that oath is important to all of that oath remains the cornerstone of our lives long after we have taken off the uniform. that oath is important to donald trump. and he in fact will take the very same oath on january 20, 2017. [applause] that is why we assembled in this room along with many other veterans and their military families all support his candidacy for hit the breed -- his candidacy for the united states of america. together we will all make america great again. thank you for your service, may god continue to bless our united states of america. [applause]

it is my pleasure now to introduce lieutenant general tom -- westy, a westport point graduate but we will not hold that against him. [laughter] he then joined the air force, completed pilot training and went on to a long distinguished military career, including assistant vice chief of staff headquarters u.s. air force. he has a defense metal, legion of merit, distinguished flying cause, bronze star, a true good american hero, tom mcinerney. [applause] tom mcinerney: thank you, don. it is very simple. here, arerriors supporting mr. trump because he has the only budget, the only

economic plan that can rebuild the military. if you elect hillary clinton, you are going to get 1% growth. you are going to get 3.5% to 6% growth with this administration because he knows how to take the hand caps off -- handcuffs off america's economy. we need that. [applause] make it very clear to the american people there is only one candidate that can rebuild united states' military and make us great again. now it is my distinct pleasure to introduce lieutenant general on theellogg, who is national security part of mr. trump's team. he is doing the transition team for the defense. in vietnamtours

under the first airborne division and then he was civil -- special services. he had a distinguished career, and aiding in the commander of the 82nd airborne division and finally finishing up in the joint chiefs of staff because the chairman wanted a warrior. keith is a warrior. god bless you, mr. trump, and god bless america. keith kellogg. [applause] thank you, and i'm honored to be on the stage today with these great americans, to medal of honor with -- winners. we have endorsed mr. trump to be our it commander in chief. he knows sacrifice and character . i last want to identify as mr. trump said earlier, mr. jane horton, a gold star white. chris -- [applause]

chris was a great young sniper of the 43rd division, the thunderbirds of oklahoma. god bless you and god bless what he has done as well. behind these veterans, we started just last week, there were 88. now we are 165 today. [applause] women who havend led at all levels of leadership and believe deeply in his temperament, his leadership, his vision, and his guts to be our commanders in chief. [applause] for those of you watching, let me tell you a little bit about the people that support him, the people behind me, and the people who are not here, to the millions of americans who hopefully are watching. these are commanders who fought in afghanistan very they fought in iraq. they fought in mogadishu.

they fought in myanmar. we have leaders the were wounded. they hunted down sod -- saddam hussein. one of our commanders that is on our team hunted down and killed public taskbar, the colombian -- the colombian drug lord. we are in the middle of a change election. those of you here today to those of you listening and to those of you watching, if you want to keep the status quo with all its failures and promises of more of the same, then you know where you can go. or if you want to move forward with courage, what we can be, what we should be, and what we will be, then you will elect donald trump to be president of united states of america. [applause]

to those of you watching, join with us on the stage, join the millions who already stood with us for the past months to carry this man and with him, our nation to victory on eight november. god bless you, and take care. [applause] don: ok, without further ado the person you are here to see and hear to listen to, the next president of the united states, donald j. trump. [applause] donald trump: thank you, everybody. usa]ting thank yoump: everybody, please sit down. this is an amazing honor.

the difference is we all want to get back to work, whether it is building our military or building our country, we have got to get back to work. we have a lot to work. ,e have very much left behind speaking with the generals and admirals and all of the military people. we talked about the word depletion. the military has been treated so badly with equipment and money. this is a time when we need the military perhaps more than ever. when you look at the number of ships, you look at the number of military personnel, you look at the numbers are setting records for all-time lows, we can't have that. there is a world out there, and nice to say,- not but there are a lot of very, very evil people getting up some potentially strong countries. we have got to be prepared. we have to keep our country so great and so strong.

that is why i like to have all the support from so many generals, so many admirable's -- admirals. they are smart, they are tough, they know what is happening. i believe in them totally. that is a fact that they believe in me is one of the great honors of my life. i want to thank them. [applause] now, not to mention her in the same breath, but hillary clinton startedcampaign of 2008 the birther controversy. i finished it. i finished it, you know what i mean. was born barack obama in the united states, period. now we all want to get back to

making america strong and great again. thank you, thank you very much. thank you, everyone. thank you. [applause] don: very, very briefly, the big

theme that has come out today, what you heard today first, we want to deeply thank all of our military men and women that continue to serve this great country. wanting our country to be great again, not deplorable. those men and women, the veterans, the families who stand behind all of those sacrifices, they are not deplorable americans. they are great americans. [applause] don: one word came out today and the theme of what you just witnessed, one word is leadership. we need leadership desperately in this country. [applause] don: thank you all for being

here again. let's make america great again. [applause] [chanting usa] [background chatter] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] announcer: reporting on the event we just saw, politico

writing that trump did not apologize for the uglier most racist narrative during the obama presidency. and he lied about his role in the conspiracy theory and without any evidence, attempted to pin the blame on hillary clinton. that is politico's take on donald trump statement today where president obama was born. for campaign 2016, c-span continues on the road to the white house. hillary clinton: we are going to get big things done. donald trump: we will have one great american future. our potential is unlimited. announcer: live coverage of the presidential and vice presidential debates on c-span, the c-span radio app and c-span.org. monday system or 26 is the first -- september 26 is the first presidential debate. 4, thetuesday october

vice presidents debate in longwood, virginia. and then washington university presidentialond debate. leading up to the third taking place at the university of nevada, las vegas on october 19. watch these on c-span. listen live on the free c-span radio app or watch live anytime on-demand at c-span.org. now on c-span, the evangelical and conservative leaders on whether donald trump's residence advances -- presidency advances their cause. we will hear from proponents and opponents. this was broadcast by the christian tv and radio station owners. thank you and welcome to

evangelicals debate 2016 election. other? trump or that is the question. i am jerry johnson, president of national religious broadcasters nrb. this is an association of christian broadcasters. the threefold mission is to advance political truth, per vote -- promote media excellence and free speech. i remember when mike huckabee first ran for president, a debate moderator challenged him because he had been a pastor and a christian leader. maybe you are too pious to be political. maybe you can't handle the cut and thrust of political debate. and mike huckabee said, obviously, you've never been to a business meeting at a baptist

church. we are seeing christians debate, tweet and blog, and -- but what we are seeing here, the discussion, and i can tell you it is needed. this presidential election is unlike any other in recent years. evangelicals are among the most vocal critics of both major party nominees while others strongly back donald trump. we are holding this forum to allow for a reasoned, careful debate among evangelical leaders in the hope that it will result in more light and less heat. i am grateful to these leaders

of diverse backgrounds, professions and political commitments for their willingness to engage each other on this matter. christians, now more than ever, must be america's best citizens. we hope this forum will help them be that in this election season and beyond. being the best citizens necessarily includes an educated vote for president, including this year. to the press in attendance we , are grateful for your interest in this debate, and the way to think about this forum is that it is a family conversation. perhaps much like the ones that are happening this fall across the nation among evangelicals around dinner tables, in church, parking lots, and sunday school classes. clearly there are some strong disagreements among evangelicals , but after november 8, we will still be part of the same family with common concerns

about our nation and common commitments to improve our nation. we are glad for you to listen in to listen on to conversation and to report what you hear. you are certainly free to ask questions of the participants after the debate is concluded should they be willing to elaborate on their views. as a nonpartisan association of christian communicators, nrb being neither supports or rejects candidates for president . since we have support on both we felt our debate, organization would be an ideal platform to host this conversation. we want to thank the national press club for hosting us. we want to thank c-span2 for airing this debate live and also welcome the nrb tv audience. our participants, some of who are nrb members, while the others should be, are eric erickson, janet parshall, bishop

harry jackson, bill wicker men. -- wickerman. the debate will have three stages. this debate, three parts. eric and janet will each make 10 minute opening remarks following which each will have five minutes to respond to the other. then harry and bill will have 10 minute opening remarks following which will have five minutes to respond to each other . then i will ask a series of questions of the panel, and they will engage each other. first, eric erickson is host of atlanta's evening news on the radio in atlanta and editor of researchit.com. he will present a opposition to donald trump. eric is a fox news contributor and currently pursuing a masters degree at reformed theological seminary. let's welcome eric erickson. [applause]

go for it. eric i am a "star trek" fan. : one of the worst "star trek" movies ever made was "star trek" v" where everyone becomes brainwashed by a cult and is is a blackhat god hole at the center of the milky way. they go looking for a black hole at the center of the milky way, and not until kirk asks the relevant question, they all step out of it. what does god need with a starship? what does god need for a sitter in the white house? if you decide you will vote for donald trump, go for it. i will not ask you to violate your conscious anymore than you should violate mine. but i do think christians in america, particularly those of us with platforms, should not be supporting donald trump openly,

because i think it is harmful for a witness for a number of reasons. let's just deal of the candidates. we have two candidates in this election. one candidate in the interview has been asked who jesus christ is and referred to him as her savior. in this election has been asked multiple times who jesus christ is, and the closed his he has gotten to it is when cal thomas said, jesus to me is something i can think about for security and confidence, someone i can revere in terms of bravery and in terms of courage and because i consider the christian religion so important. to david brody he described god, i think god is the ultimate. you look at this, here we are in the pacific ocean. how did i ever owned this? 15 years ago. i made one of the great deals, they say, ever. i have no mortgage on it as i will certify and represent to

you. that is what i want to do for the country, make great deals. god is the ultimate. saysen two candidates, one jesus is her savior, and the other says it is someone i think about for security and confidence, if we are witnesses to glorify god for ever and advance the kingdom of god, when the new person interested in the faith comes to us and asks us, why do you not believe him when he does not say jesus is a savior, you think he actually is a christian? -- why him, not her? please explain how you are openly advocating a man that has blackened his books about multiple affairs with married women, has cheated widows and single moms and the elderly out of money for trump university, has stiffed the low income

worker that they want to collect everything they are a road, they have to sue -- they are owed, they have to sue -- how does he represent our values? you say, we believe you. if you want to advocate for that, but how are you advocating the kingdom of god? [please stand by] he has taken money from the elderly, from widows, from single mothers. deuteronomy,from and from james, this is undefiled religion to the sight of our god and father. to visit orphans and widows and keep oneself unstained by the word. he has filed for bankruptcy and

let others for the bill that he came up on top. he's refused to pay labors and small businesses what they were actually owed telling them to , sue, and again he told them in iowa he's never had to ask for forgiveness. when anderson cooper had to follow up, he told anderson cooper, he's never asked for forgiveness. and he did it in when asked if june. he had ever repented, he said i will ask for forgiveness. he he says he is a christian. he says he has never had to repent. he's been asked who jesus is, and he says, a guy he can look up to. matthew 3:2. in those days, john the baptist came preaching in the wilderness of judea and saying repent for the kingdom of heaven was near. mark 1:15 jesus went into galilee and proclaim the gospel of god. the time is fulfilled, the kingdom of god is near, repent.

mark 6:12, the apostles proclaimed people should repent. -- 17:30, they look everywhere to repent. revelation 3:19, i will approve and discipline, so be zealous and repent. he has not repented and he says he has not repented. we are going to say this is a man who christian should advance in the public square? if you want to go vote for him, go vote for him. but you're harming your witness if you go out and advocate for him. but it is not just that. let's look at first corinthians judge not lest you be judged. 5. paul writes, now i'm writing to you not to associate with anyone bears the name brother if he will be sexual immorality or is agreed or is a swindler, for what am i to do with judging outsiders? it is that not those in the

church whom it you are to judge. he repeats it later. we instruct brothers to the name -- in the name of our lord jesus christ to shun brother who conducts himself in a disorderly way and not accordance with tradition. some people would argue they were writing these individual churches. matthew henry wrote they were to avoid ultimately energy with these people. they were to have no commerce with them. they were to have no commerce. they were to shame them that in so shaming them they might bring them to repentance, and it's not to shun them. for those who think this only applies to the individual church thessalonian, you would come into conflict with john wesley, even joseph bradley. all have written on 1 corinthians 5. this appeal -- applies to the church universal. we have a man running for president of the united states who has bragged about his

affairs, who has bragged about stiffing others with the bill, cheated women, widows who had said he's never had to ask god for forgiveness, who does not identify jesus christ as his lord and savior, but says he's a christian. if we are in the public square advocating for someone like -- whatat good is us good does that do us as christians to say we believe in scripture when scripture tells us we should not be advocating for a person like that? this election is ultimately, either way we've got someone we don't like. and i realize some of you have decided he is better than her. that is fine. some say he could be cyrus letting us back into the holy land. i would say that between the lesser two evils, god has never asked his people to choose the evil. he has done it for them. he has never -- he didn't ask the israelites to open the gates for epic and is her --

ebuchanezzar. he opened the gates. i don't think we should be asking people to do that. history, i am sure of it would show us there are people who told those in babylon it's just a statue. we don't remember them. we remember the man who refused to bow. i believe in a god and a last day and a savior, and i believe i am on a winning team. i believe i win in the end, and i don't think this election affects my salvation, and i don't think we as christians should be advancing a man we don't think will help the church because i think god helps the church, and we will help god. thank you. >> thank you, eric. next we have janet. janet is host of the daily two hour radio program in the market with janet partial. she has carried on hundreds of christian radio stations across the country. she is a longtime nrb member and

has been in the past chairman of our public policy committee. she is a a broadcaster from the nation's capital and has been doing it for over two decades. she will argue in favor of supporting trump. all yours, janet. janet: thank you. [applause] erick atd if i take his word, i am besmirching my witness. theink erick subscribes to worldview i never vote for anybody, i just vote against. or as jay leno would say. let's just look at the numbers. as john adams said, facts are stubborn things. there are 35 million evangelical voters in america. 28 million are registered to vote. in 2012, it was 335,000 votes in for swing states -- four swing states that made the difference.

this is a profoundly crucial election where everything the vote will count and in light of last nights fox news polls, the, candidates are one point apart. nearly nine in ten gop writ registered voters say they would vote for trump over clinton if the election was held today. among gop voters who attend regularly, 84% said they would back trump if the election was today, and then in july, pew put out a poll said 94% of percent of evangelical republicans would vote for trump over clinton. research says churchgoing republicans who were once skeptical for trump now absolutely support him. but i'm not going to use the word evangelical because that can be used as a bludgeoning tool by the media. it can mean anything from soup to nuts. in fact in 1975, time magazine said the rise of evangelical because it was jimmy carter who got 50% of the votes of the evangelicals, and how did that turn out? we are going to re-define the word evangelical, and i'm going to use the term that george barna came up.

he has a brand-new book out called america at the crossroads. i recommend it to you. he came up with the term sage cons. it is an acrostic that stands for spiritually let me break that down for you. you know that you are a sinner, in need of a savior. jesusow that savior is and paid the price for all of us. the pricelgary, paid and proved he was the savior. believe in the heart that they will be saved. that is spiritually active. that means to that, they believe in the vibrant, living, transcendent absolute word of god and it impacts every single aspect of their lives. let me talk about what happened.

in january, it's that 11% said vote trump. when it became clear he was going to be the gop nominee, that went up to 70%. after the republican convention, it was at 80%. the initial disappointment others are undecided. mrs. clinton has never caught on. at the start of 2016, she was in line to get 20% of the vote and now she has spiked to 4% largely in part to confused writing like people from -- if you are pro-life, vote for hillary clinton.

i will leave that to your own imagination. we have heard over and over and over again about character. when all else fails, go out and review it. let's look of the characters of presidents. thomas jefferson is alleged to have had an affair, fathering one, if not six children. least to known have one love child. james garfield had multiple affairs and the election was talked about him having a prostitute. what happened? she was put in the saman insane asylum. woodrow wilson had an affair while his wife was living in when she died, he started seeing a widow. the washington post said the president has been entering

edith regularly, obviously entering meant entertaining but the damage was done so what popular joke emanated from that chapter of the american has. what did she do when the president of the united states proposed? she fell out of bed. the 1920 presidential election, the national committee bribed her to stay out of sight summing them on a free trip to asia for $20,000. she had a love child, she had a love child with a man. gave birth to a man in 1919. the hardinged estate to get a trust fund while at least four other women, two of whom had his child out of wedlock. she said it is a good thing i am not a woman, i would always be pregnant.

both franklin and eleanor had mistresses in the white house. dwight d. eisenhower had a mistress. once bragging, he had more women by accident than kennedy. after lady bird walked into him, the secret service had a buzzer system to alert the president. lbj had no problem of talking to reporters. because of the watergate piece, richard nixon could make a sailor blush with his swearing. i hardly had to talk about jfk and bill clinton. that makes donald trump look pane. we will talk about character. we are not electing a messiah. i don't fear for having anything less than a sinner in the white house. last time i checked, we had

centers on the supreme court, oval house, the house, the congress. i myself join you as a s inner. we have a representative informed of government. the governors shall proceed. robinson of government is a blessing. it was designed by god himself when most of it was said you cannot do this by yourself. he turned to moses, representative government is a god instituted idea. when we were going back in history to its 1787, the constitutional convention was people paced back and forth wondering what the outcome would be. when the doors finally open, up ran mrs. powell who went to ben franklin, what do we have? a republican or monarchy? franklin responded a republic. i'm interested in keeping the republic.

17 candidates strutted upon the gop stage. those who cared, voted. we can vote for whoever we wish. the final candidates stepped forward. breeze did.ne and it was not a career politician. he lost the system. yes, he was a businessman, outsider. a gop candidate had to be a professional politician. adams and madison would iha ve challenged that. they would've passed out cold if people did that for 20 years or more. the candidate to go around his donald trump. for those praying through and during this process, have we now believe the sovereignty of god did not apply? did he take off to philadelphia or was god's sovereign in the

entire process? a leader?ect in can he use a persian to rebuild the walls of jerusalem? an adulterer and murderer? kim god take a jewish intellectual that would be isis of his day and grow? noah was a drunk. moses was a murderer. samson was a murdere womanizer. jonas ran from god. peter denied christ. has a track record of using flawed people even went it does not look right to us. to me, i choose to keep the republic and secure the system. >> thank you, janet. now, eric. you have five minutes to respond or say whatever you want.

eric: let's back to the jeremiah 30:21 reference and verse 18. thus is the lord, i will restore and have compassion on his dwelling. the city shall be standing where it used to be. out of them shall come songs of those who celebrate. i will multiply them and they shall not be few. the congregation will be established before me and i will punish all those who have oppressed them. shall come from the midst. who would approach me, declares the lord. you shall be my people and i will be heyour god. let's go through the litany of

flaws. do you remember when warren harding bragged? do you recall bill clinton going on national television saying he would like to have sex with his daughter if it was someone else's child? talkingrecall them about their sins. s, we revel in our sin all of the people is true. abraham doubted. peter rejected christ. samson, you name it. thingsd something -- two in common that donald trump does not have. one, god chose them and two, every one of them repented. every one of them asked for forgiveness. donald trump has said he does not have to ask or forgiveness. he said he is a christian but does not have to ask for

forgiveness. he has written books about his affairs. all these other people did terrible things so let's christians embrace the terrible. no, we should hire the best use. god when weglorify say yes, he is a sinner like every one said. cheated women, widows, the elderly -- that is our guy. sure. if you enjoy it and champion him, i think you form your witness because we may be wrapped up in the politics of the day, but there are people longing -- christians in this country are saying if they are putting their faith in him, what is for me? we are supposed to advance the kingdom of god, saying these other people are terrible people so we will go with a terrible

person. >> thank you. janet, you have five minutes. janet: i will be kind to eric. we know no president can serve beyond eight years, but this is what i know. careful, we will get along right now here. samuel says look on the outward trend. every bit of information through the mainstream media is doing everything with its power to denigrate donald trump. they are losing viewership. i don't know if donald trump is asking for forgiveness, but samuel says man looks on the outward appearance and god looks at the heart. never comes onn my show without saying one john, one peter, one corinthian.

really ? swallowing camels -- that is ridiculous. let's go to romans 13 where it says we as believers have a relationship with peter. i suggest the city of god. we have dual citizenship. citizens of the united states and mandated to command which is a lot less than jesus being asked who wanted to ensnare him. you have responsibilities on earth and to me as your eternal king. the welfare of the city. one of the ways we do that is to influence and occupied, living our life that they will see our good works. we are to engage culturally for the cross. it does not come by way of washington. that does not mean i don't try to influence.

here is daniel, a teenager turned prime minister, and influenced him to the point of eating grass to cravings -- praising god. i believe we have more influence on our needs then and the golden book that i believe god uses its people to handle out its plan. we are to obey. richard says the pilot option is not one for of his believers. we don't wash our hands. not voting for trump is not voting for clinton. the perfect is the enemy of the good. candidates should not oppose us from opposing a more dangerous one, a profoundly, articulated worldview. i don't care if she talks about her savior or not. i'm interested if your deeds match your speech. you believe in the denigration of marriage, the annihilation of the pre-born. you said you would protect american citizens.

what difference does it make? as a result, we have dead american citizens. the question we have to ask -- what will you do for your country? first, last and always, what will you do? there will be people appointed to the court three potential justices who could serve 30 or more years. that means not only my children , but my grandbabies. that is something i care about. hillary put out her list, donald trump has put out his list. the difference is 180 degrees. am notnald trump says, i asking about forgiveness, it is debatable. what is not debatable is the mold of antonin scalia. hillary clinton, i doubt it. she is not weaved together a basket of deplorables and i am in it. there is a distinction.

will the president to check the country? i don't need to elaborate. will the present bill the economy? how will the candidate provide equal opportunity? one candidate has thousands of unemployed in the other as i driven her own car in years. there is a distinction. the positions believed and practiced by evangelical christians, which has met with evangelical christians? cut, dry. the bible tells us to be sharp. that our mind was transformed. you not only honor me with your life and hard but you on array with sound. seek wisdom. this is a time for power, not only believe it to think critically. janet, thank you, eric.

we have time for follow-up. now our next round and switching the order on the pro or anti-trump this time. we are going with bishop harry jackson. is the senior pastor of the hope church in maryland and founder of the high impact coalition. he is one of the chief conveners of the reconciled church, healing the racial divide movement. his book is co-authored with george barna who was nominated for the goldman dallying award. medallion award.ng harry: thank you. i began pastoring after well-knownba from a

eastern business school. i found myself starting the bible study. folks that wound up coming to the bible study, most of them were white. the community had 1% black and eventually we started a church. settingecame in that pro-life, profamily, and i also believed that we needed to be engaged in changing and transforming our culture through our political system. with that as a beginning statement, i want to say that donald trump is being challenged about race and racism. we are living in an interesting time where he may be the only one who is able to bring some substantive healing to the

racial divide, because god is in the details. the details of practical answer is where we stand. talkinghe challenges about race in terms of policy is that very often black christians see things that hispanic christians are seeing things through a lens of justice. they want justice now, things to be more fair and even an equal. white evangelicals often are hung up on issues. they talk about marriage and life as though they are exclusive. the bible does not say righteousness or just this is the foundation of god's throne. haveieve as we relationships with the lord, we want to crete and atmosphere of justice in our land.

beenoo often, blacks have and hispanics, have been, in a sense, able to settle with the politics agreement. someone who says hey, i like you, i understand you. and that has been good enough. no real answers are coming. i believe that hillary clinton will simply perpetuate the status quo, do what she has done for 30 years, and the aura of criminalization will continue. why between these two, i would vote or donald trump. the first three are for general christians and the remaining four, with i believe, the emphasis on blacks are and

hispanics are. first, religious freedom and liberty, the johnson amendment as was already mentioned, is a challenge. donald trump says that he wants to -- he is for religious liberty and freedom. number two, the supreme court justices. i believe we are going to -- we have to live with up to 40 years , whoever gets in those amazingly powerful seats. third, the support of israel. donald trump has articulated a position that it will be -- those of us who believe the sensein a very literal believe that there is something to supporting israel as a nation, not to say they are always right on their policies,

but whether we want to support and support the existence of israel versus its annihilation. i want to talk more specifically about african-americans, my fourth point. i believe educational reform is critical, the opportunity for charter schools is really important. my own daughter work in this city, charter schools for four years and i believe that we have to somehow change this thing about where education is going. 80% of the people incarcerated in america today are functionally illiterate. we have a problem. is weing that we can do could really guarantee that every person in the third grade and all of our urban churches could read.

it would be amazing. it what kind of empty out some of the jails. fifth, business empowerment. i believe economic plans, donald trump has one for urban improvement would make a difference for us. it is interesting that under the bush administration, 8% of the loans given to small businesses were given to black businesses. byer president obama, 1.8% the small business administration's figures were given to, or used in minority businesses. so, capital formation is obviously something important in terms of starting, maintaining businesses. we know in urban situations, if the desert -- if i could call get that -- we will need to

jobs in urban centers. having some idea to be more equity in terms of business and empowerment will be very important for us. nonviolentxth, offenders returning home, getting a chance to redeem their lives is important. i served on the board of prison fellowship. , think it is interesting that if you look at the recidivism rate of people going back to his prison, he will find oftentimes there is not an opportunity for these guys to restore and develop their lives appropriately. i think that, in some pragmatic ways, donald trump will look at these things.

seven, and finally, and this family tax incentive are important for all people, all christians if we are going to perpetuate a society built upon foundation and family. i would argue that in african-american and hispanic communities, that family tax incentives are significant. those seven points are some of the reasons i could go on and on and try to delve into the whole, more details around the critical side of things. i would also say that right now, status quo, the obama administration, democratic party has a bias towards inactivity in terms of solving urgent urban problems.

it is no secret that we are on the verge of explosive violent outbursts and there is a generational shift that is going on. we also have a dynamic in the black community and hispanic community where there are at black americans that a -- one is upwardly mobile and thriving and another that is scrapped in a conundrum of class, generational poverty which is aggravated by race. it is the same thing in the hispanic community where one candidate will be proactive, solving problems. i also believe having a citizen politician will be important for place in our at a culture that the folks control their little fingers

need to be broken off and we need a change. we need some organized and strategic chaos for a moment. redefine and reestablish some of the priorities. the seventh point in my experience leads me to saying that this time i support donald trump. thank you very much. >> thank you, bishop jackson. we will hear from phil. he is a special assistant to president george w. bush. he is a legislative advisor in d.c. heore entering politics, worked as a missionary to turkish workers in west berlin, germany. he is currently president of faith and law, a ministry to

staff. he will speak against the candidacy of donald trump. thank you. bill: thank you for hosting this debate. weimportant question and will be focused on this. i want to thank bishop jackson, eric erickson. i have respect for all of you. evangelical faith is a far more difficult choice this election year than any we've seen in the last half-century. the choice has provided us with many good people on both sides. sadly, the division has also prompted the question of motives. this is unhelpful and unfair. we will let god judge motives. our attempts to be e pluribus unum is hard enough without everyone else. a quick word about me.

i have a hard time getting to my right. i'm a republican because i am a conservative and a conservative because i am a christian. i believe conservative policies best reflect the christian worldview, but i'm careful not to demonize my own politics. i don't pretend to speak for god. the driving motivation is the same as that for the rest of my life. to put the lord first in my heart and actions. i was ready to support any of the other 16 republican candidates for president but there was one i could not support anyone. d he won. this is uncomfortable for me, not the least of which to be divided from so many allies inside my party. i cannot wait until the season is over and we can recover unity, that is my hope. >> amen. bill: i want to analyze the reason i heard for why evangelicals are supporting him.

they boil down to three justifications. one, he is the lesser of two evils. two, god uses bad people for good purposes. three, trump is a good man. is thest argument, trump lesser of two evils is the most compelling of the three to me. it is an argument i have used many times, trying to convince my friends not to vote for a third-party candidate because republicans were not sufficiently pure. i respect my friends who concluded they must vote for trump reluctantly. they believe the supreme court hangs in the balance and he is more likely to support conservative justices and i think they are right. as one who works on judicial nominations in the bush white house, i care deeply about the court. yet, i've concluded this justification is insufficient. first, trump maybe a threat to

our democratic republic. this is a serious charge. unfortunately, trump's statements have given me ample reason to be concerned. i care about the supreme court because i care deeply about the government handed down to was by the founders. the founders knew how difficult it would be to sustain the democratic republic. benjamin franklin, as we have heard, said he has given you a republic if you can keep it. just because we have preserved popular sovereignty for more than two centuries does not mean it will go on forever. i love the constitution because it reflects the framers fundamentally christian views that we are creatures and god made us. trump, on the other hand, has often demonstrated contempt for the rule of law. he's sounded more like a strong man impatient with traditional spring.

he advocates death to the innocent family members of terrorists. he said you have to take out their families. he advocates torture, not as a importantetting intelligence but as a mean of retribution. would doilitary rulers unlawful orders. if i say do it, they will do it. he has praised dictators like letter o vladimir putin. a russian opponent of putin implored his praise, saying putin is a strong leader in the same way that arsenic is a strong drink. why would trump praise putin again and again unless he actually admires him? maybe it is safer to assume this

time he is not lying. trump also said when the students poured into tiananmen square, the chinese government almost blew it. they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. that shows you the power of strength. our country is perceived as weak, spit on by the rest of the world. trump's encouragement of violence against people protesters should have no place in our republic, much less on the republican party. among his many statements are these -- i would like to punch him in the face. try not to hurt him. if you do, i will defend you in court. don't worry about it. knock the craft out of him. he admires strength, whatever form. it exults faithfulness and meekness, that are strong because they rely on god. this leads to the second and most compelling reason why i

believe the lesser of two evils argument does not stand. trump corrupts us. some people argue the never trump crowd focuses on his weaknesses and ignores clinton. not so. we know who she is only in not supporting her. yet, it is true we have a higher standard for a republican nominee. trump corrupts what it means to be a republican. if we support him, we become complicit on his behavior. trump mocks disabled people, brags about how many married people he slept with. he says prisoners of war are not heroes if they were captured. he accuses a nativeborn american judge of being mexican-american and cannot rule. speaker ryan called it a text book racist comment. a fallen soldier has no right to

question him. he accuses my old boss, president bush, as the reason for the 9/11 terrorist attack. isadvocates religion for who allowed to enter the country. he charges the father of senator cruz as an accomplice in the murder of president john f. kennedy. people who will not vote for clinton because she is a liar are voting for donald trump because they hope he is a liar and does not mean what he says. as an aside, some evangelicals do not vote for romney because he was not conservative enough. trump is far to the left of romney. he opposes entitlement reform. he says he wants to expand them. opposes free trade and has a long history of supporting liberal causes. when we line up behind this man, we underline our credibility.

more than that, we do violence to our movement, saying the ends justify the means. another argument supporting donald trump is god uses that people for good purposes. this is certainly true. but where in scripture does it direct us to support that people? are beyond us but our job is to support good candidate. after some evangelical leaders say we need and that man to stand up to the bullying from the left, the implication is a good man or woman who plays by the rules is not up to the task. it is like we are hiring a hit man to play dirty for the sake of government. this has nothing to do with our faith. it reflects a lack of faith in the power of virtue. we don't need to do bad to do good. in fact, that is impossible.

ends and means both count in god'd s moral accounting. the final argument mystifies me. mainly, donald trump is not that. in fact, he is a truth teller and humble. trump has implied judicial nominees should be -- he has played with fire by suggesting that the election is rated, setting up the possibility of serious civil strife if he loses. he is a man that never admits he is wrong and really asks god for forgiveness because he believes he rarely does anything wrong. and imp is a good man, have a different definition of what good is, i will stand against trump and clinton. vote for evanl mcmullen -- a good man who is on the ballot.

he can be a write-in candidate in him was every state. electoralwins all 270 votes, the house of representatives will decided and if mcmullen can be elected, improbable, yes. impossible, no. trumppecially because does not deserve our vote. it is an honorable path. hate the thought of hillary clinton being elected president and she will never get my vote, but i will not compromise principals for the sake of party allegiance. if trump becomes what it means they republican, i will not be republican. hopefully, his nomination is a case of temporary insanity, but i will not allow trump to be the face of the nation for the world. i will not allow old purity to stand in the place of virtue, not with my vote. while not stand idly by

the national character is polluted, not with my vote. as christians, we are called to do god's bidding. this is doing what we should and entrusting in the results. bill. thank you, bishop harry, your response. five minutes. harry: first, bill, thank you for your comments. have a sincere faith. and i think what i'm looking at is, as an individual, who has run the campaign from a media perspective, almost like a shock jock. saying things that get attention. coming from a kind of construction manager kind of

perspective -- i am looking at that as this candidate is growing, he is making some strides. having theh to one-liners, other things, serves them well in the primary. i will go back to this idea that , the 11 or 12 years i have been working on speaking out on social issues, i'm engaging as a conservative because of my christian background. i think it is time for us to face race issues with practical solutions and face class issues with practical solutions. i think that unfortunately i am looking at the choices.

unfortunately, the democratic party has had somewhat of an adulterous relationship with the black community and the hispanic community. it is like they show up at midnight and want what they want. after they have gotten what they , the boat, we don't get no flowers, no dinner, no romance. mp candidacy is a menace o manifestation of the fact that conservatives have failed to carry. they talk a lot about sensible. they've done nothing. because of that, folks are looking for options. i am willing to take my vote and take a risk to make a judgment

and assessment that one definition of insanity, if we do the same old thing and expect different results, then we are insane. i do believe that the thought behind the character comments you made, lesser of two evils, makes a lot of sense. that therey agree has to be a higher standard as we go forward for a republican unconcerned, if i could go on beyond my time limit, unconcerned that us debating about mr. trump in the wrong way, we're not addressing the fact that most liberals see all of us as uncle toms or racists.

of there were in the back the portals -- bag of the deplorables. we have finally stop saying that big government is bad and all of these things and finally do something of changing the way big government works in the world. we have to also show some compassion. again, i think trump started off wrong. about-face and going into the black and hispanic communities is a sign that he may be a changed individual. i'm praying. i wish we were not at this point but this is where we are. for the reason i have stated, i believe that pragmatically

addressing and looking at class and race issues with an eye towards fixing them is the only way forward for america in a practical sense. thank you. >> thank you, harry. bill, your response. five minutes. bill: thank you. i completely agree with mr. jackson that we have to do a lot more to care for the poor. i've been deeply involved with the board nationally and internationally and some people say how can you be conservative and think about the poor? i'm a conservative because i care about the board. a segment thats has been working on this for a long time and another that say those people do not vote for us, we don't have to worry about them. fact you say he is a shock

jock, i'm concerned about that for two reasons. one, let's assume he does not mean it. that concerns me because he is saying things to get elected that he does not mean. the other possibility is he doesn't mean it. i come back to the data where are the recurrent themes -- i come back to where are the recurrent themes? his admiration of people who admires in this country. why would be admire a guy like putin or the tiananmen square butchers? why would he say this and not just once, but again and again? i think that is what he appreciates and we should take that seriously. one of the most profound statements he has made that concerns me is what he said in the debate.

military leaders will obey you. he walked it back this much the next day. how about the judicial nomination? i would call it a dog whistle on the second amendment, that maybe they would be taken out. he walks back. i'm kidding, kind of. is that the kind of society we want, that we are killing one another? it has worked within the rule of law for a long time and rightly so. we don't advocate killing abortionists or punishing women. we want to work appropriately. the rule of law is oppression based. look around the world. arehow many places that punitive democracies. if you see the police coming, you run the other way. not because you are corrupt, because they are.

to think that the rule of law is in violent here. it is profoundly reckless. it makes my blood boil when he calls for extradition things . knocking the crap out of them. i think he appeals in people that are so mad and so angry at the bigotry and intolerance of the other side that they want her own guy to be the hitman. we have to trust god. we have to trust god's way. we cannot take shortcuts. my concern is trump is an attempt to take a shortcut. >> thank you, bill. we are off to a good start. i want to push back from your position for each one of you. i will start with janet. democrattrump was a

even though he donated to democrats. you know he donated to pro-choice causes. you know he has a mixed record on planned parenthood. he has supported a lot of pro-abortion candidates and abortion seems to be the most important question for a lot of evangelical christians. how do you reconcile that with a vote for donald trump and you trust him now? janet: absolutely, i can trust him. d goes to the coat ofte dali levi. he's given to pro-life, democrats, conservatives. that is quite honestly the art of the deal. let me go back to what you said before.

he said this is basically a family discussion and it is enthusiastic. it'd probably conducted on the hollowed halls of the curtis, not c-span. but as long as you are watching, we will have this discussion. why didn't we have this discussion four years ago? we had a man from massachusetts that was pro-abortion before he was for life, supporting obamacare before he said he was opposed to it. this is the evangelical conversation, i love my friends were members of church of the jesus christ latter day saints. this is an enthusiastical conversation. he believed jesus was safe and he believed that he would return, yet we have a member of our panel that is advocating another mormon. if we are going to have an event -- a conversation about evangelicals, let's put doctrine on the table. >> thank you, janet.

been eric, trump has accused of denigrating minorities. been accused of undercutting the christian view of the sanctity of human life, the image of god by the way he talks about them. i think this all started on june 16 when he came down the escalator and maybe opening speech about what he felt, concerning mexico and the people coming across. i want to read the direct quote. "people that have lots of problems, they are bringing those problems. they are bringing drugs, bringing crime. they are rapists. are good i assume, people.

andeak to border guards they speak to what we are heading." that is the quote. i want to emphasize the phrase "and some are good people." can you deny that statement is true? unclear, because of are goodat, " some people." if that statement does not show he is denigrating minorities, there is another quote or action you would use to justify he is a racist or undercuts the human dignity of immigrants? >> i think the hyperbole of the statement overshadows the point you were trying to get at. he was not trying to draw a blank and statement but unfortunately it was her that way by a lot of people and a lot of times perception is more reality. was histhe bigger issue

treatment of the judge from indiana. he says his heritage cannot be there because he was mexican a nativeborn american. swedish but i'm an american. i think that in and of itself was extremely problematic. nd ive to tell you, you an d may not be hearing some of these things but there are some that are right and they are. these people believe in particularly, as, the white race in this country. you engage them and they believe the policies that benefit white americans are the policies trump advocates. i first came into contact with these people because of their

hostility towards adoption in evangelical circles because christians have the greatest propensity of any group in this country to adopt outside of their race. laws would very like that prohibit that and i am troubled that they hear donald trump and think they are one of them. they certainly here at and i think the campaign made a very bad mistake in fostering those dog whistles for that group. >> thank you, eric. bishop jackson, trump has put forth a list of prospects of supreme courts. right away, he said -- not necessarily the list -- at one point, he alluded to his sister making a good judge in some context. here's the question, given the

donor record, the past supported democrats record, past unevenness, at least, on the planned parenthood issue. why do you think he would keep the promise, go with that list of people like the ones on that list? is this part of the art of the deal? is this a bait and switch? is he playing us? what do you think? harry: i don't think he is playing us. thisnk he understands, at point, i'm not sure he considered it at the very beginning that he has really got to ingratiate himself with a certain demographic. selectivee christian community to be the

folks he really wants to proceed -- receive support from. i think he will keep the promise as much as any politician will keep a promise biggest they believe it is in their best interest for reelection and that kind of thing. what i see is a man who has been shaped in the debates and process who is starting to understand these different groups are the groups that i have to have with me over the long haul. i think that is why the list was offered in order to be specific, to tell conservatives and evangelical christians i will do some things that are helpful for you. >> thank you. has been accused of mocking the disabled and i believe he used that phrase. there is a clip where he is

quoting a reporter that seems to be antagonistic or questioning him in an on fairway. he falails his arm. a group called catholics for trump put together a video analyzing this claim. the same arm flailing, the slurred speech pattern trump uses in the speech to talk about a general he does not like. trump clip,lics for there is another video of trump using the same flailing and slurred speech pattern for ted cruz. ted cruz is not physically disabled. the general is not physically disabled. what did you think of this analysis by catholics for trump? matters, do you know

of any other case -- who and when -- that he has mock somebody that is disabled? bill: let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say for a minute he was not mocking the disability of the supporter. i think a lot of times unfair rap get an because things happen out of context. and we ever seen donald trump make fun of any other people on how they look or how they act? let me think. just about every day. fat people, yes. carly fiorina, yes. hillary clinton, yes. rand paul, yes. ask yourself, i don't know about you, how many people in your life who are above seven great -- the seventh grade, make fun of people of how they look?

many people. that is like middle school, elementary school childless behavior. he is doing it on the national stage. that is corrosive. he said something deeply wrong about the man's character. >> thank you. i'm going to allow eric or bill to answer this question, whoever wants to shoot for it. most christians have not been able to vote at all. probably most christians today still do not have a vote, places like china and so forth. those who have been able to vote in most of church history and even today don't get to vote for candidates that make a good advertisement for the church or christianity. they are voting between a candidate that is controlled by

choosing between that and a candidate chosen by the military. christians and where they are, they do cast a vote. to vote inprivileged the past for candidates we have identified with, they are sort of he arose oroes. do you see a distinction between this idea -- voting and supporting a candidate embarrasses the republican party or the church, and just this decision you have to make as most christians have had to make and other countries have had to make between two choices, and you have to do the best you can do. it seems that trump is the better of the two choices. thishave been asked

question a lot in various forms. i always go back to the apostle in romans that government is an interes instrut of god. who bys a roman citizen right of his citizenship that we know from the history was allowed to vote in the assemblies and forums in jerusalem. we knew that he could exercise his vote as a roman citizen. but he never wrote about it. if you want to vote between the lesser of two evils, do it. i don't think we should be compelling each other to violate our consciences to vote or not vote. that is why i am not going to tell anyone don't vote. but we don't have to.

yes, voting is a right as an american citizen, bii have a higher obligation to advance the kingdom of god, and when the two come in conflict, i've got to go with advancing the kingdom of god. >> picking up on what he said about the lesser of two evils, sometimes there is this view that a candidate is good or a candidate is evil. a decision is good or a decision is evil. if you study ethics, there is a whole field about this and various schools of thoughts about this. we heard a list of candidates earlier. people like j.f.k., and roosevelt and jefferson, some of the people that we say these are good, these are heroes, these are founding fathers, we have statues here in the city. but they weren't just good. they were also good and evil. and some candidates are mostly good with some evil, some are

mostly evil with some good. it is always a mix. we are in a fallen world. i am thinking about the difference between the greater good, deciding what is the greater good, and what is the lesser of two evils? either want of you want to speak to that? does that make sense? >> i will say this as this juncture. i think the checks and balances in our system we know come from a biblical perspective and understanding. and because we've got people with mixed motives and issues that they themselves may not even understand, we do have a system of balancing out the different powers of the three branches of government. i would say we will never have a 100% pure candidate. but in this system i think it would be terrible if we don't exercise our right to vote and

commit to doing our best to grapple with these kinds of decisions. that my -- is my answer. >> i think you heard this. i was in a meeting, and a do not trust id i donald trump to always do the right thing on all of our issues all time. then he said i do trust hillary clinton to do the wrong thing on our issues all the time. how do you process that statement? >> and that is where i come back to the lesser of two evil arguments being inadequate in this case. there is another candidate. van mcmumen. macmullen. i don't vote based on faith. i vote on character. i know many christians who have

good character and others who have deplorable character. i am not looking for a pastor in chief, and so the character issue is hugely important to me. ultimately i do have another choice. i live in virginia, and i will . voting for evan macmullen if there was no such thing as write-in, there comments a time where i am being put into an impossible choice. i think there is a more vitt bus decision in that situation. it is because i do have a much higher standard for our republican nominee than i do for a liberal nominee. i care more about who we put forward and support. that is why i don't go by that reasoning. >> this is a different kind of a question. i want everyone to answer. i want to start with janet

here. assuming your candidate wins in november, what is the one likely consequence or result that most concerns you? > that most concerns me? >> if trump wins what, is the nagging doubt you may have? >> that christians won't be praying and fasting for him on a regular basis. they did say we are to honor the king. we are to pray for those in authority because we are the beneficiaries when that happens. so i would be doing that on a regular basis. but i have to telling you i am struggling with the math. if you vote for evan or you don't vote at all, you have voted hillary clinton. it is math, absolutely math. so you may have the momentary i feel good and i feel rasheserachese, and i have advanced the kingdom of god

when you have done none of that. you haven't been pragmatic or done what was right by seeking the welfare of the city. so i would have a problem with that. absentia. name mike pence. he represents everything we evangelicals support. the character and the eportment. half of that ticket is absolutely, undeniably a person that proclaims his relationship with jesus christ. hat needs to be discuss. >> there are those who say we can't trust trump with the list. he is making a lot of promses. this could be bait and switch. he has made one executive

decision, and only one, which is the vice president. you cannot really imagine any of the other 17 or 16 candidates picking someone better than pence. he is not perfect. there was one big flaw that people criticize him for up in indiana, but it is at least remarkable. then i would say secondly, this isn't just about the candidates. it's about the party platforms. the republican platform has never been more conservative. the democrat platform has never been more lillibridge rat. what do you think about those two facts? do either one of you want to take that? >> on mike pence, i worked in the white house. the vice president has precisely as much power as the president allows him or her to have. otherwise it has been likened to a president -- essentially you just attend funerals around

the world. so i have no confidence in that. does donald trump have a reputation as a man who likes to surround himself with people who challenge his authority and likes to hear from accidenting opinions? o. i don't have any confidence this man would be able to have any influence on donald trump. >> that is good. we only have about five minutes, but if you have a closing comment, we will start down with eric and work our way down here. closing thought, maybe a minute or minute and a half. >> two thoughts. one, like janet, i went to law school. god help me in math. if there are a million voters and one decides not to vote for hillary clinton or donald trump, there are now 9

99,999,999 voters. oo, stead of needing 5 0001 to get a trouble? if i am not -- i would disagree that the math argument works. it just takes one voter out of the vote pool. i will be voting for peyton manning, someone i can be proud of to become president of the united states. my greatest fear if he were to get elected would be that he would have a back ache. if we take trump at his word that he gave donations to all sides because he is a businessman, if we take him at his word that he is going to appoint these judges, if we take him at his word that he is going to do all these things, then we need to take him at his word that he was quite happy to have these affairs with married women and not ask for forgiveness, and that he would like to have sex with his

daughter, that he was ok filing for bankruptcy and letting others carry the debt for him and didn't ask for forgiveness. if you want to go in and vote for him, fine, but i think as christians we harm our witness to advocate for him. >> if peyton manning gets elected, the secret service name for him will be omaha. 234u78 one the process. the process said there were 17 candidates. the people spoke. not the people in washington, no the pundits, the people spoke. and when the people spoke, there was one man standing, and his name is donald trump. f we believe in the public and process, but i am far more concerned about the church. i have never seen such infighting in my life. it is an embarrassment to the cause of christ. i am very concerned that once the election is now dust in the annals of history, we are going to wonder whether or not we are going to be able to unite arms and move forward again for the advancement of the kingdom of

jesus christ. we are going to hold ought against other brother because they didn't vote the way we thought they should vote. so i would end with this. it is an old saying. we are not quite sure to whom it can be subdescribed but still profound. in' essentials, unity. in non-essentials, liberty, in all things, charity. >> bill? >> i don't want to give into the self-fulfilling prophecy that is his just a binary choice. framers never assumed as such. they didn't have janet's confidence in the majority, which is why they had so many checks. in terms of the process, i am working well within the constitutional framework put out by the founders when i am voting for evan macmullen. the math can work if we make it work. i think we need to take

seriously trump's words, and we need to stop hoping that is a 500ster and a sharl contain and lying all the time. i think there are words we need to look for, and he says them again and again and believe them. >> well, i am excited about this election for this reason. believe that the only healing alm possible for america is going to come forth from church if she rises up and stans in the gap, prays, votes and exercises her liberties. i believe that there is a redefinition going on. it is a time of tremendous change, and that ultimately god is allowing us to see some of our biggest cultural flaws through the flaws of these candidates. so i am hopeful that god is not

through with america yet. i believe the church needs to be more unified, and i am anxious to see who ultimately wins and the gospel will be preached no matter who is elected. i am excited about the future and what it holds for us. >> folks, let's thank our panel members. [applause] >> i am geri johnson. we want to thank you for atching on c-span 2. i want to remind you that christians vote. it is just one of the things we do. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute]

>> this headline from the hill today. enthusiasm gap looms for clinton. a newspaper writes that hillary clinton is running her operation by the book, spending millions of dollars on staff, tv adams, data modeling and field offices in battleground states, while donald trump relies largely on media coverage to fuel his candidacy and his field operation is

scalabrine tal. -- is skeletal. his poll numbers have improved. that is because trump voters are more enthusiastic than clinton supporters, and that says the hill makes some republicans bullish about trump as pro's -- trump's prospect. >> for campaign 2016, c-span continues on road to the white house. >> we all want to get back to making america strong and great again. >> i am running for everyone working hard to support their families, everyone who has been knocked down by gets back up. >> ahead, live coverage of the presidential and vice presidential debates on c-span, the c-span radio app and c-span darlington. monday, september 26 is the first presidential debate from new york. then on october 4, vice

presidential candidates debate at loaningwood university in farmville, virginia. on sunday, october 9, washington university in st. louis hosts the second proceedings debate, leading up to the third and final debate between hillary clinton and donald trump taking place at the university of nevada las vegas on october 19. live coverage of the presidential and vie presidential debates on c-span. listen live on the free c-span radio app, or watch live or any time on demand at c-span.org. >> at the table now is meredith, who is policy director to talk to us about presidential campaign ethics and the topic of transparency. transparency and greater is issue or problem this presidential cycle? if so, why? guest: it is a challenge in every cycle. what is different about this

cycle is you have one candidate who has never run for public office. there is no record. no 10-year or 20-year record of being in the public eye. with mr. trump you do not have a lot of information. most of the other candidates have been in the public eye for so long there is a lot of information. with hillary clinton you have the opposite. someone who has been in the public eye for decades. there is a lot of information available. there is an overarching narrative that has followed her through that time in public life about her struggle to be transparent. host: how do you gauge transparency? how do you figure out if what folks are putting out is worth it in terms of people knowing what is going on? guest: it can be difficult. a lot of the time you have people who want information. there is a public policy

question about how appropriate is it? let me give you an example. many years ago there was a decision to require candidates to file financial disclosure statements. the idea was for the statement to have information allowing the public to determine the magnitude of a conflict of interest. you had categories of values for holdings. there was the decision to go down that path as opposed to releasing your irs form. your tax forms obviously have other information that may not be relevant to your serving a public office. at the presidential level we have a tradition established where they do release their tax forms. you have a public policy standard that says financial disclosure is sufficient. you have a tradition that says for the president we want tax forms.

where is the public policy, the main street, in that discussion? that is the discussion the country is having. for the presidential level, you are talking about something different, even to members of congress and governors. position most powerful and there is a tradition to understand that as president your ability to make decisions has such a wide ranging effect. there have been efforts to require that the irs tax forms be disclosed that has never gone anywhere. would be thek that best way, because i don't know the tax forms are the best way for the public to gauge interest. we know the financial disclosure forms as they currently exist are. host: phone numbers for guests. meredith mcgehee with the campaign legal center, policy director. we have separate lines or

democrats and republicans and independents. calls. over to your campaignlegalcenter.org is the website. let's hear a little bit from hillary clinton's phone interview with tom joyner talking about transparency. hard tonk i worked very be more transparent than not just my opponent, but in a comparison to anybody who has run. the medical information i put out. that meets and exceeds the standard that other presidential candidates, including president obama, mitt romney, and others have met. my tax returns are out there, 40 years of transparency. questionsat the real seem to be directed toward donald trump and his failure to

even meet the most minimalistic standards that we expect from someone being the nominee of one of the two major parties. host: meredith mcgehee, what do you think? a point that she has put out a treasure trove of information. tendency in the media to have what i would call a false equivalency. she gets attacked for something she admitted. mr. trump has been nowhere near as transparent. that is a fact, not a pro or icon. con here the amount of information available on the side of hillary clinton is much greater than donald trump. host: we will talk more about donald trump as the segment goes on. let's get a call in from battle creek, michigan. good morning. caller: i wanted to talk about the trout tax return problem.

trump taxn -- the return problem. it has been suggested that donald trump is lying about this. that he is not under audit. he was asked in an interview, release thetrump irs notification that he is under audit, and what years are under audit. the spokesperson said, no, he could not release that information. i am frankly not sure what years are under audit. has mr. trump ever said this year and this year are under audit, but i will release the years that are not under audit? at this point, i don't believe we can believe trump when he says he is under audit. he should release things, the returns that are not under audit. guest: i would agree at the

presidential level the expectation and tradition the candidate would release the tax forms is part of the american political process. when mitt romney was running, there was a big push because he was considered to be a very wealthy man. people wanted to know where the wealth sat. there is a line here that i think is important to make clear. one part of this is where are the conflicts and potential conflicts when you have large amounts of holdings? some of it is people just wanting to find out how well the heat is, there is almost a loss of part. art. we need to step back and say of getting interest information whether it is at the presidential, senatorial, or gubernatorial levels. the point is that not i doubt how wealthy any candidate is, but to say to the public, here

are my holdings. i will be transparent when i make a decision that if there is a potential conflict it will be clear to the public what my holdings are, what the potential conflict could be, and i can be held accountable for the decisions i make relative to the holdings. that is the point of the transparency. not so we can find out how wealthy any individual candidate is. indiana.saw, democratic line. caller: mi on? on? i -- am i host: yes, go ahead. caller: i want to know why there is not more of a push for trump. it seems they stayed on hillary with everything having to do with her financial disclosures. the press on bards were with -- bombards her with all this

pressure. frump with his financial stuf going on with russia, all of that. stuff that has been brought out about his financial -- why isn't there more of a push to get him to, as far as the press and any get him to beto more transparent with his financial disclosures? truly is as who he a person as far as charity. all of the lies that he says he has done for people. characterring out his of who he truly, really is. hillary, they have done everything to make her look like

she is nothing. i think there should be more pressure put on him to get his out there.taxes host: meredith mcgehee? guest: in the coverage of presidential politics, one phenomena -- one phenomenon that is an overarching narrative, it is like the dan quayle is not smart because he cannot spell "potato." gore is robotic and wears brown suits to warm up his image. the over ark of hillary clinton has been secrecy coming out of whitewater. a series of activities. the media grabs onto that and maintains the narrative. they often follow people through

public life. think of richard nixon when he was labeled tricky dick. american tendency in politics to define the overarching narrative for each character, if you will, in american politics. it is dangerous that it is not thed out a full picture of character of the candidate that will potentially lead the country. in terms of donald trump, because he is not in public office, he is a newcomer -- even more than if you compare him to dwight eisenhower, who had not run for public office but had been in public service for most of his life. , isphenomenon with trump that none of it has been sticking because he is new to this arena. this arena is a very particular arena that creates overarching narratives that follow politicians through their lives. trump's business

empire, what is known about it? you mentioned mitt romney, but are there cases in history or presidents had significant business dealings and questions have come up about conflicts of interest? guest: yes. this is not new to american politics. kennedy, his family and father of money. there were questions raised about the holdings when he was running. have the financial disclosure regulations in place at the time. the roosevelts, a very wealthy family. richat time it was the were going to take care of all of us. ,ompare that to a harry truman who was seen as comparatively poor. it was a significant contrast in american politics. the notion of having wealth and

the upper echelons for presidential candidates is fairly common throughout history. what is different this year than , not only that trump doesn't have a record, but with mitt romney and donald trump is rather than having family wealth you have the question of business wealth. actually raising questions simply because of the holdings they have. as you make decisions those holdings can be affected significantly high the decisions of the president. lancaster, california. good morning glenn. caller: i would like to talk about hillary, what she did to herself. she set up a private e-mail server. she made money through corruption, pointing to people who donatedhnson $500,000 to the democratic party. james comey, who used to be her

banker, who did her tax records. she has got away with so many criminal acts as secretary of state that the american people -- she has no right to run for president. she is a criminal. clinton foundation is a money laundering machine for or in governments. she has ruined the american dream. her and barack obama with their corrupt, crony crap. thank you. host: why don't you start with a little bit about the opinion piece you recently wrote and published in law news. legalized corruption? why hillary clinton will not be prosecuted for clinton foundation allegations. guest: the point i was making in

is that there is one perception of what constitutes corruption in the public, and another standard of corruption in the court. what you have seen from the supreme court in particular is a step-by-step process in which the definition of corruption that can be prosecuted has been made this big. it is very narrow. it started from a standard which , when you have any appearance of corruption, very broad terms of making sure the american people have faith in their public officials. citizens united, that standard was knocked down a notch. they said if there is the appearance of a conflict, justice kennedy wrote, that will not decrease america's faith in the government.