understanding post mark. >> guest: this comes from people who provide the misinformation and in some ways it's our fault. one of the way sitting out is that we decided to be more vocal and we need to get the truth out and why we do it. there's a lot of misinformation when it comes to organizations that try to confuse the troops with their version of what they think reality is. >> host: you mentioned there's a difference between federal state and prosecution and what's happening in the state level? >> guest: used to be a state prosecutor and i started my career in new jersey is a prosecutor and the problem at the state level is the volume of cases my colleagues at the state level have to deal with is so overwhelming that oftentimes plea-bargaining cases down to us are crimes in the crime that was

committed doesn't really address the problem we areoe faced withn the profits that can be made from drug trafficking. they have a number such. at the federal level we more resources than we do a better job in dealing with the kinds of crimes that our congressme has enacted. >> host: "the new york times" headlines senate roots renewed push for sentencing overhaul its familiar roadblock and there's a new version of them measure passed 16-five t on thursday and plotted from

>> host: what are your thoughts, questions or comments about the justice system and those with experience want to hear from you too. (202)748-8003. brian in michigan, independent. >> caller: hello. thank you. i have an older question i want to ask that is relevant and i just haven't been able to get an answer. in 2009 muller, special counsel, today on the russian collusion was head of the fbi and there was an ultimate investigation going on around uranium one but first time in our state department history since 27 we did not, did not, have an inspector general who has a staff of 300 at the state department looking at all of this so when you press forward today how can muller not be

conflicted in all of this. he knows exactly what went on uranium one and the fbi has a seat and even though he wasn't had to inspector general's critical position in the state department and it was formed and they were there to do a service and i didn't hear any crying out about it. not much. i don't understand how that works. such a big country that we limit ourselves to someone usu like muller. >> host: heard your point. any thoughts on that. >> guest: well, department of justice has inspector general in the inspector general does a perfect job in monitoring the activities of the department and if there's any impropriety after the inspector general will detect it and act appropriately in accordingly. we have a tremendous system of justice in our country and in the case of candace versus march the justice scalia noted a study done by a university professor of 15 year. of people who were convicted for murder and the results of that

study is as justice scalia pointed out was in .003% of the cases where someone in the country at the federal and state levelst convicted of murder actually innocent that means 99.7% of the time our system of justice got it right. >> host: dave, jacksonville, florida, your next independent. >> caller: good morning. a while back there have been reports that trump was personallys interviewing for federal prosecutors or a usa's for the district where trump tower is located and i was wondering if how your association looks at that and his federal judiciary nomination so a lot of them are already going through but they weren't approved by the aba. how do you and your brother and look upon the things?

thank you. >> guest: thank you for the question. it's a good one. in our system of justice the 94 us attorney's office are manned by 93 united states attorneys and 93 united states attorneys are all political appointees and they serve at the pleasure of the president. they are traditionally interviewed and recommended by the permit of justice and recommendation goes to the white house. in each instance the senators from the states for the us attorney's office are located heavily weizen on who they think is most appropriate to serve as the united states attorneys. my colleagues are career professional prosecutors but we are not political appointees. we stay on regardless of who the us attorney and from one administration to the next. >> host: mike and olivia, washington. independent. >> caller: yes, i was wondering

about what he thanks about the criminalal justice system wheret seems to me that poor people go to jail and that rich people pay a fine and they get away with some pretty you know criminal stuff. as far as i think somebody like had a school going and -- >> host: musketeer question about poor people going to do. >> caller: well, in our system at the federal level. >> guest: everyone is entitled to representation by an attorney whether poor or rich. the system protects everyone he ensures everyone will get a fair shot at proving or forcing the

government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is guilty. no one in our system of justice is to proveve their innocence ad the burden is always on the united states to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and unanimously with juries of 12 to. >> host: want to shore viewers to congressman that we recently had on her show in their legislation that states can ability fair and effective base justice act. we want to listen to congressman scott and get your reaction. >> the problem is with the federal government knows in terms of time policy is mimicked by the states so when we have a true coney in minimum sentences for low-level drug offenses they tend to pick it up and three strikes you'reen out and we pass in the early '90s is picked up and a lot of it serves as a model for the state. the states have gone to the point where they just can't afford to keept up and the washington state was faced with a lot of prison expansion in

prison cost and they did a study to come up with what has been shown to work to reduce crime and in a cost-effective basis. they went to things like early childhood education which would be a long-term effects of working with prisoners and second checks programs to reduce in prisoncism rate rehabilitation so when they get out there better prepared to restay out and just a continuum and then you have this in the justice act a continuum of initiatives that are designed from a research-based perspective to reduce crime and the money. one of them is a significant reduction in mandatory minimums which at some point require judges to lower sentences and violet common sense and the judge opposed the senate to make sense and neither one because the mandatory minimum invokes

[inaudible] >> host: your reaction to the corpsman and the legislation. >> guest: one of the problems are having is there's not a lot of accuracy inlo these reports with the state systems were better than the better system. first of all, we prosecute differentt types of crimes in te states prosecutor in many instances we prosecute a different kind of criminal than the states prosecute in many instances. the other thing we found out the researchou is the recidivism rae at the federal level three years out is about 34% based upon the arrest. some of these state systems play with the numbers and they don't look at rearrests but look at re- convictions and they don't include people who prosecute in their case for christ at the federal level. the statistics in these examples they are using to claim that their system does a better than ours is just not true.

the gold standard of these systems is what is your recidivism rate based on arrests and those states can duplicate what we do at theat federal levl at three years out 34%. some of the things the bureau of prisons and this is one inmate courses offered to micro- computing, plumbing apprenticeship, nutrition class, prerelease personal health, release financial management, prerelease employment, wellness intervening, psychology, stretching, job fair, job searches in the bureau of prisons does a good job of trying to rehabilitate our inmates impair them for release. a year before they are released they go through a more intensive program, six months ago to a halfway house and after they are released from the federal system there given a period of supervised release where probation officer monitors what

they are doing and doing that. release. to try to help them get back too society. everybody wants to have a situation where no one was convicted and tried and serve their sentence will recommit another crime. >> host: this is a headline in "the new york times". what do you make of that? >> guest: i think we should do everything we can to rehabilitate our criminals and obviously there are limited resources andnd we have much ned for non- criminals to get benefits to advance their education and ability to serve productive lives.

i think it's an obligation of our society to do what we can to rehabilitate people who made the bad choice of committing a cri crime. >> host: arizona, susan, republican, you're on the air. >> caller: good morning. i'm in arizona and we have [inaudible] many prisons and my son, six years ago, got a dui and he went to the state prison and was upset with my son because he was with some girl and he got another dui he went in fori four years. during those fourr years he had education, he had classes to go to for domestic [inaudible] and alcoholism andnd in the last yer that he was there he did more classes and it did help but there is a lot of people in the

presence that don't want to help. they wantck to go back because they are scared to come out in life. my son can't get a driver's his home andin doing great and has a po but he can't get a job and he's been working at a camp service that pays him minimum wage and he gets up every morning and takes them to the service at 6:30 and hopefully he is a job but no one will give him a chance. the prison are not trying to help the ones that come out and that's what i mad about because it doesn't work. i wish i could give a dog to see, i sent him a letter about how the prisons are working for the last four years and you know that doug did not answer meet once. not once. >> host: let's take your story. >> guest: that's a good example of the state system versus the federal system and as i mentioned a moment ago the federal system we do monitor the prisoners we release during the

supervisor. the judge's sentencing will determine what the length of supervisor should be from three-five years. unlike in arizona apparently the federal level there is that ongoing supervision that ongoing assistance to help inmates to the corner and make better choices in their lives. >> host: her son sounds like he is trying he's up against roadblocks and can't get a driver's license can't get a job. >> guest: and we need to fix those things. i think peopleha who are rehabilitated should have an opportunity to benefit from all the advantages of our society driver's license in getting a decent job. check the box is something that people are looking at trying to decide whether we should continue to pull these people or in effect, policies people beyond the time the service after the event rehabilitated. >> host: check the box. >> guest: check the box is a for many employersui indicate whethr

human convicted of crime. >> host: and i could go away to track. >> guest: people are discussing. employees have the right to know who they are hiring what kind of person so the difficult issue but we have to resolve that and give these people an opportunity to lead productive lives and not go back to crimes of lives a crime. >> deputy attorney general rod rosenstein indicts 13 russian nationals for allegedly interfering with us political system. after that the fourth circuit court of appeals has rejected the president's latest travel ban proclamation. we will show you the oral argument in the case. after that senate confirmation hearing for nominees for positions with the federal trade commission. >> deputy attorney general rod rosenstein has announced the charges have been filed against 13 russian nationals and