>> sunday night on q and a, journalist and author on her book the woman valor about the ratification of the 19th amendment which granted women the right to vote. >> it's very small and it comes with the senate with only two vote margin. there are senators who are sitting on half of it actually in 1918 and it sticks until june of 1919 before it passes both houses. and the senate they were sending it out for ratification in the states was called an off year when most state legislatures were not going to be in session. and that was sort of person of a drum to make it more difficult. they had to convince 30 governors to call their

legislators back in the special session to consider the mma. >> elaine weiss, sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. >> this morning bret mcardle for leaving time but this case to the last half hour. i wonder after watching yesterday you think michael flynn's attorney sidney powell did what she needed to do to make her case before that panel of judges yesterday? >> look, it is a difficult case if your focus is simply on the politics of the matter. if you are looking at the law and the facts of the c case, i think ms. powell has the stronger side of the facts and the law. with the executive branch is the one that should be determining whether case goes forward or not. steve at the headlines the "washington post" this morning judges skeptical of shutting down a review of the flynn case. i wonder your reading of the

judges reaction, their interaction with the lawyers yesterdays ? >> guest: any time you are in front of one judges difficult as an attorney. but to be in front of multiple judges at the appellate court level that is simply a challenge. there.beenng you don't know what question is coming, and sometimes i had judges that i thought were absolutely against my position, gave me the hardest time in the courtroom. and i left very, very disappointed. only to find out later they actually agreed with me but were testing the parameters of the arguments. so it's hard for me to it second-guess. i think any lawyer at the front of the court has toe take a step back, watch come andap see what happens. there are incredibly thoughtful judges on this panel. if you look at america garland, and i expect she is one that does not put politics in front of his role to assess

the facts and the law. i am interested to see what will happen. >> host: were trying to give our viewers a flavor of that hearing yesterday. we aired it, streamed live over the internet. he mentioned judge american garland. this is the judge with the acting solicitor general jeffrey while talking about the government's argument in that hearing. >> the government has already dismissed this case correct? >> that yes that's what the panel says, the motion explain the governor explains there's discovered evidence of misconduct by the prosecution can no longer prove beyond a reasonable doubt the false statements for real, right? that's the government's reasons corrects? >> that's one of the three reasons. judge garland. >> of giving all three reasons. he stated three reasons and i believe you believe those are true, correct? >> yes. >> what more is there for you to say? only put another report let me begin.

seth optional that you have to say that much in the motion to dismiss? >> i don't think that we did. we often don't prevent under the circumstances this year we went further than we thought we were obligated to. and by the way, judge garland to drive that point home, the attorney general of course sees this in the context of nonpublic information from other investigations like >> i am not in any way questioning anything underlined. i'm just asking, just list the reason given. see my guess i just wanted to make clear it may be possible the attorney general had important information that he would not be able to share with the court wouldsh instantly did wear the reasons we could be but may notma be the whole picture given to the executive branch. >> bret chan for one the helots coming out from it that was secret evidence seen as key for flynn. what do you make for that exchange and the possibility of secret evidence or evidence the court hasn't seen it?

[laughter] >> guest: well all evidence is secret until brought out. in public view. and you do not know what the government has all the information that they have. just take the evidence it did have. let's talk about q and his peter strzok in this case. you already have very damaging issues with your key witness in the case. and not to mention the documents with the notes from the investigator. so everything that you have is in the public view justifies the department of justice being concerned about proceeding in a case. we almost wonder, here we are in the low bit seems tipped upside down. you have a defense attorney, a former judge concerned about a past life this judge was concerned about the government abusing its power, but now you have a defense attorney arguing on behalf of a judge who no longer is concerned about the government abuse of

power, who wants to maintain what the department of justice says they can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, but because of the issues in the case and some of the conduct of the fbi investigated the case. defense attorney in the country should be standing up and s cheering for such a decision. >> several colors already for you this morning falling to join the conversation republicans)-, democrats, independents. patty is up first out of connecticut and independent. patty i know you hung on the phone since the last segment i appreciate that. go ahead you are on with rhett's job for now. >> >> caller: okay i am calling it because flynn isy been set up by obama. don't forget he worked for obama. obama fired him because they disagreed about iran and everything else. and he wanted truck to not pick him because he was afraid

he was going to talk. flynn knows where the bodies are. buried. the threatened flynn blast lawyers they had this threatened to arrest a sentry i would give into a lie that i was guilty. now the paperwork coming out the fbi foundt nothing wrong with flynn. it was dark and lisa page who decided they were going to go after him. and lisa page even said changed at 302. against flynn. there is so much corruption her here. that the government is going to have egg on their face when donald releases all the stuff if he doesn't the right way. i've seen the paperwork already. it was a set up. >> host: can i ask where you seem paperwork already? >> caller: yeah, it's been released. i've seen the paperwork. he is innocent.

there's no if answer butts about it. c1 thank you padding connecticut, bret tolman. >> guest: perhaps all those facts aren't out in the public yet. i think some of those give the flavor to it the country is viewing from this case in particular. and that is you certainly have misconduct by the fbi and the investigation. you have concerns over keyve witnesses. you havenc concerns about what patty referred to as a set up. let's look at that. the director of the fbi that directs his investigation to go forth despite the fbi finding that there wasn't a basis to believe that concern. the investigation to start to begin with. it's very much likern the attorney general indicated on multiple occasions. they were in search of

something without a predicate to open the investigation. that doesn't include what then came out we now know the agents in the interview were telling the truth. so somebody asked the question why would someone plead guilty? and there are many reasons. i've seen a bit in the criminal justice system for nearly 20 plus years now. people plead guilty for a lot of reasons. sometimes it's the fear of what would happen if they went to trial. and the long sentence that could occur. the staff that they may expand the investigation to include other people you care about. there are many reasons. it seems like some of that might be apply in this case.st >> del republican, good morning grade student good morning to both of you gentlemen. he is absolutely right. you cannot take politics out of the situation.

it's one thing when the two fbi agents went to flynn originally. i understand why. when they did not, well for the lack of a better word, mirandized because that was the purpose of them being there. they lied about that from the get-go. from that point on, this whole thing is tainted. it is corrupt, it is collusion, it's all about combing and his co-conspirators to get donald trump. so why, flint pleaded guilty was because he had the entire justice system at the very top of working against him. and he had -- he lost all of his wealth. and had no place to go. what was he going to do but plead guilty? in your guess is correct. he had no way of getting out of the mass without further

ruining his life. when everyone out there should beho very concerned that this country was led down the path of total corruption, just to get one president. i am very sorry for this country that they cannot see that. >> host: bret tolman jimmy thing to add to that? >> don't think i would add is one of the reasons we to look at their cases the only agency the only agency to take away freedo freedom. and i was the u.s. attorney u.s. attorney i understood that power but i don't think i really truly felt the impact of the power until i became a defense attorney that i got to see how that power got to see how

individuals are targeted in the investigation is done in a way that is to justify the conclusion that you've already reached. we need to be better than that. weekend he better than that. and in this particular case, general full and, there is not a basis to investigate him. they also use deception when they interacted with him. there is then a conclusion by the fbi that there is not a case to be brought. that was overruled by those higher up. on thosere higher up are now seen of having more of a political agenda that we would like to think occurs in the fbi or the department of justice. >> james lawrence, massachusetts. a democrat good morning you are next on with bret tolman. good morning. in reference to the last lady that was on with mr. tolman i

would like to learn what tony podesta's role was in all of this stuff with manafort 20 was arraigned in everything. and tony podesta grabbed all of his millions of dollars and took off because it was his brother. i would also like to know how many violations are the usually in a year or say or twoer years in the federal government? it's my understanding that it is routinely violated. there are several, tony podesta had several by himself and was never ever charged. this was the original charge of flynn was brought up on that they ponied up and i don't understand why this is not coerced plea deal. the minute they find out because 80 pages of of exculpatory evidence presented in the appeals to so then, out

of 100 pages 80 of them had exculpatory evidence on them. and this is hello, we better drop this, thank you very much. >> i think the interesting part of that, is even back to judge sullivan. the judge appears to believe that he as a central role in deciding whether or not the case should be dismissed. that's not the role of the cour court. the statute does require the prosecutor to file t t and get leave of the court, it's really just a procedural mechanism. because a court has a daca in the cases on the daca and is always the court that can remove it from the daca. under see that we've lost that and all the sudden we now have a judicial branch of stepping the shoes of the executive

branch, wanting to assesse the facts of the law inms terms of whether or not to grant a dismissal of a case of the department of justice says they no longer have the ability to pursue or should pursue based on numerous factors. factors that are known and unknown to us. this is a dangerous precedent set. every defense attorney, every organization and agency out there with criminal justice reform should be standing up and applauding the back of the department of justice is making a decision with these facts on the table to dismiss a case instead their hatred for this president and their concern over attorney general bar making this decision as a political decision is greater than their love or affection for justice and for the fair administration of justice.

that is concerning. >> you think president trump could step in and issue a pardon for general fund? >> but certainly within his prerogative to do so. i would like to see the judicial branch acknowledged and recognized that we have given all of the prosecutorial power to the executive branch and the department of justice. the attorney general of the united states indicates that it would be wrong to pursue a case any further. and wishes to dismiss it. i would like to see that happen. i like to see them grant that and move on. but the president has that prerogative i'm certain he will look at that decision. judge solon appears to be playing political games in thisbe case. whether it's causing delay in order to stretch this out until after the election or whether it is because he builtt up personal animus towards

general flynn, either way it is inappropriate right now with what is happening. and i hope there is relief soon. but i am more concerned about the integrity of the separation of our branches of government. cnet of arlington texas, independent, good morning. >> for the first of i like to save michael flynn pled guilty twice because the government had enough evidence to convict it without a reasonable doubt. second of all this is not a conspiracy against truck. he was indicted by a grand jury prayed he would have been convicted by a jury heading onto tropic he admitted so twice. thirdly, judge sullivan have the authority to file for a brief period they force judge sullivan to dismiss the case which he may may not, the panel may not enforce the mandate. it was felt after the judgment is made by judge sullivan. so they jumped ahead and force

him to do something although he had even ruled on the case. i would also like to say, michael flynn is on surveillance, him and his son conspiring to kidnap living in pennsylvania to have him addition back to turkey so he could bedi executed. michael flynn as a criminal. bill barr is a criminal. donald trump is a criminal. he is no patriot. this is not administration based on the rule of law. >> host: we've got your point. bret tolman? >> guest: one of the factors it is often forgotten is the attorney general has the exclusive authority to bring a case and presented to the grand jury. but there is no mechanism, there is no grand jury to go back to when you want to dismiss the case. that authority lies the attorney general.

now remember it is the same attorney general that they plan to prosecute after the ig found the inspector general found that he lied to then investigator. so this attorney general is not looking at the politics of this. he's looking at the facts and the law. on it is getting injected into it by a judge who refuses to acknowledge the authority to dismiss the cases within the department of justice. it really is a difficult decision to make, when you might request it is an extraordinary motion for lack of a better description that you would file because you have no other avenue for release. felt that judge solon was refusing to dismiss the case

and acknowledge the authority of the executive branch. steven we have less than two minutes left with bret tolman as he talks about the michael flynn case. good morning thank you for taking my call don't thing that concerns me is been one of the rule and he said that the rules not only protected the rights of you note the defendant, but it protected the american people. you know, so it's kind of like bifurcated. i feel like the attorney general dismissing the case, i mean how can he do that? how can he represent the

american people against, take favoritism because of a political client. and at the same time represent a defendant who is a political client. and you know he is on the same political -- you know team that the attorney general is on. you know, i wish she would stick to that. c1 thank you for the call. >> guest: sure, when i was making the decision, it is a heavy burden to make prosecutorial decision. i had fbi agents who brought cases to me that wanted me to it authorize thehe prosecution. and i declined. they certainly weren't happy it.t but they also at instances in which i pursued a case that i later learned was a case that did not deserve to be

prosecute prosecuted. that was a weakness in the evidence or misconduct by the investigators, but i have seen both. and in this case let's not forget that the very heart of this is a case of the fbi fabricated. when i say fabricated they set general flynn up in a manner in which their purpose was either to catch him in a lie or to get him fired. and the agents themselves indicated they did not believe he wa' lying. is not a formal interview but more one in which you interact with the fbi agents more like colleagues would do. that should concern everybody that on that week's w factual basis they pursued a case. so the politics in this case, whilee there are some are not on the side of the attorney general now looking at it.

in assessing not just the weaknesses in the evidence, but the misconduct by the investigation. on those that made decisions on the investigation. so we should be concerned the like this does not get dismissed but we should be concerned that a case like this began with politics. hopefully it ends setting politics aside. >> host: to the lone star state thiss is gina republican. good morning. >> caller: yes, sir, glad to talk with you all this morning very good morning. want to talk about our judicial system, if sullivan is liable to not dismiss the case totally, our whole country is in trouble with the prosecution and everything. that means any judge will be able to go in and say hi and i don't have facts but we are going to prosecute.

i'm to say that flynn only going to get this case over head over, free him up suit he has to say. people make us were all these masks to silences. that is my main point. let's see what he has to say please to america. >> of the judge c in this case has fabricated or produced a basis to take on a roll it hasn't previously done in this country. you hear the arguments in the case with the uncomfortable tension when it comes to describing what the judge is doing in essence though you cannot avoid here is really

stated clearly a judge who has been outspoken about his animosity towards thisow administration. and against this in particular who brought on another former judge who is outspoken against this administration. who isow now pursuing action that will change the dynamic between the executive and the judicial branch going forward. and that should be something we are concerneded about. and apolitical frustration or a political opposition should not cause us to whittle away law and the integrity between the branches of this government. >> host: left o college. >> , independent. good morning. >> caller: good morning. i like to begin by saying i

believe you being just a bit disingenuous. the justice on the j basis that to drop the case was up in the air. that was before it was revealed that he was talking to the russians and lying about it. so right there, that's a shaky premise right there. the case only went forward because newrm information was revealed. and i believe already that barr and trump have already damaged the justicece department's role with the american people. so, thanks and have a good day. >> host: ret tolman you have the last minute or so. >> guest: so the color points out that he was already talking to russians and then he lied about it. let's take those one at a time. he was going to be significan significant -- in a significant position and

incoming administration conversations with the russians that would be understandable. in the question about whether he lied whether there's a case to pursue. you have the director of the fbi indicating to the president and others that he did not believe there is anythingrm untoward in terms of general flynn's discussions with the russians. then did a follow-up. and you have concerning notes by the fbi. we should be concerned about the fbi when they target an individual and seem to have an agenda in their investigation. reaching a conclusiong for example before they have the case. here they have both that suggests they don't prove but they suggest that their purpose and meeting with and talking to general flynn to get him fired or to catch him in a lie.

see you have already beginning of this investigation serious concerns about the authenticity and the integrity of the investigation.a look, i was a prosecutor. i wanted to be tough on crime. what i never wanted to see happen was that we push an investigation because we had something in mind other than the facts and the law at stake. and here it appears politics is what was in the mind of those pursuing this case and authorizing it. >> will leave it there for honow. but bret tolman i will come back and chat with us again prayed former u.s. attorney, former republicans counsel for the judiciary committee, thanks for your time. >> thank you. >> binge walked book tv that celebrate saturday evenings at 8:00 p.m. eastern settle in and watch several hours of your favorite authors. saturday we are featuring programs at the late award-winning author toni morrison his books include song of solomon, and beloved.

and watch next saturday august 22 sp feature programs with award-winning biographer. binge watch book tv, all summer on cspan2. >> book tv on cspan2's top nonfiction books and authors every weekend. coming up saturday at 5:30 p.m. eastern authors elizabeth hinton, robin kelly, and cornell west talk about the black lives matter movement. on sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern on "after words". university of california berkeley law firm investor former deputy assistant general and the bush administration, john you with his book defender in chief. looks at presidential powers and the u.s. constitution. he is interviewed by mark roselle author and george mason university founding dean of the school of policy and

government. watch book tv this weekend on cspan2. ♪ ♪ >> the presidents, available in paperback, hardcover and e-book from public affairs presents biographies of every president, inspired by conversations with noted historians. about the leadership skills that make for a successful presidenc presidency. in this presidential election year, americans decide who should lead our country wherever perspective into the lives in events that forge each presidents leadership style. to learn more about all of our presidents and books featured in storing visit cspan.org/thepresident. available in paperback, hardcover and e-book. wherever books are sold. you are watching book tv on

cspan2. every weekend with the latest nonfiction books and authors. cspan2 created by america's cable television company as a public service prayed and brought to today by your television provider. : : : and tonight were going to take the opportunity to show you a quarter of those appearances. first up from book kb debut in 2000, here is malcolm talking about his best-selling book the tipping point.