will look at accomplishments an setbacks and examine how impact presidential terms. this saturday the first one hundred days of presidency, grant was the famous war general who won the white house in 1868. campaign slogan was let us have peace issues during guarantees first days included reconstruction, the payment of civil war debt, voting rights and the fight against the kkk. watch american history tv series first 100 days saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span2. >> c-span, democracy unfiltered. we are funded by these television companies and more. comcast is partnering with a thousand community centers to

create wi-fi enabled listings so student from low-income famies can be ready for anything. >> welcome back to washington journal, we are joined by representative harriet hageman, resources committee, welcome back to the program congresswoman. nd other allies of president trump, attacking, essentially, the federal judiciary and saying they don't have the right to rule and that they should be investigated. elon musk saying that the judges should be impeached. what is your take on that? guest: i'm going to disagree

with your basic premise. i don't see it as an attack. we are able to criticize anyone in public service. whether they are in the judiciary or legislative branch. i think it is appropriate to criticize a decision if you disagree with it. as an attorney i have done that in the past. i don't think that is all that atypical. where i would agree with elon musk and president trump is, i find these decisions to be strange. reason i say that is, we have been just bombarded for years with the idea of this all-powerful executive branch, and that is the bureaucracy and administrative agencies, and the president has the right to do things such as under the last administration claiming that the president had the right to forgive billions of dollars or millions of dollars in student loans. hundreds of millions of student -- dollars in student loans, allowing the president to forgive student loans.

they were doing that through the department of education, and saying the president has the right to do that because he oversees the department of education. host: who said that? the judiciary blocked it. guest: they did, but there were many people in media who were comfortable with the idea that the president had the authority to do something through an agency that is contrary to what congress -- host: let's stick with the three branches of government. do you think the judiciary has overstepped its bounds? do you think there is any ambiguity as far as what their role is as compared to the president and congress? guest: it is not a matter of rules. they are defined by article 1, 2, and three. it is whether their decision is the right decision. that is what they are attacking, elon musk and the president, they are saying what these judges are saying, that their decisions are not legally sound. we all have the right to criticize or disagree with a judge if they issue a decision that we disagree with.

i don't have any problem with them saying these decisions are legally suspect and they should not stand. what are they going to do? they are going to do what we always do. they're going to appeal them. they are going to appeal them up through the process. the president has already said that. and that is the correct process to follow. host: the department of government efficiency, the subcommittee in the house led by representative marjorie taylor greene, held their first hearing yesterday. he covered it on c-span. if you missed it it is on our website. i want to play you a portion of the top committee democrat. this is representative melanie stansberry. she had some remarks, and then i want you to respond. >> i also want to point out that literally while we have been sitting here for almost two hours getting lectured on fiscal responsibility literally the republicans just released their plan to raise the debt limit.

while we were sitting here. and they want to raise it by $4 trillion. ok, guys. like, literally, i am just, like, without words. inflation is going up, you want to raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion, you want to cut medicare, you want to cut medicaid, you are talking about going after social security after promising you wouldn't. what the heck is going on here? we are not trying to take down elon musk as a businessman. this dude is literally breaking the law inside of the federal government, and for a party that is supposed to be the party of law and order, i really do not see you holding him accountable and doing your most basic constitutional responsibility in the separation of powers. host: what do you think, congresswoman? guest: well, i don't think she

understands the relationship with the debt ceiling and in terms of what we are doing in terms of the budget and what doge is doing. raising the debt ceiling is to pay the bills that have been incurred. i find it rather strange in light of the fact that we are only one month into this administration and we have got those coming due because of the last administration. so, we are raising the debt ceiling so we can pay the bills incurred by joe biden. i find it to be a very strange argument and i find it to be rather bizarre that she is attempting to equate cutting spending through doge and identifying programs we don't want, don't need, and should not be funding, with paying the bills that have been incurred. host: she also said that elon musk is breaking the law and that you, the republicans in congress, are not holding him accountable. guest: what i would ask is, how

is he breaking the law? no one seems to be asking that question. he has been appointed by the president -- again, just like any other appointee or special employee of the presidential office. he has been appointed and tasked with going in and looking at how the government is spending money. he is doing that. i cannot for the life of me figure out how that would be breaking the law. i think that is the question we need to be asking these folks. it is easy to throw things around. i would like to see the proof of how he is breaking the law. host: if you would like to join our conversation and ask representative harriet hageman any questions you can do so. she will be with us for about 20 minutes. the lines are republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. and independents, (202) 748-8002 . earlier this week a group of about 30 house democrats led by

representative glenn ivey of maryland -- he will be our guest after your segment -- they wrote a letter to the senate judiciary committee urging them to reject kash patel as fbi director. i will just read you a little bit of that. we will put it on the screen for folks to read. the nomination o patel, an individual with almost no law emenexperience and history of politically charged statements is clearly a break from tradition and one that deserves eenve scrutiny as a result. he has published a list of political appointments in his book andromid to shut down the fbi headquarters on his first day in office. the fbi directors no a position for an erratic political actor focused on retribution. he continues, but i would like you to respond to that. guest: i think the rhetoric and hyperbole is off the charts in terms of making those accusations.

kash patel has extensive experience in dealing with the issues he will be as the head of the fbi. one of the things to understand is that prior to 9/11 it was the field offices for the fbi that did the vast majority of the work. there was obviously an fbi office in washington, d.c., but our field offices were fairly independent and they actually functioned much better. it was after 9/11 that the head of the fbi brought everything here at washington, d.c. and stockpiled all of the power here. if you talk to people who are long-term fbi employees they will tell you that is when the fbi became politicized. work back out where it should be and reducing the footprint in washington, d.c. i see as a very positive thing. what i think you are seeing is the caterwauling that we words dart to take power out of

washington, d.c. and returning it to the states where it belongs. again, there is nothing stated in that paragraph you just read that is highly accurate for what is happening. kash patel is absolutely qualified. host: including he has published a list of political opponents in his book? guest: i would like to see how that is written, because i think it is common to take things out of context. i don't know what they are referring to there. again, let's read the book and see what it says and compare it to the letter and i can comment on that. just commenting on what they say about what he allegedly wrote, i don't know if that is accurate. host: you have not read kash patel's book? guest: no. host: kyle is in buffalo, new york. hi, kyle. caller: good morning, c-span. thank you. i think the problem is some people are just nervous, i think, with the whole elon musk issue.

whether it is illegal or not i think the problem is you have a billionaire who is in charge of slashing government waste, fraud, and abuse. that is the problem. i don't know the legalities of it all. and that is pretty much what i really have to say. host: why does that bother you, kyle? caller: you know, i don't know if it is fake news or not, but you hear about his bride -- his background with apartheid south africa. any time were talking about a billionaire is just a tough situation because you know they did not get their money honestly, you know? i'm sure a portion of it is, but there is a lot of people you have to step on and crush to get into that type of position. so, i just think a lot of people are uncomfortable having a

foreigner in charge with our books, i think. host: let's get congresswoman hagemann to respond. guest: mr. musk is a naturalized citizen of america. i don't think there has been any legitimate allegations about apartheid or anything, him being associated with that in any way. apartheid ended in africa several decades ago. as bad as it was that has nothing to do with elon musk. whether he is a millionaire or billionaire is irrelevant to whether he is identifying waste, fraud, and abuse we should not be paying for. one of the things i find interesting about this discussion is when he identifies these programs in the way our money is being spent would bet you 80% to 90% of the people in this country in a debt, we are spending a trillion dollars a

year on our interest payments? our interest payments are higher than we are spending on defense and we are playing -- paying for what in guatemala? i think it is legitimate to pull up the hood, start wrangling around in their and see how money is being spent. that is not the wrong thing to do. host: want to ask you about something on the front page of the new york times this morning about elon musk. under trump shakeup benefits for trump -- for musk empire. firings undercut litigation and inquiries. it is talking about federal agencies affected by those moves have more than 32 continuing investigations pending, complaints, or enforcement actions. into mr. musk's six companies. you know he is a major

government contractor as well. does that give you pause? do you feel that might be -- that his actions with doge could be enriching himself? guest: identifying ways in which we are wasting money has nothing to do with enriching elon musk, number one. number two, it is very, very common -- host: isn't it convenient to have federal employees investigating you're fired and say, we are saving money? guest: i'm not seeing that happen, so i'm going to object to the premise of your question. i have a hard time believing things in the new york times after they pushed forward with the russia, russia, russia collusion hoax for years and have yet to apologize for all of the dishonesty and lies they told during the course of that, and many other things. the new york times is not known for being necessarily accurate in their reporting. that is number one.

and number two, having dealt with administrative agencies through 30 years of litigation and trial experience, it is not uncommon for them to bring enforcement actions against people and they have done absolutely nothing wrong. that is why we are innocent until proven guilty in this country. having an enforcement action or administrative proceeding does not mean a lot until it is resolved. host: patrick is a republican in huntington, maryland. good morning. caller: morning. how are you? host: fine. go right ahead. caller: i have been register republican my whole life, and having to vote this last cycle, it is part of my duty as a citizen, i had a hard time voting for him but i did so because of the things he promised. work is hard, and i have to pay

bills. i have to feed a family of five. he's not making things cheaper. things are more expensive, including gas. i don't see how routing through these departments and putting people on leave, especially you offer people buyouts, but the only ones taking them are the ones that were going to retire already, so you are actually costing us more money because these people are now getting nine months of free pay before they retire. and i heard yesterday that they are buying $400 million worth of armored tesla's from musk. that doesn't sound like cutting government waste and spending, buying electric cars that only have a 300 mile range. maybe you could explain why my tax dollars are going to be going towards buying electric cars that are armored? i'm assuming it would be the cybertruck. why would we be buying $500 million worth of those? host: congresswoman? guest: i'm not aware we are

going to be buying $400 million worth of armored tesla's. you indicated you heard that yesterday. i'm not going to deal in rumors, number one. number two, he has been in office one month. the inflation rate you are seeing is 3% year-over-year. again, that is not donald trump's fault, that is because of the profligate spending and the policies for the past administration. i think that it is very disingenuous to try to blame someone who has been there and attempting to cut the cost of government for an increase income -- increase in costs. the fact he is going in and attempting to cut that federal spending tells you we will eventually be able to bring down inflation down. as far as gas prices, is entirely -- entire energy policy is based on the fact that we need to be energy independent

and produced domestically. the increased cost is when we have to import energy. have all of the energy in the united states not only to meet our current demand, but into the future and be a net exporter. between our coal, oil and gas, uranium, etc. we have the ability to be energy independent. as we move toward that and continue or start yielding the infrastructure necessary, you will see prices decrease. host: congresswoman, this is what i found about patrick's question. this is fortune magazine that says state department might i-4 hundred million dollars worth of armored tesla's from doge head and tesla ceo elon musk. the state department included a line item in its procurement forecast by armored of electric vehicles valued at $400 million amid musk's cost-cutting spray. guest: i think we ought to look at that and see if something --

if that is something we should buy. i do think we ought to be buying electric vehicles, so i'm with you on that. [laughter] host: patrice is in spartanburg, south carolina. good morning. caller: first of all i love your jewelry. i'm so glad you are on here today. but let me go ahead, because -- host: move things along, please. caller: i think it is ludicrous folks are complaining about the transparency in government spending. what does this administration plan to do about child trafficking, the media, and then the trees that has gone on? -- treason that has gone on? host: the treason? could you be more specific? caller: there has been a lot of

treason that has gone on with this last administration. guest: in terms of the human trafficking and child trafficking it is one of the most horrific legacies we will have of the biden administration. they lost over 300 thousand unaccompanied children that came across the borders. what that means is they are working in sweatshops, being sex trafficked, or are no longer with us. it is a horrific state of affairs and it is the fault of both hhs and the department of homeland security. mayorkas and the head of hhs allowed 300,000 children at a minimum to disappear. the human trafficking over the last four years has been off the charts, and slid women and girls and children are the ones that have suffered. i know that mr. homan is working toward that. i know kristi noem has also made that a priority. it is a horrific situation. i have often said that mayorkas was the largest human trafficker

in u.s. history and i will stand by that statement. it was devastating what happened over the last four years. over 12 million illegal aliens have come into this country, any of them children under abusive situations, paying coyotes and the drug cartels, the human traffickers. it is a tragic and we need to get our arms around it. we need to make sure it never happens again. host: richard, a democrat in augusta, georgia. you are next. caller: i have a lot of issues with the congress, but i'm going to start off with this, congressman hagerman. do you support the george floyd police reform act, and also do you support the john lewis voting rights bill? i know for a fact that burgess, donald, and senator scott, three black men, voted against the bill.

how can they do that when we have been struggling to have our right to vote for the longest? now also, about elon musk. is he running the country or president trump? those people he working for him have security clearances to be doing what they doing? i'm a veteran. i had a top-secret security clearance and i know what it takes to get one, ok? why is it that you guys want to keep supporting a man that is a convicted felon, a criminal of sexual abuse and fraud for all of these years, and you talk about efficiency? the country has not built a refinery. we have been producing oil since the barack obama years. host: we have a lot to handle there. guest: we have a lot to unpack. it should, thank you for your service. i appreciate that. as far as the security clearances, i'm confident that

everyone of the people working with doge and under president trump have the necessary clearances to do the work they are doing. it is president trump who is running this country and i find it rather rich that you would ask that question. you can see how incredibly active and intellectual president trump is. especially when you compare him to president biden, who we all know was suffering from dementia for several years as far as him being a convicted felon, again, the law fare against president trump was off the charts, and as an attorney i was horrified as to how our courts have been weaponized against one man for political purposes. that is not who and what the united states of america is. as far as the voting rights bill, everybody has the right to vote. we have worked hard to make sure it is easy to vote, but we want to make it hard to cheat. everything a person who has a right to vote in this country

can vote and it is actually easy. so, i'm going to push back on that. as far as the refinery, i agree with you. we need to be building refineries. have not built a refinery in this country since 1979. host: and the george floyd police reform act? guest: i'm not going to get in the middle of telling the police how to do their job. i think they have a difficult job in new york, in chicago, in atlanta. i mean, i think it is difficult and i'm going to support the police if they do something wrong. we address it. they are there to take care of us and they take their job seriously and i'm going to support our law enforcement. host: let's talk to joe, hackensack, new jersey, independent line. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span. i was wondering listening to you, you are such a breath of fresh air.

have you ever considered for 2028 running for president? [laughter] thank you. that is my question. guest: joe, you are so kind. i like representing wyoming right now, but thank you for the compliments. host: jerry is a democrat in sewall, new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to give you credit for coming onto c-span. because i see how aggressive mimi is with you and the questions and how she addresses you. and i give you a lot of credit for standing up to that. i am a registered democrat. i have never been so embarrassed by my party as i have an trump got in. i am watching them lose their minds and watching the media lose their mind and twist and turn different things. i watch every station.

newsnation, cnn, msnbc, fox, newsmax, and i cannot believe the lies and the way they can twist something, and i am very proud, i really am, of president trump exposing all that he is exposing. i hope he can save us all money. i hope he can keep us out of wars. and i don't understand how people are not in agreement with that. host: jerry, can i ask, did you vote for president trump? caller: i did. guest: i think what you have voiced is the fact that he is actually appealing to a very broad base of people. everything you have said is very common sense. i'm going to tell you that i do work with some very good democrats. glenn ivey, who is going to be the next guest, i think he is a very thoughtful man. i think he is a good man. i have to question the approach

that the democrats are taking to where we are for the very reason of what you have described. as a democrat you voted for president trump and what he promised he was going to do, which is cut spending, root out the waste, fraud, and abuse, return power to the states, produce domestic energy, be stronger on the world stage. all of those things. i think we can all wrap our arms around that. that is why i'm surprised that is why i'm surprised at the reaction to doge, because exposing these things, again, i don't care if you are a democrat, independent, republican, or you have never voted, when you look at the way usaid has been spinning our money it is common sense to say, i don't think we should do that. i think we ought to make sure the kids in philadelphia can read and do mathematics. we need to be focusing domestically because a strong america makes for a safe world and a weak america makes for a very unsafe and unstable world. it is important that we focus on

the issues here and i think that is what you are saying. have to put these differences aside and do it is best for america. host: oakville, tennessee. ronald, you are on with representative tenney command. caller: hi. i don't think this country realizes how close we come to losing everything we have. these democrats ought to get a backbone and realize what trump did the last four years when he was president. had he not got in there all you democrats would have lost everything you had. look what he's done. check what he has done. host: ok. let's go to rochester, minnesota. a democrat during john, you are next. caller: yes. yesterday a local small business was rated here in rochester, minnesota, home of the mayo clinic. this local small business

employed two individuals for many years. legally, but they were valued, skilled employees. now this local small business is being forced to shatter their doors. what is congress doing about this? we hear nothing about immigration bill that was -- what is being done about immigration. to provide for these small businesses. now, our congressman is silent. he is like a cockroach, hiding in the dark is. we hear nothing from him. no town halls. we are not hearing anything. what is going to be done? thank you. guest: john, i was just in your lovely state last week. beautiful. my mother is from minnesota. we already have immigration laws on the books that address this. and if you need to have foreign labor there is a legal way of doing so through a variety of visa programs. to the extent people believe they have to have that kind of

labor i would encourage them to follow that law. i'm not going to apologize for enforcing the law. and i'm not going to apologize for our department of homeland security. i'm just not going to. we have 12 million illegal aliens that have come into this country over the last four years. i think the number is higher. i think most people think the number was higher. that was the official number that came out of the biden administration. we have to be able to secure our borders and to do that we are not going to be addressing with immigration reform in the way that you are suggesting. we have to be able to enforce our borders. i'm sorry that happened. i'm not going to apologize for enforcing the law, but i'm not going to promise we are going to change it because of that situation.

host: i just wanted to update on that situation with the cybertruck. this is the latest we got, which is from business insider. state department removes mention of armored test laws from its 2025 procurement list, replaces it with armored electric vehicles. so, that is the latest. we want to be complete the accurate about that. that is $400 million. it says it will be buying armored electric vehicles instead of specifically tesla's. guest: i come from an oil and gas estate. i kind of like gas-fired ones. [laughter]