talks about dna testing services and how genetic data could be used against consumers. as always, we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter as well. ♪ host: good morning. it is saturday, december 2. topping the headlines are two major stories, starting with the senate passage of a major tax overhaul just a few hours ago. the measure passed early this morning by a 51-49 vote. a major victory percent majority leader mitch mcconnell and for issident donald trump, who looking for his first legislative victory before the end of the year. that was tempered by the guilty plea at a former trump administration official. general michael flynn admitted

to lying to the fbi about his postelection discussions with russian officials and is now cooperating with the mueller investigation. a sign that other members of president trump's and her circle maybe in the crosshairs. we are getting your reaction to general flynn's guilty plea. republicans can call (202) 748-8001. democrats can call (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also reach us on social ,edia on twitter at @cspanwj and on facebook.com/c-span. the guilty plea tops the headlines this morning in the washington post. former national security adviser michael flynn pleaded guilty friday to lying to the fbi about his contact with russian andssador sergey kislyak, in an ominous sign for the white house, that he is cooperating in

the ongoing probe of possible coordination between the trump campaign and the kremlin to influence the 2016 election. when flynn was forced out of the white house in february, officials said he misled the administration, including vice president pence about the context. the court records and people familiar with the contact indicated he was acting in consultation with senior trump transition officials, including president trump's son-in-law jared kushner in his dealings with the diplomat. that is the key story today as we are talking to you, getting your reaction to that guilty plea by michael flynn. what the you think about it and what do you expect to happen next? republicans can call (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. more from the

washington post, which breaks out how this investigation has all come together. "mueller has moved so swiftly it has left trump's team grasping for answers about how far the probe might ultimately reach. on friday, the news about the deal broke about the regular senior staff meeting at the white house, leaving many feeling helpless. i don't know really what is going on, said wha one advisor. they requested anonymity to discuss private conversations. who is it going to implicate? what are they going to say? flynn's cooperation poses risks for the white house, unlike george papadopoulos who had minimal contact and met with trump just once. flynn was a key member of trump 's and her circle and was at one

point considered for the vice presidential nomination. ray from florida on the democratic line. caller: thank you for c-span. i think michael flynn is a scapegoat. i feel very sorry he is having to do this. host: what you mean by him being a scapegoat? caller: i think somebody has to take the fall. it is like with any leader, subordinates will stand in front of a firing squad to protect the leader. i kind of feel that is what is happening with michael flynn. if the democrats can get any other trump supporters, they will do the same thing until they get trump. i print -- i pray to god that doesn't happen. host: why is that? i feel the president is not guilty of these accusations, that he never colluded with the russians.

they are just trying to get him impeached so they can get michael pence in there. politician.s a trump is not a politician. he is an outsider and they hate him. that is one of the reasons they hate him. host: harvey is calling in from virginia on the independent line. what is your reaction to this guilty plea by general flynn? caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i am a retired navy chief. the question i have -- president trump surrounded himself with a lot of generals. those guys led thousands of people. lying,ersonality about covering up, it's a sad day in the united states. those people actually led thousands of people and the way they treat people today is unreal to me.

thank you for taking my call. from tuscaloosa, alabama on the democratic line. what is your reaction to this news? caller: i would like to thank you for being my first and only post that i like -- host that i like. i have been calling since 1985. now she owns that place. my response to michael flynn, former general flynn is that his son also was involved into this russia thing. news where he indicated he was involved with wiki leaks. he was paid $8,000 to put out a fake information about hillary

clinton representing someone that was a child molester. host: do you think the reason that general flynn struck this deal and is cooperating with the investigation is because of his son? he is trying to protect him in some way? caller: yes. also himself. he is trying to protect his son and himself. since this is going on, i don't think this is the last of it. i think are more folks it will be indicted, as well as trump's son. you can write this under calendar. once special prosecutor mueller starts investigating trump's son, donald trump, jr., you will inflection going on with north korea to affect with going on with the special prosecutor, mr. mueller. host: let's hear more from the

washington post, which is some background about general michael flynn from his rise to the white house to his fall. michael o'hanlon, a senior fellow at the brookings institution said he demonstrated restraint and political acumen when he served as a top intelligence officer in iraq and afghanistan during the obama administration. many of the same virtues that were characteristic of that period seem to have been lost in how he handled the trump phenomenon. -- it goes onsay to say flynn was known as a nonconformist, someone who was not afraid of voice criticism or buck the rules. at times business things created problems, causing a reprimand after sharing privileged information with partner forces in afghanistan.

his hard-driving style created friction with his staff and with officials at the pentagon and he was ultimately ousted from that post during the obama administration. mark is calling in from melbourne, florida on the independent line. what the you think today? caller: how are you doing? host: what the you think about this guilty plea by michael flynn? caller: it is a great day for america. in my opinion donald trump is the most unqualified president in the history of this country. i think his administration is totally corrupt. the x fbi mueller, director is a tough prosecutor, and he is going to get to the bottom of this. hopefully eventually donald trump will be removed from

office. he has no business being president of the united states. joining us now to give us a little bit more information about this guilty plea and what it means is washington times national security reporter dan voyboylin. . thank you for joining us on the phone guest: my pleasure. host: explain what this guilty plea means and how significant is it in the mueller investigation? guest: this guilty plea in washington today, i'm standing of the capital right now having a cup of coffee. it was feel in the city shaken yesterday by michael flynn's guilty plea. there was a two-page letter of offense from special prosecutor robert mueller and it described how michael flynn has played guilty to lying to the f the eye about conversations he has with

russia's ambassador last december during the transition. riod from president obama to president trump. the significance is it is really intense and people spent yesterday trying to wrestle with this. i think there are two major takeaways. the first is that it is far more powerful than the last set of indictments, the first indictments they came from the special counsel of this russia investigation. those were against donald trump's campaign chairman paul manafort and another aid. this crime that michael flynn pled guilty to push the special counsel directly inside the white house. it also -- that is very important.

the second piece puts it inside the white house with someone who is a national security adviser. flynn only served for three weeks but this is a post condoleezza rice held, henry kissinger held, colin powell held. it is the glue between the whole national security apparatus and the oval office. people really -- it has wrestling, struggling with what is next year. host: explain what the nature of the communication that michael flynn admitted to having with russian officials and who else they might implicate? guest: great question. it was a little vague. i think the special counsel, the way they are putting information out to the public space, it is a strategy that people speculate they have about getting more people to potentially flip, get more evidence. these types of investigations

work in concentric circles. what do these two medications mean? there was circuit kislyak, the russian ambassador, and it has to do with the possibility of russian sanctions being eased. this is what michael flynn pled guilty to. these conversations had to do with that. in the past he had lied to the fbi that that was ever discussed. he lied to the fbi that he never actually met with mr. kislyak. that puts him in a place where he is guilty of lying to the fbi, which carries a five year charge, five years in jail. there is also this idea that within this letter of offense robert mueller put out it is -- when michael flynn was national security adviser he had discussions with high-level people at the white house. there is a lot of speculation that other folks knew he was having this discussion with the russian ambassador, which would mean if he lied about it, it is

possible there were discussions with other people hide inside the white house -- high inside the white house. that spins back around to this larger question, is robert mueller getting it the end yet there was potentially obstruction of justice after the crimes? did people lie about them, potentially obstructing justice? host: talk about the white house reaction to this guilty plea. the president lawyer downplaying michael flynn's association and his role in the administration. talk a little bit about that. guest: that's right. michaeldid downplay flynn's role. that has been the white house's de facto stance ever since michael flynn but the white house in this cloud of flame and smoke. back in early february, donald

impliedso said -- they it was easy to see they were trying to get out the idea that flynn was a liar and that, as you just said, he did not have access to that much. it seems like they are stumbling a little bit, trying to isolate this damage. as we can see with the mueller investigation, manafort last month and then this month's michael flynn, people in washington are wringing their hands and sweat is burning down the backs of some people at the white house wondering who is next. host: michael flynn was close of the president in his role as national security adviser. dan, people in the white house have been told this investigation is near its and an issue -- its end and should rep up a christmas. what does this latest involvement shed light on that prediction made by white house attorneys?

guest: i think the white house attorneys are saying that, but as we just discussed it's a contradiction between what they are saying, that michael flynn lied and he was not that significant of a chess piece on the big board versus what appears to be happening at the department of justice and robert mueller, former fbi director, is investigation. how can his credibility -- how can you maintain credibility? there were attacks from the white house trying to imply he was somehow associated with improper things that had gone on during the obama administration and secretary of state hillary clinton. at this point you have -- how do i describe it? this continuing heavyweight battle between the executive branch and the country's department of justice. oylan,.an b

thank you for joining us on the phone this morning. host: we are getting your reaction to the michael flynn guilty plea. good morning. let me just say you are a breath of fresh air. i would like to make a comment. i have a couple of points to make. first of all, the person -- the first caller, when people call the allottedn line, she called on the democratic line and she was clearly a republican. she mentioned flynn as a scapegoat and she is presupposing the president is not guilty. that remains to be seen. my second point is i am looking at this plea with some

trepidation, but also i'm thinking flynn is key. when you look at the chronology, he was called in because of the firing of comey. this was precipitated by the president when he clearly stated to lester holt he would like to -- the russia investigation go away and he would like to see flynn go easy -- see him go easy on flynn. i'm thinking since flynn is what precipitated the special counsel, he has got to be key. the has got to be able to name names, and i refuse to believe the president had no prior knowledge. the president or the vice president or their subordinates that were taking care of the presidential business.

host: let me ask you this. this investigation started to investigate russia's role during the election, in meddling with the election. so far everything general plan as pled guilty to involved after the election. ors that change your idea affect your views about this investigation at all? caller: absolutely not. i think we are on the outside and we are just -- we don't know what all mueller has. that.s why i am saying i have some trepidation because other charges against the trump administration, they have basically crashed and burned. i just want the facts to come out. i just want flynn, and i'm thinking that from the

transition into the oval office, flynn was thre. and they went to downplay it in say he was only there for 25 days. flynn is the only person that trump has not thrown under the bus. host: let's look at some reaction from others, including the fbi director who president trump fired, former fbi director james comey. "leteeted and said, justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever 5:24." stream. amos also some reaction from lawmakers. dianeat b feinstein said is more than about lying to the fbi. this shows a trump associate they go shooting with the russians against u.s. policy and interests before donald trump took office and after it was

announced that russia had interfered in our election." chris coons reacted to the news as well saying the guilty plea from president trump's former national michael flynn is a clear indication that special counsel mueller industries have found conclusive evidence of illegal activity and are actively proceeding with their investigation." senator richard lumen ball, -- umenthal.ught -- bl also from a cnn reporter, "lindsey graham said to me i would urge him not to pardon michael flynn, but that would be up to the president." some reaction from both democrats and republicans yesterday after the guilty plea a former national security adviser michael flynn.

leavenworth, kansas. it will take me a few times, chris. caller: thanks. i want to say number one you just nailed it with the last caller. the bottom line is robert mueller is brought in to investigate collusion with the russians during the election, that somehow tampered with the electoral process. whathas nothing to do with flynn got charged with, which was lying to the fbi investigators about something he was doing as national security adviser. after the election. the bottom line is even though itwas bad conduct on flynn, had nothing to do with collusion with the russians, nothing to do with the electoral process,

nothing to do with collusion. at the end of the day it does not prove anything to what mueller's actually investigating. host: let me ask you this. although we know this one charge that we have this guilty plea from michael flynn, there might be more that robert mueller and his investigators know that could of all things that happened before the election. the you think it is too soon to make a determination whether there is any sort of coordination there are not? caller: i think it's a possibility. that is obviously a possibility, but if it was, widely -- why would he execute a flea deal before flynn has given any information that is indictable or proven anything towards collusion during the election?

they have already given the charges. that has already been a plea deal. he has already cooperated. if he is cooperating with anything that has to do with election or collusion, it seems very preemptive that he would actually get a plea deal from the prosecutor. that is normally a plea deal -- a plea deal would come after he has delivered the information that will indict other people. host: the new york times today has a section asking what the plea deal means for the special counsel's investigation. it says, "in trying to figure out what happened with russia and the trump campaign, mr. mueller appears to be following inward,gy of moving pressuring people to cooperate. mr. flynn may have already given information to mr. mueller steam that is not mentioned in these court filings.

but one question raised by the documents is to the unnamed people are with whom he spoke about these matters and what these people told federal investigators? reportedly took the lead for the transition team on the un security council resolution about israel. earlier this month, mr. mueller's investigators interviewed mr. kushner about his interactions with the russian ambassador." is calling for maryland on the independent line. what is your reaction to general flynn's guilty plea? caller: good morning. i want to say a few quick things. i do teach american government so i know a little bit about what of talking about. i'm sure everybody can remember back to the can start investigation of bill clinton. investigation of

bill clinton. i don't particularly agree with it, having unlimited resources and time, but that is the system and that's the way it works. of courte than 85% cases in the united states are played out. people flee. plea.-- people is the way the system works. mueller was initially investigating collusion with the russians. i believe it has turned towards obstruction of justice and he is obviously gotten when and in my humble opinion for the next few weeks and months more domino's are going to fall. in my opinion, eventually it will lead up to the top. that is my two cents. host: what about this notion that in the white house the attorneys for the president have been trying to allay the fears,

saying this looks like it is wrapping up? his it seem like it is wrapping up? caller: in my opinion, no. of course, you know, the president's right hand lawyer is going to make him feel comfortable and try to make it seem like it is kind of normal business. that he is only going to plead guilty to one charge. i'm sure there were multiple charges. he was facing significant jail time under the logan act, which was passed in 1799. this is not a charge that is used at all. again, this is our system of laws. folks may not like it but we will have a civil society here, people need to abide under our laws.

host: pat from kentucky on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to share a few things if i could. saying -- he played guilty to this. i think it makes it more clear we do have traders in the white house -- traiters in the white house. some of the trump supporters don't seem to understand we are concerned that we have an unfit and demonstrably incompetent person in the white house, and that he has chosen people that are possibly proven trai ters. we are not mad at him because he's a businessman and not a politician. democracy is our in imminent danger and possibly the world. host: i just want to ask, so far

what we know from what general flynt has admitted to that he did lie to fbi officials. overall the message from the white house is we were in a transition, talking to people from foreign countries about our policies. that does not mean there were laws broken or collusion there. so far we don't have a hard evidence of that. does that affect your views at all? caller: well, i think we have reportingevidence for that other people in the trump administration have talked to russian. russia keeps coming up all the time and you don't hear about it in other countries. no, i guess the answer is no. russia keeps coming up. host: the other big news story is the passage in the wee hours

of the morning of the massive tax overhaul in the senate. the gop plan that will cut corporate taxes, as well as some middle-class taxes according to politico. the senate narrowly passed the tax overhauls early saturday morning, putting republicans on the cusp of revamping u.s. tax system for the first time in more than three decades. the vote came after senate frantically rewrote the trillion dollar legislation behind closed doors to win over several final holdouts. own plan inssed its november. now that bill will go to conference to work out the differences between the house and senate. let's take a look at what senator mitch mcconnell said after that bill passage. [video] >> this was done to the regular

order. chairman hatch can attest to all the multiple hearings, markups, open amendment process. everybody had plenty of opportunity to see the measure. to complain about process when you are losing, and that is what you heard on the floor tonight. host: we have some reaction from democrats about that process just before the bill was passed. democratic senator jon tester went to twitter to express his frustration. [video] >> happy holidays from everybody. it is the night we will be voting on the tax bill. i just got the tax bill 25 minutes ago. this is the tax bill. see how thick it is? this is what it looks like. let's look at the bill. this is what it really looks like.

take a look at this. this is your government at work. here is the bill as written. here is the modifications that are in it. i can read one word, it is called at this language. can you tell me what that word is? if you can, you have better eyes than me. this is unbelievable. we are doing massive tax reform -- host: that was just a little bit of the reaction from the montana democrat before the bill went to a vote last night. some of the modifications were written in the margins, and there were some scratch outs that were frustrating some democrats in the process but it did ultimately passed by 2 votes. steve from pennsylvania on the independent line. what you think about michael flynn skeptically -- guilty

plea? caller: i think it had to do with him being in his position. whateverd to the fbi, he stated, i think there is more to this than meets the eye in the -- in the journalism and mainstream media miss the mark. people do discussions with the transition team and going to the process. i think they missed the mark because it had to do with what was going on in syria after the chemical weapons attack. he put the warning out, we are going to do this and put it into the syrians crisis. or at least help try to stop it does all the death. i think the journalism and mainstream media had better stop attacking everything that is going on in this country because it is turning the public against

each other, one way or another. as for the tax reform, with the new tax laws, i remember when reagan was elected and i was 18 years old and i got to vote back then. within a few years all the money that was being put into my pocket by not paying taxes out of a paycheck and working in a factory was very helpful in buying a home and starting a family. host: i want to get back to the mueller plea. you were talking about the administration, and it has a right to signal to the world what its plans are. what about the notions under the logan act, which prohibits people from communicating with forward governments and a way that is contrary to current policy at that time, but was being advocated by the trump team was different from the obama administration.

caller: every presidential country hasthis always reached out to foreign governments and explained certain terms of what could be coming down the pipeline, for what they are not going to be doing in the future in regards the world crisis. under the logan act there is no statute that says they cannot communicate between forward governments, but it does restrict them from becoming allies under the radar and not letting the general public know what type of governments they are going to form every time there is an election. it protects the united states from being entangled in foreign developments, of crises or attacking other people. there is a lot of stuff we are not told in the media is not told.

that is done on purpose from the government to protect certain secrets in this country. there is a lot of things that went down over the years since i have been on the planet earth, hen they were searching all the asian buses coming into canada after the los alamos secrets were taken. and they were stopping them at the border. there are a lot of things that journalists right now are toting the line. if you would take it back to the clinton administration and the democrats under the obama party -- obama administration a year before the election, they were the ones talking about the russian collusion before he -- it became a fact that somebody was meddling in our elections. i know there was no russian in my booth when i voted. host: ed is calling on the

republican line from south carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to remind your viewers it seems like trump an mike pence, one day to figure out flynn was lying and he was fired. probablyen mueller and millions of taxpayer dollars to figure that out? i don't understand. mike pence found out he was lied to by michael flynn and he was fired. host: ok. a little bit more about the tax plan that passed early this morning. reuters has a fact box pointing out he republicans in the effort are in favor and against the effort to pass that plan. it starts with bob corker. a deficit hawk from tennessee said on friday he did not vote

for the senate legislation because of thi fiscal concerns that it would deepen the debt burden on future generations. other key republicans including susan collins, the moderate senator from maine, she will support the bill after securing several improvements and the tax and getting assurances other legislation will be advanced to help lower health insurance premiums. and other key person is the montana republican. he signed on to support the bill on friday after voicing concerns about mistreatment of mainstream businesses. he said he wanted more tax relief for businesses that include partnerships, proprietorships and other non-incorporated enterprises. a goes on to name other key republicans including ron johnson and jeff flake who voted in favor of the legislation. we have curtis falling from the

democratic line from jacksonville, florida. what do you think about this michael flynn plea? caller:. good morning i love your show. is just the tip of the iceberg. it is funny to me that i love your show what people call in. it shows the naivete of america. that is why we are in the shape we are in with the person in office right now. this man said when he was running he could shoot somebody in the park and the people would still love him. that says he thinks american people are stupid. he shows it every day. like the previous caller. they go on and on about trying to justify the obvious. he had a private line to the russian embassy. for what? everyone is trying to defend him reaching out to a foreign entity. there is only one.

russia. the sanctions were messed up. the oil drilling. who is tied into it? take business, oil companies. where did the secretary of state come from? the oil industry. i do understand. it amazes me how naive americans are. we believe -- we see but we want to believe. when it is obvious, we tell ourselves that doesn't really exist. president trump said it. he said it during the campaign. people are losing their jobs for this. if you did it, you should bear the punishment. i don't care for you are. a senator, a businessman, and after, if you committed the crime, usually punished. -- you should be punished. but not him. host: with the you think about

the guilty plea from michael flynn? caller: i think it means nothing. i'm surprised. i thought i would be the first republican to call, but i guess i am the second. i don't think it means anything. the man before stole my thunder 20 said michael flynn -- when he said michael flynn is a liar and that means nothing. james comey being his good buddy, and mueller is mixed up in the uranium the asko. -- the fiasco. unless michael flynn tells every lie he of, this is going nowhere. i hope it doesn't go nowhere. i think donald trump is one of the greatest presidents we've ever had. as far as the piling on, democrat versus republican, i've never seen anything like it. i don't know why they allow you to be a host when you're so biased is not even funny. things are taken my call.

sean is calling in from virginia on the independent line. with the you think? -- what do you think? caller: first of all, he is a general. he had a security clearance with the army, that he was in the white house. he had boundaries he had to follow. that comes along with so many other things. is intel information, that is scary because putin and his people want to get to the states -- to the united states. they still have a beef about the wall coming down. there being union used to have. that is the way i see it. there is so much money involved in this. follow the money, i believe. host: what do you mean by that? party you think the money might lead? caller: somebody mentioned the oil deals.

then you got a mention about the middle east problem. then you have to look -- they lost in afghanistan. we are in afghanistan. it is like a big cycle. there is a place the soviet union was that 30 years ago. putin was to bring it back. i will leave it at that. host: and some other news, politico reported the lawmaker who paid out a secret sexual harassment -- was blake farenthold of texas. claim. money to settle a the only no sitting member of congress that used a little-known congressional account to pay an accuser. lauren greene, former

communications director susan her boss in the 2014 over allegations of gender discrimination, sexual-harassment and creating a hostile work environment. also yesterday, the lawyer for another congressman accused of sexual harassment, detroit democrat john conyers,'s lawyer spoke yesterday about his conditions. he was hospitalized yesterday. and what is next in this investigation. [video] >> with regard to mr. khan you myth -- mr. conyers' investigation, hot topic, we will discuss in the next day or so what mr. conyers plans to do. health is nots the best. it is not what it should be. he has undergone a second round of examinations. i will meet and confer with

doctors, and it will be congressman john conyers it will be the one to decide what it is he is going to do in terms of whether he is going to continue to represent the people. is not going to be washington. but we will meet in the next couple of days to get stronger, which i anticipate he will so we can discuss these issues. that people need to know this, and he is the individual that has fought for the people in this community for a number of years and we will talk very shortly. host: that was congressman john conyers' attorney arnold reed speaking yesterday. in related news, democratic house leader nancy pelosi is calling on another member of congress to resign amongst sexual-harassment claims. she is calling on nevada

congressman to resign. minority leader nancy pelosi says she spoke with representative ruben key when. she says the allegation was convincing, and in light of the accusation, he should resign. reports he repeatedly made sexual advances towards an aide during his congressional campaign. ike from arkansas on the republican line? what do you think about general flynn's guilty plea? caller: i'm afraid it is part of this witchhunt. i had a comment for the said we are naive. i have a masters degree. he said the best president we've ever had. i would give my life for the president. there are millions like us. we are not naive.

i feelo excited because so emotionally attached to our president. we've ever had he does not take pay for what he does. i'm so embarrassed because he thought we would welcome him. i'm so embarrassed. i wish he would go over there and serve 10 years when he said i don't appreciate the president. i feel so sorry for that man who has so much hate and so much egotism. banks. -- thanks. host: jackie from dayton, ohio. what is your reaction to michael flynn's admission he lied to fbi agents? caller: i'll never vote republican again. i am really ashamed of the he hasnt and i feel like

let so many people down with his prejudice. hateful the way he talks down to people. i am ashamed of him. i hope the sooner they get him out of there, the better it will be for the country. he has not done anything for us. he lied. i don't appreciate it. -- i'm embarrassed as a woman. i'm embarrassed what he thinks about women. i'm embarrassed what he does to women. he makes fun of people and laughs it off. he is hateful. host: a little bit from the wall street journal about the tax

bill and the road ahead in trying to get lawmakers in the house and senate to come together to work out the differences between the two plans that have been passed. today ina chart today's wall street journal that talks about all the differences between the senate bill in the house bill, including the number of tax brackets. the house still has four, the senate bill has seven. the individual rate is about one point. 39.6% versus 38.5%. the corporate rate is the same. there are some differences. the top half is 25% on the house side, the senate side is 30%. there are things down to the child tax credit. there is a difference in the amount there. just pointing out all the work lawmakers in the house and senate have to do to work out some of the key differences between these plans. one of them is the senate bill

repeals the obamacare individual mandate, where the house version does not. mary on the democratic line from cambridge, massachusetts. caller: i was listening to the republican saying that probably fling did not -- flynn did not really do anything wrong. it is a sort of technicality that he got mixed up. in michael flynn thought he did not do anything wrong, then why was his first major statement -- i want to make things right with god, my country, and my family. they always dragged their poor, beleaguered wife and family and to these criminal activities. he would not have said that he would not have wanted people to hear him say that and make sure people hear him say that if he thought he did not really do anything wrong.

these republicans are crazy. that's all i have to say. host: we don't have any clear indication he or the president collaborated with russians during the election. that was the point of this investigation. is that affect your view at all? caller: it doesn't. he said i did something wrong, i'm going to make it right with god, my family and my country. that is kind of a big statement. it is just about the only statement he made. the wanted everybody to hear him say that. he must think it is important. allen from asheville, north carolina on the independent line. caller: good morning. host: what you think about the guilty plea? caller: michael flynn -- i'm not really a trump fan. i'm a fan of america.

i have got a problem with the government uses its resources for political process. and let's go back a little bit. flynn would've never been involved except the russian dossier, which is created by fusion gts. got thisan issue that whole thing started. comey trump brought that to's attention --trump's attention. susan rice that all the unmasking and that is were flynn comes in. identity is not given out unless -- susan rice found at all these people during the transition. if flynn was not a problem, if this was a real serious problem -- it is a serious charge for flynn, no doubt. but as far as trump goes, flint would be held responsible for scheming with trump to do

something with russia. that is not what came out yesterday. and going to this deal with women, of politicians, the media and hollywood have gotten a pass. i was in business. back in the 1990's, sexual harassment was brought up possibly. we had to go to classes. the whole policy. when bill clinton did his thing, and this lady that was embarrassed by trump and his sexual escapades and whatever they are, entities rocky should be held accountable. but clinton, he had sex in the workplace with the subordinate. he lied. he lied to a grand jury. that is what he got impeached for. host: we are talking about the michael flynn guilty plea announced yesterday. i want to read some other headlines. this is from the new york times were president trump is saying he does support the secretary of state rex tillerson.

president trump on friday rejected reports he was in fire secretary of state rex tillerson as fake news and declared, "i call the final shots" as he acknowledged his disagreements with his top diplomat. the president's tweet was posted a few hours after mr. tillerson described reports this week that the white house wanted him. to resign as laughable "he's not leaving and while we disagree on certain subjects, i call the final shots. we work well together america is highly respected again." tom is coming from michigan on the democratic line. caller: thanks for taking my call. -- what we are discussing is whether michael flynn essentially procured the russians for the trump administration.

is this a first contact michael flynn ever had with the russians? if i remember right, michael and heas over in moscow was sitting at the same table as vladimir putin. they looked awfully friendly. michael flynn has been on the payroll of the russian government since, i do believe, early 2015, late 2014. paid by the russian government before he became a member of the donald trump campaign. so why did michael flynn become a member of donald trump's campaign? he was the first notable individual, hemant jeff sessions, who became a member of the donald trump campaign. don't you find that a little

curious? host: why do you think that is? why he joined the campaign? caller: because the russians for paying him and he was getting russian money. the russians are probably pushing him to become a member of the donald trump campaign, to maybe get rid of some of these sanctions that the obama administration has put on the russian government. -- thee new ski act oligarchs in russia are unable to earn the big money that they used to earn. this is truly hurting the rich people in russia. and there are a lot of rich people in russia. they are all tied in with vladimir putin. host: in some other news on that tax bill that passed the senate, the president tweeted about it this morning. "take his tax bill and tax cut in history just passed in the senate.

now the great republicans will be going for final passage. thank you to house and senate republicans for your hard work and commitment." james is calling from kentucky on the republican line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i think the problem with flynn is he is a big liar. he did what he did. he is going to pay for his sins. republicans and the democrats in this country need to get down to the bare facts of life and try to live together. i have never seen so much hate in this country. everybody hates everybody. this is a god-fearing country, supposed to be. we should love each other and stop this foolishness that is going on in washington. they needed cleanup the swamp. if it goes to the president, get

him out, but we need to clean the whole thing out. this sex thing has been going on for centuries. it is not nothing new, but we need to stop it too. thank you for letting me talk. host: jeremiah from birmingham, alabama on the independent line. what are your thoughts today? look,: on michael flynn, i have been around the justice system for many years. right off the top of my head, two reasons you take a guilty plea. restraints, and you tell them co-conspirators in order to get a reduced sentence. michael flynn was facing serious charges. he got a reduction of those charges by line to the fbi -- the charge of lying to the fbi.

in order for him to kick that, he has knowledge of what was going on in the trump administration. we have never been able to he hastrump because never released his tax returns. is deeplyion, trump involved with the russians, as well as members of his administration. he keeps firing people. host: abe is calling from north carolina on the democratic line. what did you think about this guilty plea? that -- the job in the top-performing, he is kind of on the right track, i think. flynn, i think he was a tool that trump used to do this the

links. -- dealings. i think there is more to the story of the simple fact that trump was in debt problems a long time ago. if i he owed the russians so much money that the russians are using him in the white house. host: we will take a look at the they -- reauthorization of fisa. -- it expires at the end of the month did later on, our spotlight on magazine series continues. the christiant advocacy group alliance defending freedom. a we will be right back -- we will be right back. night, her book "man

of the hour" about her grandfather. she is interviewed by bruce darling. >> because of his wartime experience, he became convinced that the only way for democracy to survive, the best way to beat our enemies and be a strong country, was to have a great school system where we showed democracy was better than dictatorship, and we would have brilliant people, talented people in government and science. the way to do that was have the sat and implement in schools across the country the kind of technically advanced people we would need in positions of power if we were going to be a great

nation in the high-tech world he foresaw. impactan extraordinary on american life. 9:00tch sunday night at eastern on book tv. q&a, john cogan on entitlement programs. desire toem from a help someone who is in need of assistance. we all have it in us. is easier tons, it spend the someone else's money. they have that same basic desire you and i do. they have this desire to be reelected. once that is put in place, the game has changed. interest groups press for more

assistance. money starts flowing to politicians who protect those benefits and the game changes. programs. entitlement sunday night on q&a. "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is martin matishak. he is here to talk about the reauthorization of pfizer section seven o2. -- 702. tell us what this section 702 does and what would happen if it does expire. programs thatare are electronic spying tools. they target the online chatter of people outside the country.

we are talking about emails, rousing history, online chat. intelligence community about terrorism. host: what happens if it expires? what has to happen to keep it from expiring? if you believe people like the fbi director and the attorney general, it will make the f ei less safe. these programs make up 25% of all intelligence. bid to renew these programs, the fbi and others have declassified certain instances where they have been aed, including monitoring 2009 plot to bomb the new york

isissubway, capture an social media recruiter. when this happens between now and december 31, congress needs to renew these things. other than that, they will be slowly turned off. host: this thursday, the fbi director was on capitol hill. he was asked why was important to reauthorize section 702. consequences, what would we not be able to do if it expires? 702 for thevalue of protection of the american people is at the front and, the early stages when a tip comes in. environment as you heard from everyone on the panel that there is a high-volume of threats, and there are so few

dots to connect with these more loosely organized situations. the premium on getting the right dots to connect which are real and which are more aspirational, that is when the value of 702 kicks in. information the fbi has already lawfully in its possession. no one disagrees with that. they can know that this tip from law enforcement or someone in the private sector really matters. it allows us to mobilize resources to make sure we get in front of the threat. back, we willed rebuild the wall that existed before 9/11. i implore the committee to not go there again. that is something we learned the hard way. host: that is the one side of

the argument. there are critics of the rule brings u.s. citizens into surveillance. what is the counter argument? people are warning against is backdoor searches. the way information moves on the internet, sometimes it is to and from americans. o2 -- 702in the seven database. they might be able to use it in court and privacy advocates say that is illegal. you need a warned if you're going to use something in court here in -- court. to do so is authoritarian and wrong. host: we are talking with martin matishak, the cyber security reporter at politico. 700re talking about section

two of pfizer and whether or not it will be renewed. it is set to expire later this month. republicans can call (202) 784-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, and independents (202) 748-8002. this is the first attempt to reauthorize 702 since the disclosures by edward snowden. how does that affect discussion moving forward? caller: it hasn't affected greatly except for some of the bills that are out there. there are five bills out there. three are in limbo. there has been an approach for greater transparency, greater openness about the number of americans who have been swept up in this incidentally. ron wyden of oregon has talked about this. there has been universal

debates, unlike past everyone agrees that these programs stabilize. host: what is the next step? you say you have these several bills that are out, that would adjust the fact that it is about to expire. what is the difference between them? caller: across all three bills that are outside communities, the sticking point is the idea of a warrant requirement or putting up a wall. the first bill was in the judiciary committee. it said if law enforcement queries the database and have probable cause, you need a warrant. the fbi says that is putting up a wall, it is a hurdle in the early part of an investigation. bill thatce passed a

makes no mention of a warned, that says queries will be subject to a court review. friday, the intelligence committee reported a bill that says you can still use the database and see everything, but in cases not related to national security, you would still need a warrant. how canadvocates say you on see something you have seen? these things expire january 1. probably going to happen as the senate bill or the house intelligence bill will be attached to a budget deal, whether that is short-term or if there is a larger budget deal. it could have a five-year renewal in there. they will jam it through. there is the possibility that leadership could ask for clean

renewal. host: we are talking with martin matishak of politico. republicans can call (202) 784-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, and independents (202) 748-8002. in october, you wrote a piece in politico. rhetoric."s "trumps own is undercutting his administration's case. caller: this goes back to the tweet the president but out earlier this year that said president obama had ordered his trump tower to be wiretapped. there is a lot of surveillance programs out there. 702 doesn't do that. it is a foreign focused program. it added to the jumble about

national security. it's sort of made this weird jumble area we saw -- jumble. we saw that in the house committee yesterday. is just toaid this give the president cover because he made this tweet that he has been unwilling to prove with evidence. theblicans say this is proper vehicle to do this. it was a shouting match. this is the jumble of his come up around surveillance and made it harder for officials to say this is why these programs are important and why they have declassified some incidents saying this is where it has actually helped and we can prove that it helped. this goes back to snowden. don't just take our word for it did we can show you a through z this has where -- is where it

has helped. host: ron is calling in. caller: good morning. there is a reporter that works for fox news named james rosen. if i remember correctly, a pfizer court declared him, the obama administration had a pfizer court declare him a enemy of the united states. has anybody been held accountable for this? guest: i have to admit i am not familiar with that case. i am from illinois myself. i don't know that case. host: good morning. caller: i was wondering whether surveillance exists. i have never seen any

surveillance used in order to facilitate prosecuting a crime. that iferesting to me the surveillance exists to prosecute a crime, why hasn't information been released with respect to intelligence collected in order to prosecute crimes. i want your guest to speak to cases that have been -- where there has been intelligence collected. host: how was this evidence collected and used by the government? guest: imagine you are enough ei agent and a car passes by and there is a license plate that someone jots down.

go back to thean office and put the license plate into the database. if it gets a hit from an essay, nsa, they can go forward. i don't have any specific court cases where it has been used. lawmakers on both sides of spoken to this, that it has been used in court cases or as a tip. think about it that way. it might not be used in court, but it might have started the preceding all along. host: we of her lot about unmasking with respect to the previous administration. talk about that process. does that mean the identities of americans caught up in

surveillance could be at risk or used as a weapon? hich : it's the process i and identity could be revealed in an intelligence report. laws are in place to stop that from being released to the general public. that has been the debate, there has been no illegal use of this so far that we have seen. democrats are very adamant about that. trey gowdy said it might not be illegal, but it is improper. thee were people during obama administration who had and an ornament number of unmasking's. s. they want to tighten up where something like what happened to

michael flynn doesn't happen again. host: why do officials unmask certain individuals in the data collected? guest: sometimes it's just to with person had a meeting someone important in new york or overseas. i don't know who this person is. i don't know why this is important area -- important. i need to know who person a is. there is a whole reporting chain about that. lawmakers think that could be tightened up. democrats say it could be tightened up, they say section 702 is not where it should happen. it could happen any other time than now. host: we are joined by martin matishak of politico. we are talking about pfizer section 702 which will expire at

the end of the year. good morning. caller: good morning, i am a republican. one thing missing here is an expression of concern about individual liberty. this is all about a collect of -- collection of information for the collective. you mentioned a car driving by. that was an individual in that car. they are overwhelmed by pfizer secrecy -- fisa secrecy. mentionseaks about or individual liberty that was once part of the american fabric. do you have any concerns about the eradication of liberty in these searches? guest: there are lawmakers who have put forth ideas about better warrant requirements.

california had a bill that was defeated in committee that would have said you need a war it just to look at this database. those proposals have never caught on for whatever reason area security -- reason. it slowshawks think things down. there is a fourth america -- amendment caucus. some of the transparencies in the final bill to address this. empowere ways like they a branch board to be able to run better. right now, there idle because of previous laws. it would increase oversight. i understand your concern and there are lawmakers, we are 30 days away from this expiring,

their proposals have gone nowhere. host: the los angeles times had an editorial about civil --ertarians concern about concerned about privacy. it said it should be reauthorized, not permanently as the trump administration wants. how likely is it that some limitations or restrictions might make it into the final cut? guest: i think there will be a sunset on this. sayakers, even hawks, technology changes over time and we should see of tweaks need to

be made. i don't think it will be a permanent reauthorization. that is not going to happen. in terms of civil liberties, we've been talking about a war it requirement. -- warned requirement. rant requirement. host: steve is in maryland. hello. caller: a couple of decades ago, i had to careers. i was in financial services and was involved in looking at money-laundering cases. the other career was navy intelligence. we would track arms sales. every year, we would get an annual briefing talking about this.

i always speculated that would never happen. what would happen in those cases where those two worlds crossed over? what is the obligation of analysts to report something with an american citizen that might end up breaching this intelligence wall? guest: that's a fair point you make. are ready tosts report whatever they see. it is what he talked about at the very beginning. they are talking about a warrant assertions and other into the renewal. they want as flat a field is humanly possible, so if something comes across the desk, they can look at it to the

fullest extent did -- extent. host: henry is calling in from michigan. caller: kimberly, you've been saying all morning the flint guilty plea has nothing to did -- flynn guilty plea has nothing to do with collusion. ofs because of surveillance 702 that we know that roger stone colluded with wikileaks and julian assange, who received the hacked information from the russians. donald trump, jr. set up a meeting with a russian talked abouthey the sanctions. the reason flynn is caught up in

,his, the transition team before they got sworn in, or going against the obama administration who put sanctions against the russians for interfering in the election. all of these threads of information came from intelligence under these 702 wiretaps here and -- wiretaps. host: i said the guilty plea involved activity after the election. 702 includes the investigation. his communications were caught up. it's been recorded that russian officials were under routine surveillance. it was picked up and put in an

intelligence report. the identity,for that got out illegally. it's unclear if 702 was in play here. news,just in some other what is your reporting about the pompeolity that mark might be heading to the state department if rex tillerson steps down? we have seen this a couple of times this year. no offense to the secretary of state. if tom cotton were to go to the cia, it would put someone who security hawk in the intelligence community. introduced back in march or april that was a clean

reauthorization of fisa. he believes metadata should be turned back on or expanded. he is pro-surveillance. executing the of programs. host: laura is calling in from illinois. caller: good morning. i was interested in how the iserpretation of this fisa un-american. they go after normally with the foreign.or turks, all that is normally monitored. it's when they go into the private sector of americans that fisa comes in to play. with flynn, they were monitoring

the ambassador and that's how they got flynn. it was not through fisa. the main thing been amended to this is the oversight. i don't know why they are fighting it so hard. the congress is the one that implements this as far as the purse strings. why not use the oversight so we don't have this massive release of names exposed? it's ridiculous. was it three times the number of people unmasked? host: i want to give martin a chance to respond. guest: it's a fair response. this is all about the tweet about being wiretapped or the election.

it has nothing to do with anything. this is the vehicle to do it. i don't think anyone is going to be happy with how this plays out. -- i talked toay intelligence after had their markup, it was the most partisan. oversight is going to be an issue going forward. no one is going to let this go. host: the house intelligence committee markup on this bill friday ended in a straight partyline vote. on can see that discussion www.c-span.org. washingtonlling from dc on the independent line. i am pretty sure they will pass this bill.

one thing i can honestly say is republican, democrat, american, russian, we are all part of the human race. i think he stepped up to do a job no one else wanted to do. -- they are going to cut things like that. host: we are talking about fisa 702 right now. caller: it all goes back to the situation with the trump administration being accused of collusion with russia. russia things about opening up a new trade area.

it's almost like we have to work with other leaders to come together. sure we should be in on that trade. host: i want to keep moving as we finish this discussion. let's go to richard from iowa. you were on with martin matishak . know,: i just wanted to if this information is out there, why won't they let people -- guest: the programs used to gather the information our top seed. -- secret. the methods are top-secret. neededwhy warrants are

to access the information. it is held in a top-secret database at the nsa headquarters in maryland. you need a certain type of clearance to access that. that's why most of us of never seen the information or know how to where he the data that -- weary -- asked the database. host: you can follow him on twitter. thank you so much for joining us today. guest: thank you for having me. host: comment next, we will take more of your phone calls. republicans can call (202) 784-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. interviewed adam smith. he commented on rumors that the white house is getting ready to replace rex tillerson with mike

pompeo. >> i don't know that it changes anything. my biggest concern is the state department. whether it is tillerson or pompeo, the state department has not been engaged. diplomacy has fallen off and morality is terrible. -- morale isrror terrible. the secretary of state is forced to react to the president's tweets. i hope they start using diplomacy as a tool in our national security agenda. right now, i'm very concerned about the state department. >> is that an administration cultural issue? do you think it would change with someone else at the helm? >> i do think it is a cultural

issue, it reflects president trump's lack of desire to employ the state department for whatever reason. he simply doesn't believe in it. they got rid of the afghanistan/pakistan working group at the state department. stablee trying to get a solution in afghanistan and pakistan and they have completely disbanded it. there has been very little progress in terms of building relationships in africa. i don't think they understand diplomacy. i have served with congressman pompeo, i'm not sure he is an upgrade. exxon,llerson worked for he knew he had to work with other countries. i'm not optimistic the state department is going to get better. >> washington journal continues. host: we are taking your phone

calls. republicans can call (202) 784-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. let us know what is on your mind for the next half hour. let's look at some of the headlines across the country. this is the cover of the chicago sun-times. russia probe reaches oval office. there is a picture of michael flynn who pled guilty yesterday to line to the fbi. jared kushner gave flynn direction. news, thisyork daily says look who's talking now. the colorado springs toette, flynn pleads guilty

lying to the f ei. -- fbi. that is also getting top billing, the passage of the tax bill. it passed early this morning. leah is calling from utah. good morning. caller: high there. -- hi there. i want to talk about a problem with collecting information. isy can say this person national security. the person that made that statement might be looking at .ow much money the person has an arab-american might have a large amount of money or inheritance. the government has to seize that

money while they are investigating, even if the statement was false. when someone says you are a problem with national security, the government concedes the money -- can seize the money. that is my comment. host: jerry is calling in from new jersey on the democratic line. caller: good morning. i am a registered democrat. i don't want anybody to question that. i did folk for trump this time. -- i don't believe anything is going to go to trump. i am waiting for the stuff to come out about the wiretapping. i believe trump was correct. comey's tweet.

he is a big truck. he has lied to congress. you do not play gowdy's comments. gowdy came out yesterday and said when comey testify, he led them to believe they weren't looking into trump, there was no collusion with trump. he said there is nothing with trump. these people know more than they are saying. if you're going to talk about this, please be more balanced. there is a lot coming out about the democrats two. -- too. two i.t. still those guys i am dying to know about.

there is so much out there that hasn't been answered. more is going to come out. i can't wait until the media has to deal with that. you will see. host: we have some other headlines across the country. calls paso times sexual-harassment the tip of the iceberg. the problem is in statehouses around the country. the detroit free press, the headline is conyers'team is firing back. it showed his attorney addressing reporters yesterday. he said it will be up to the congressman to decide. the caller times of corpus dollars paid.

it talked about his role being the only member of congress to use a secret fund to pay out a settlement in a sexual-harassment claim. charles is calling in from new jersey. caller: how are you? host: once on your mind today? caller: security issues. what's going on in the world , if youecurity to me don't do anything wrong at or you're doing something you're not supposed to, you don't have to worry about your wires being tapped. just be a good patriot and love your country and let them do their job to keep us safe. that's how i feel about the issue. host: paul is calling in from york state on our republican line.

good morning. what is on your mind today? caller: i would like to know if anyone has any ideas about what the liberal leaning left is digging for with respect to collusion and the trump white house? host: what do you think the investigation is about? caller: i think it's a witchhunt. i just don't know. they don't take it any further. they just talked about collusion, they don't take it any further. what do they expect was being done? do they think the russians are going to control the white house? that's never going to happen. host: in a programming note, our cities tour will continue as book tv travels to kansas city,

missouri. tv,ng up today at noon on are programs will air in one time block. the kansasear about city stockyards, which were once the largest economic driver. >> the beginning of the stockyards had to do with the railroad. bridge opened, the first span across the missouri river. kansas city had railway access to chicago and eastern markets. livestock dealers and railroad men decided to and -- andand shoots cattle eastend that

or to chicago. between the meatpacking industry and the retail operations, that employed 20,000 people at any given time. there were communities of people down there. they worked at the stockyards. it was the heart of kansas city and the business community at that time. in theose jobs, it aided population growth. in as wee sure to tune travel to kansas city, missouri. to watch video of the cities we have visited, you can go to www.c-span.org. line on ourn the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning.

i wake every morning sick about what is happening to our country. i was sick last night listening to the tax debate. americans thatl have knowledge and intellectual capacity to run for office. we have people in office who are not doing the business for the american people. madetax bill, deals were and people -- deals were made and people didn't care. jeff flake thinks he's going to be on a committee to help the dreamers. this tax bill is for the very rich. thinghing -- the whole during the election was about inequality and now they are giving them trillions more.

the people who voted for them are losing their medical to duction's. -- to duction's. -- deductions. on for theiroing own self-interest. we need people to run for office who want to solve problems. we do not have to have all this money in politics did -- politics. we have the internet. you don't have to spend millions of dollars. the tv networks make billions of dollars every election. we should have free political discussions on tv with every candidate so the american public can see what is really important instead of the stuff they are fed. carolina onh north

the independent line. caller: how are you? good morning. i am going on the same thing about the tax cuts. about 20 years ago, i read a news article. heritageonsored i the foundation. heritage foundation. they finally got their prize last night when they signed that tax cut. people are going to pay for that. there is going to be no safety net. the money is going to go to the top 1%. how much money do they need? i ask people, i am reading this book called the art of listening. i am trying to understand people.

i am trying to understand what we don't hear from each other. it is sad when people are not caring about each other. , i just don't know what else to say. it's really hard to see this continue. host: chad is on the republican line from alabama. caller: how are you doing this morning? i wanted to talk about roy moore. bits dying down little lately. i don't think -- it's frustrating that the people of alabama are going to elect a republican or democrat or right in somebody. te in somebody. i don't think they should be talking about not seating him.

are,is all they accusations. it's funny that they come to light, some of them are 40 years old. host: do you support judge moore? caller: i am voting for him more now than ever before based on once going on. i think it's the swamp. host: what do you think about these allegations? this is my opinion. here in alabama, i think he is going to win partly because washington is trying to step in and give their opinion on what alabamians should do. he is not going to have a problem winning.

part of it is going to be to blame from washington. the washington post reports today that an nsa employee has pleaded guilty over work at home. the employee worked at home without authorization on sensitive hacking tools. he pleaded guilty friday for defying the espionage act.

chain is calling in from all hot -- jane is calling in from ohio. taxes, taxes. the republicans don't give a damn about ordinary people. i don't know how anyone could be a republican. everyone needs to vote for democrats or independents. all they care about is their donors. that what about reports for a short amount of time, many middle-class people will see a tax cut under the plan? what do you think about that? caller: for a short amount of time. what about the people that need health care?

they don't care about us. calling from is orlando. good morning. caller: good morning. thatlivid over the fact hillary clinton at the end of her campaign destroyed evidence that absolutely would have convicted her for obstructing justice. she broke ipads and her cell phones here it -- phones. that is an actual crime. people talk about obstructing justice. they are on a witchhunt for our president area and --. -- president. i used to love ellen hillary

clinton. -- bill and hillary clinton. i have become so disgusted with what the news has to say about them. i have grown to love mr. trump. i say go, mr. trump. do some punishing to our former first lady for what she actually did. host: one of the headlines in the wall street journal, there is one industry that is ,uffering this holiday season the christmas tree industry. barely december and it may be too late to get a christmas tree. supplies are tight. some lots are closing almost as soon as they open citing a -- open, citing a low supply of

trees. severaly reports factors for the shortage. some is the weather, some as agriculture. some are turning to grapes instead of for trees. trees. caller: good morning. joban doesn't excellent reporting all the news. , with thebeing said republicans and democrats, they need to start working together. republicans just want to raise the taxes. , theyike the lady said are out to line their own pockets.

i think they need to work together a little bit better. that's another thing. i just wanted to say that as a comment. we love you here in north dakota. keep up the great job and vote democrat all the way. host: bill is calling in from all to monte springs. -- calling in. i believe the investigation into the administration should proceed. i don't think it's a witchhunt. facts of already been established. also, since we focus on misbehavior on a daily basis, it should be pointed out that brown

will be sentenced monday for tax and fraud charges she was convicted of. thank you. news, president trump will likely keep the u.s. embassy in israel in tel aviv. he plans to reorganize jerusalem -- recognize jerusalem as israel's capital, but not move the embassy there for now.

angie is calling in from miami on the republican line. good morning. caller: thank you so much for c-span allowing the american people. -- people to air out their thoughts. mr. flynn.es with he should honestly state that mr. trump has nothing to do with the russia situation. it is what it is. he will be convicted. with all of the harassment issues with politicians, it's not a political issue. it's an individual issue.

they are making it political. everything now is political. it's an individual that has an issue, they should be punished for their own sick mind. it has nothing to do with politics. host: let me ask you this, learning there was a fund set up to settle these claims and keep toquiet, did that contribute a situation where this activity could take place and not be revealed? caller: it's an individual issue. , i started going to journalism school, they teach you to be neutral. you just provide the news. you do not take sides. just -- in my country

in europe, that's what they teach you to do. how the disgusting media is misleading the american people. just let trump be a president. he is not the first president of the united states to have personality issues. i think the american people are being misled. they are forcing us to hear what the journalists want us to hear. just let him be president. the people who are being charged with harassing, i used to work at a job where i was harassed by my boss. it would not be fair for me to blame every staff member. it had to do with that individual. i think everything is turning political.

really decideto on their own what they want to hear and there decisions. we are attacking each other like bulldogs and you are deviating what the american people want to hear. republican on the line from ohio. good morning. caller: i concur with the previous caller. the shroud of darkness is being lifted off the american public. the news media is no longer news. it is a propaganda machine. i am seeing the african-american community awaken. donald trump is stimulated public thinking. when he tweets to people and they think it is sarcasm, he is showing how foolish people are.

, we willxt six months see a transition of people being more involved in what is going on. i have a lot of hope for what is coming up. journalism is finished. people can communicate with each other. we love this country to the point where we are not going to let the 25% take it down. the democratic party has been ruined by socialists and communists. i have a lot of hope for the young people. out, we areyear is going to see more exciting things taking place. host: michael is calling from connecticut on the independent line here and -- line. thing, it's flynn

like the republicans should be behind this. sinceny investigations benghazi was there? did they have to vote on the affordable care act, you know? amountot even nearly the of times they voted on things or looked into this, anywhere near that. roy moore thing, the sexual harassment of the teenagers, if you look at that -- if you put that aside and look at his religious zealotry, he put the 10 commandments into the statehouse. like where some people should accent]tating southern "where it should be." may bew, your religion the wrong one, because i said so. what do you know about

religions? they kill each other. it is crazy. the guys with the sexual harassment thing, it is whatever. everybody likes a 17-year-old girl. but the religious thing, that is over the top. guest: on the democratic line is robert -- host: on the democratic line is robert. caller: good morning. when i grew off in the old days, , connects tobs have their own investigative reporters in those days. once we got the internet and all tv started to lose interest, looking at reporters. , you areave reporters a reporter from boston, yo i see one tv, cnn, even on fox t -- icu on cnn -- on cnn, even on fox

tv, and the first thing you hear is "i think you are co-not care what you think. give me the facts. they always say "i think this," or "i believe that." tos is where tv really start looking at the internet. reporters on tv and tell us what to think. host: all right, that will have to be the last word for this segment because coming up, we will be having our spotlights on magazine segment. we will look at an investigative christianing at a advocacy group with author sarah posner. later on, we will be joined by joel winston, a privacy attorney , discussing dna tests and the rights consumers have after taking the tests. we will be right back. ♪

>> join us on c-span three weekend for american history tv. for a few highlights, today at 3:00 p.m. eastern, the 50th anniversary of the public broadcasting act. the library of congress discusses the history of news and public affairs programming her. jim le on african-american ministers and politics and how churches gain experience for organizing and running for political office. been a collection of the battle of midway. eastern on "

"reel america," "dreams of equality." : weekend, every weekend, only on c-span3. wednesday morning, we are live in tallahassee, florida for the next up on the c-span bus 50 capitals tour. richard corker will be our guests on the bus -- richard oncoran will be our guest the bus. c-span, where history of full daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable companies and brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now is sarah

posner, an investigative reporter at the nation institute. here to discuss about the investigation into the group alliance defending freedom and the background on gaining influence, part of our spotlight on magazine series. thanks for joining us. guest: thanks for having me. host: tell us with the nation institute is and what it does. institute is aon journalism nonprofit. the investigators fund reporters who take on investigative pieces that go in depth into issues of the day, including that these that i did for "the nation" magazine. host: how is the nation institute funded? guest: we are a nonprofit, so it is funded by donations and people who are supportive of the mission. host: tuesday, the u.s. supreme

court will hear arguments in one of the biggest cases the and year, masterpiece versus colorado civil rights commission. remind our viewers what this case is about. this piece comes out of colorado, and masterpiece cake is owned by a man who a couple of years ago refused to make a cake or the wedding of a gay couple. litigationup in against him. it includes sexual discrimination and public discrimination. host: he is represented by the

alliance of defending freedom. adf and why they get involved in a case like this one. it was founded back in the early to mid-1990's right as movement wasts really gaining steam, and there was a lot of illegible activity over that. in colorado, again, back to colorado, the voters had asked a ballot initiative that would have a hard -- that did bar totality's from enacting laws.crimination since -- subsequently, the shut that down. in that, they found a legal aclu in their mind

was needed because they believe that christians and the freedom of christians was under threat by the advance. by sarah we are joined posner, the investigative reporter, and we're talking about her piece in "the nation" about the upcoming case involving masterpiece cakes and the alliance of defending freedom, who is defending to get shop owner. call (202) 748-8001, republicans. democrats can call (202) 748-8000. and independents, you can call (202) 748-8002. guest: is the piece, you refer to -- in the piece, you refer to the adf as the christian legal army. they want to analyze of attorneys around the country who volunteer pro

bono hours to work on their communication, expanding their ability to take on more cases. they saw this as building on army of like-minded attorneys who would volunteer to do their cases pro bono. also, they have a blackstone legal fellowship, which is a summer program for law students, giving them the opportunity to lectures, interact with lawyers, career opportunities, and that sort of thing. host: one x of from your piece, you write that the organization, which once described to be merely a christian antidote to the secular aclu, has fast training ground for future legislators, judges, prosecutors, attorneys general, and other government lawyers, including, notably, in the trumpet administration.

talk about this. guest: they want to train future leaders, and they succeeded in that. found former attorneys or states who worked in attorneys general offices in tennessee. there are a number of people in the trump administration who have ties to adf. at deputy general counsel the department of health and human services is the former adf staff attorney. know all francisco has worked with adf, has been on a panel at the blackstone fellowship program. him as anentified allied attorney. trump has nominated several people to the federal bench who adf-either asdf

-- ties to adf, either as adf allied attorneys. host: during the campaign, we unifiedsee af a support for then candidate donald trump. why now such close alliances with the administration? why are we seeing more of that now? guest: in the primary, christian conservatives were split over trump. linesome lined up behind him early. others were supporting candidates like ted cruz or marco rubio. once trump got the nomination, was a coalescence around him. he pushed all the right rhetorical buttons to where they not only the nomination but also the presidency. he was such a strong guy

swinging conservative christian, because they form a significant base of the republican party. he started talking about religious freedoms. . he started promising that we would say "merry christmas" again. religious right, spring court justices and federal judges that they wanted, people whose ideologies lined up with theirs, whose philosophy is lined up with theirs. so now they see him as this great champion of their cause, and they are pretty loat to criticize himh. sarahwe're joined by posner, and investigative times reporter, and we're talking about herpes. how the approach is gaining influence in legal cases in particular, including the supreme court being heard on tuesday, masterpiece cakeshop.

republicans, again, can call guest (202) 748-8001. democrats (202) 748-8000.and independent s (202) 748-8002. i want to read what it means to be an allied attorney. "to become an allied attorney, 11 must agree with adf's point statement of faith, which includes a commitment to believing in the divinity of jesus christ, that god designed marriage for one man and one woman, and that homosexual behavior is sinful and offensive to god." talk about these 11 points that someone has to agree to in order to be allied. guest: i will just say that when we reported that th, we base that on adf's website itself. must agree with the statement of faith, and adf

claims that allied attorneys do not have to sign that same statement of faith that adf employees do, but this is on their website. it subsequently took it off eleir website that no francisco is now solicitor attorney. they are in a validly conservative christian organization. they do not make any bones about that. employees,e their and as far as one can tell from their website, their allied attorneys as well, to commit to the statement of faith that very conservative evangelical statement of faith that i do not think all christians in america would necessarily agree with. have and what other cases

they been involved with, aside from this particular piece whatg up tuesday involving they say is the right of individual shopowners not to have a right to express themselves. what else might we see them involved in? in the military, contraceptive pieces? yes, they were very involved in the challenge to the contraceptive coverage under the affordable care act. they represented a another company, which is like hobby lobby, which i am sure you are familiar with. it said that contraceptive insurance company violated their rights. this was validated with hobby lobby after the supreme court. they represented them and other companies and nonprofits in the challenge to the contraception role. -- rule. defended restrictions on abortion.

defended people who protest outside of abortion clinics and try to convince women not to have abortions. they have litigated numerous establishment cases where they might defend a bible study group that wants to use a public school for an afterschool club, or a school district, which might be sued in a case for potentially violating the separation of church and state. they represented school districts and transgender issues. it runs the gamut of religious freedom, free speech, abortion, contraception. iny are very active supporting marriage bans that were ultimately struck down in the supreme court in 2015. host: all right, diane is on the

line on the republican line from wisconsin. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go on. you are on with sarah posner. caller: thank you. i appreciate your organization, but i would also like to make a comment. what the hell, part of my french, is the government doing all of this? these are personal choices. i have nothing against people who have alternatives sexual beliefs, or religious but it is also my right to have my beliefs, and i do not think they should be legislated. i don't think you should be able to be taken to court in the first place. "i am sorry, i am uncomfortable with that, and i don't want to do that." in one case, i heard about a ile back from a wonderful little lady who ran a bakeshop,

she just did not want to make a cake for a gay couple, and she recommended another good baker. they are taking her business -- or trying to, etc. enough is enough. the government needs to get out of our bedrooms and our churches. my children were raised catholic, and i am proud of it. the only thing that i would be offended by a muslim or a jewish person living next-door. go tod allow them to their place of prayer, and i would expect the same. ast: i want to give sarah chance to talk about the masterpiece cakeshop peace and how it involves the colorado law. guest: that is right. we have a federal public accommodations law, which came out of the civil rights movement in the 1960's. this is about people not being discriminated against on the basis of their race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, their

sex. but the federal law does not decide this permission based on sexual discrimination or gender identity. 21 states do have a lot like that, and this is the decision -- this is the legacy of the civil rights movement. we have civil rights laws to protect the dignity of people to be able to participate fully in public life. these states that have included areal identification protected by nondiscrimination laws because this is a movement forward for the full equality and acceptance of every individual in american life. strongly helde religious beliefs have very strong protections under the same and similar laws. the same law that protected the charlie and david to

walk into that cake shop and buy a cake without experiencing any discrimination would protect a if they went and sat i want a cake, and the owner said i am not going to make a cake for you. what are the penalties for a company or a shock if they do not comply with this non-discrimination law in colorado? understandar as i it, you have financial -- penaltier financial penalties against you for violating the law. so theyles are in place can prevent discrimination from taking place. [inaudible] bob is calling in from philadelphia on our republican line. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span. thank you for taking my call. before i get into the meat of what i wanted to say, i want to

point out that the two men went into the bakery, they went into an establishment that they knew the preparatory -- the proprietor was religious. provoke athey would conflagration, so they came looking for a fight. thinkms of a strategy, i proprietors in things like this, what they should do instead of saying no should say, "ok, yes, i will wholeheartedly that your cake, but i will tell you straight up, i will take the profits from the baking of this cake, and i will donate them to either a pro-life organization that help people in my position, and i will to out a full-page ad saying look, we accept gay people or whoever, we will do your work wholeheartedly, but we will take the proceeds in the profits from everything that we make, and we

are going to donate them to those causes." all of a sudden, the people fight one now fil whimper into a corner, realizing they are wrong. guest: a business owner has to do with the money that he or his whatever he wants to do with it. [laughs] ok.: if they want to donate those if they want to donate those profits, they are free to do so. host: what about influencing prominent congress, members, people like education secretary betsy devos. explain how far their influence reaches? guest: well, we know that within the department of justice, they have a great deal of influence. the department of justice has decided to back them in the massachusetts case by filing a brief in support of

their position. we know they provided advice to attorney general sessions when he developed -- required by an executive order that president trump made. happyw that adf is her a with how those -- is very happy with how those came about. also, the department of justice is seeing a case that the adf brought which involves a free exercise claim against the university in georgia. both of those interventions on , in thef adf massachusetts cake shop and in georgia, were rather unusual and i think demonstrated adf's reach and influence in the department of justice. betsy devos, as we know, her 's charitable foundation donated money to adf. she was listed as being an officer with the foundation when

nat the donations were made. she said in her confirmation that was a clerical error, and she had no role in saying. in congress, there is one member of congress who used to be an adfbacked attorney, mike johnson-. he and ted cruz and mike lee are prominent senators in the republican caucus. aey led an effort, they led drafting of an amicus brief in the massachusetts cake shop that was signed by 86 republican members of congress. so adf is pretty influential trump's-=- in washington. host: sherry is calling on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. something was said that was very confusing. she says that the christian

right supported trump, and they were choosing other republican candidates, but they chose him because he became nominated. don't think the people really quite understand when we talk about christian right, these are not people who believe in christianity. these are people who believe that only white people are christian, and that anybody who is not white is not fully human, so they just wanted someone who was white. they did not care whether the person was obnoxious or who abused women or who mistreated and stole money from the people who work for them. they did not care about that. it has nothing to do with christianity. they did not choose trump because he was christian. host: ok, let's give our guests a chance to respond. that: well, i would say

the christian right is not represent all of christianity in america. certainly there are many christians in america who disagree with the christian right. thecaller is right from standpoint that their religious rights decisions to ultimately back trump has little to do with his religion and had more to do with politics. host: you talked a little bit earlier about the adf backing off what was on their website about what allied attorneys had to do. what do you think the consideration was there? consideration that perhaps it was something unethical or problematic about requiring their attorney these two sort of bow to the sort of beliefs? guest: i'm not sure what was happening there. we reported what was on the website, and they took it down. [laughs] other religious

christianity? faith-basedlot of groups that deal in litigation in cases that go up. a lot of them support a lot of different religious groups. is adf like that, or do they focus solely on christianity? guest: we looked for cases in which there were religious , asts implicated, because we said, they took cases that were not religious, but we were able to find five cases in which on behalf ofolved or representing a non-christian client. a couple of those -- more than a couple of those were amicus briefs that they had filed in cases involving muslim rights. for example, they filed an amicus brief in challenge to trump's second muslim ban.

in that case, they did not take a position on the van itself but on the question -- should the court have considered trump's tweaks and speeches and so forth when evaluating the claim against the muslim ban? they said no. takeaid you should not into account what the president tweeted or what he said, you fourd just look at the squares of the document itself, and that document is not evidence. host: that is an interesting argument to make if you litigate a lot of establishment clause cases, because, obviously, if a government official could go out and make all kinds of statements that clearly violate the establishment clause, but didn't write it down in a law or policy in such a way that is not included that explicit statement, that would certainly be a way of getting around the violations. host: all right, on our

democratic line in toledo, ohio. hi there. you are on with sarah posner. go ahead. caller: my name is ted. i am from toledo, ohio. high-end 57 years old. -- i am 57 years old, a disabled body worker. i have always been christian, and i do not put my values on anybody else. s far as the christian right goes, i am a democrat, but i find the democratic party aligns more with true christian values than we suppose it christian right, as far as jesus teachings. "love my enemy," "welcome before," take care of the -- "welcome the foreigner," "take easier the sick," it is for a camel to get through the eye of a needle.

i see the christian right using religion to further their own agenda, and that is why more and more people are going away from christianity. my son, who is 19, we discussed the bible daily. the thing cc on the christian right, where supposedly the , there isy say nowhere in the bible that says it. host: ok, we only have a couple of seconds. guest: this goes to the issue of adf and the christian right and not represent all of christianity in america. there are a lot of christians who are adamantly disagree with in theitions taken master cuties -- masterpiece cakeshop case, for example. they certainly do not represent all of american christians. all right, sarah poznan, you can find her online

and on twitter. thank you so much. guest: think you have any. week,coming up this looking into dna testing and consumer privacy issues. talkney joel winston will to us about how that data can be used against consumers. we will be right back. ♪ >> this weekend, c-span cities tour takes you to kansas city, missouri, and with the help of our spectrum cable partners, we look forward to the history. at noon eastern on booktv, we will take the kansas city library's pendergrass collection. >> it was a machine bought by kansas city, certainly in , andol from 1925 to 1939

the political machine being tied into organized crime and other illicit activities, taking tokbacks and using influence make sure that your preferred candidates are elected. >> on sunday at 2:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv, a visit to the negro league baseball museum. >> let me introduce you to foster, the genius, in a meeting. the building still stands. as a matter fact, it is right around the corner from where the museum still operates. is where eight independent black team owners met in 1922 nationalnegro league, and of course the negro league within go on to operate, amazingly, for 40 years, from 1920 until 1960. >> watch c-span cities tour of kansas city, missouri

today and sunday at 2:00 p.m. on c-span3. working with our cable affiliates as we explore america. "> "washington journal continues. host: joining us now from thesburgh is joel winston, privacy attorney who is here to discuss dna testing services and the genetic data, how that genetic data can be used against consumers. joel, thank you so much for joining us. guest: thank you for having me. good morning. host: most reviewers have probably seen these companies advertising how you can find your ancestors using a dna test, but minority leader chuck schumer earlier this week ordering the ftc to look into this kind of testing. why is that? guest: i think the problem stems from the fine print. there is a long list of terms

and conditions attached to these test, so when you purchase them, you consent and agree to give away a good origin of your genetic odyssey writes as well as most of your legal rights. reported byis gizmodo, you probably would not hand out your social security without a good idea of how that information would be used, right? that would be dumb. guest: that is true, and with genetic data, it is even more sensitive. it is essentially the software that is you. it is what determines who you are, your personality, your health issues, and it also connects with your family members and relatives, so we are just at the tip of understanding what this genetic information and dna can do and what it means for us. so if you give it away is really a risky move. host: who rescue wit regulate companies what

exists now for these companies, and what protections are in place for consumers who just want to find out where their family came from? these companies are regulated by a number of different state and federal laws , but essentially, what they are , based under contract law, it is actually, the legal parameters are thousands of years old, and it is essentially, they are asking your consent to take a license and legal right to own your dna and to own the information derived from the dna. so what they are doing is not necessarily illegal -- in fact, it is plainly legal because it is becomin the consumers who pue the tests and consent and agree to the terms. host: you wrote a piece somethingprogress.org about these companies and the issues that they present.

don't use the ancestry dna service without actually reading the ancestry.com terms of policy.and privacy according to these legal contracts, you still own your dna, but so does ancestry.com. the family history website newstry.com is selling a dna testing service called ancestrydna, but the dna and genetic data that ancestry.com collects may be used against you or a genetic relative. a coin to its privacy policies, and the street.com -- ancestry.com takes ownership of your dna forever. comeownership of your dna on the other hand, is limited in years. they cannot effectively taken away from you because you're still you, but what they are sneaking into these contracts are in perpetual

worldwide license to your dna in any way that they deem -- that they want to do it, either now or in the future. so your ownership of your dna ceases after you pass away, however, they still retain ownership of the actual dna sample itself and of any information that they can derive from sequencing the dna, either with technology that now exists or any technology that exists in the future. talking with attorney joel winston about dna testing services and the consumer rights. republicans can call (202) 748-8001. democrats (202) 748-8000. and independents (202) 748-8002. now, joel, consumers use this information for everything just to find out where their families to getom or sometimes

health information, but how do these companies use this data that is submitted by consumers? guest: the companies use it in a few ways. one, they use it to provide the services they are advertising. they will provide some insight into your genetic background, but they are also using it in other ways. they are selling it to third-party companies, specifically medical research companies and pharmaceutical companies. these companies are scouring through the data in search of big blockbuster treatments -- a cure for alzheimer's, breast --cer, huntington's disease they are out there, and they believe on the basis of big data of dna collections from millions of individuals will give them the insight to allow them to commercialize treatment for these different health issues. full disclosure, i have used one of these sites before to find out dna history, but on it, as i was filling it

out, there were lots of boxes i was able to check to opt out of having that information distributed among others. are there regulations that require these companies to allow consumers to opt out, or does it depend on the company itself? guest: there are no regulations that require them to give consumers a chance to opt out. even with the big companies, the ones that you would expect to be the most transparent, their terms and conditions are actually hidden across multiple different documents, and during the sale process where you click in different walks is different places to give your consent, oftentimes, they will ask for consent for medical research, and they will make it sound as if it is for the public good, but they are actually put research that they are commercializing a selling. host: cap barbara from texas on our independent line. you are on with joel winston. winston feared i

just turned in a dna kit from 123, whatever it is called, ancestry, but i do opt out from them keeping my information or using it for medical reasons, and i'm wondering, are they really going to use it? there are quite a few african americans or black americans tracing our roots back to slavery and trying to connect to becauseew and the bible we know that the people in the bible, they are black people because they run from egypt all the time to hide amongst the africans, and we eventually got sold into slavery. can they use my -- if i opted out and did not give my consent for them to keep it, can they

still use my dna? i am real concerns now. guest: that is actually a real good question, and the answer is it depends. it depends on a service that you use and what the terms are of the service and what was opted in or opted out. if you opted out of the research portion of it, then they are, by their own terms, they are prohibited from sharing your dna as part of research efforts. but again, that is upon themselves, that is their own enforcement, and each of these companies has portions of the policies that allow them to change their policies at any time. it is up to the consumer to continuously go back and check and reread and make sure that the policy is still in line with what they want. you may be familiar with the wheref henrietta lack, genetic information was taken and used an commercialize for research against the knowledge of the individual. unfortunately, there is really no clear answer other than to

say you have to pull up the terms and conditions of the service that you use and verify what it is that you opted out of. host: let's take a look at what senator schumer is calling for from the ftc with a report from the "new york post." schumer said it is unclear what companies, like ancestry dna, do with all the data they collect from hair or saliva samples that clients, eager to know if they are 20% cherokee or have a genetic marker for a certain disease, send in. many do not realize that their sensitive information may end up in the hands of many third-party companies. schumer said in a press conference in manhattan on sunday, "there is no point in learning about your family tree if your privacy gets chopped down at the same time." he is calling for an investigation of the makers. they have ramped up their marketing for the holidays. we have seen a lot of sales and ads about these things, people

billing them is holiday familyor friends and members to what would the ftc do if they choose to look into this? think schumer is on the right track, but respectfully, he is slightly off. you have no privacy when it comes to the tester when you send in the test and submit to the terms, you have waived all of your privacy. what they are doing is entirely legal under contract laws. the language is legal, but the problem and the reason the ftc should look into it is that these companies are making false and misleading statements to the public about the control that they have. rather than being fully transparent and confessing to what is really in the terms and are using their pr machine to remind customers that they do have control over their dna -- only if they consent to give it up.

but they do not really make clear that the purchase and the fift fulfillment of these orders is the consent. host: william is calling in on our independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you today? i just wanted to call in because i happen to see this gentleman, joel winston, talk about consumer rights and so forth. real quick, i will tell you that in 1969, i've bought an insurance policy after i graduate from high school. and i kept it. in 1983, i divorced. two years later, this insurance company sent me a form that said i needed to take a blood test, if you can believe it or not, for aids -- just because i got divorced. the ending of the story was that the company that i have the original policy sold. the new company came in and triple the policy, and i converted it into a type of policy for a retirement fund.

i did manage to get a little money out of it, but from data, just supposedly, i was forced to take an aids test, which i declined. they canceled my policy. just shows- but that you what can happen when you, you know, people get your data. thank you very much. i do not know if you want to comment on it or not, but that is my story. host: i want to add to that and say how, if any way, do have a iaws get implicated -- do have implicated? do they apply here at all? guest: they do not apply. as soon as you consent to these, you lose any privacy rights you may have had in protecting your own information. thecaller mentioned in 1980's when companies use to ask

people, they would target people based on lifestyle, which he mentioned it was a divorce that prompted the company to ask for additional blood work. so there are certain protections that exist now that did not exist then, however, these regulations do not provide an absolute protection. the problem is once you take one of these genetic test, and you get results that saying you may alzheimer'sly for or may have a proclivity toward cancer or heart disease, the insurance companies cannot get their hands on these tests directly, but they can ask you if you have taken these tests. if you have taken them, and you have knowledge about what these results show, then you cannot give a false statement to a life insurance company about your health background. separately, for health insurance, we know that pre-existing conditions used to exist. but have been outlawed,

there is a real threat that pre-existing conditions are coming back. so health insurance companies are really eager to get this type of data and combine it with other types of medical credit reports that they have for you in order to underwrite you based on your genetic issues. host: we are joined from pittsburgh by joel winston, a privacy and consumer rights attorney. he is talking about the privacy issues implicated by the use of dna testing and how regulators might respond to it. once again, republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. and independents, (202) 748-8002 . joel, i get your point that you can contract away your privacy rights here, but is there anything else the ftc could do? for example, can they require these companies to be more forthcoming about how this information is used, exactly go, and what you

can or cannot all ou go, opt ou? guest: yes, absolutely, the ftc can prevent the company's for making misleading or deceptive statements about whether terms and conditions actually do. they can require that they be prominent to consumers, and at the very beginning level, it can require that all of these agreements in terms exist on one single page. if you wanted to read the privacy policies and the terms and conditions of these companies, you have to go through and sift through multiple documents in multiple locations. so it is not even just the burden of reading the terms and understanding the terms -- consumers cannot even really find these terms. our republican line from washington, d.c. you are on with joel winston. caller: good morning.

i am currently proposing a new bill in washington, d.c. called recovery act to locate the descendents of american slaves. as you know, the latin american -- theion african-american population is the principal population for identity theft. -- or what we call reparations, but we are changing the name legally to recovery, you have to test, dna tests, any person who is claiming benefits from this new law.

host: or other issues. john is calling in from kingsport, tennessee.

good morning, john. more of a question is problem. future type this is something more her valent in our society. would that in turn lead to another type of slavery, and involuntary servitude of those clones? guest: i can't speak to future technology that doesn't exist yet. you speak to a major staying. a single genome costs a billion dollars and took 10 years. now the cost is less than a thousand dollars and can be done in a civil day. we are just at the cusp of we are in thewhat

model tiara. if there are future technologies ,hat allow them to explore dna clone dna or used in as a whether they provide snippets of dna to people, we don't know what the future holds. areyou and these contracts giving away your right in perpetuity for the length of your life and beyond. host: other than just not taking these tests come oh can people do to protect themselves? guest: you cannot take the test. if you take the test, you have no privacy. these companies have two choices the way they write their terms. they have chosen the way that gives them complete ownership. all the terms and conditions of

these companies contain arbitration agreements. you agree to waive, all your legal rights and the access you court, and any type of normal rule of law where, if you discover the future that they have woken the law against you, you have waived your legal right and would have through the course of binding arbitration. host: just a few minutes left. caller: i have a question for joel. justhat that is -- we discussed this the other day. we're talking about what keeps them from doing this, taking our information and keeping it. i was on the cdc website and it was talking about your in tests. andthe national health nutrition test that the

government takes, they save our year in tests in a warehouse for 10 years. i just read that on the cdc website. so my question is, i mean, they've got nano biotechnology. they have a pill now that is abilify and it has a sensor. host: i want to give joel a chance to address the fact -- is the government collecting these? guest: the government itself collecting information, there are a number of regulations that would prohibit the government from using it or selling it.

host: thank you so much for joining us today. thank you.: host: tomorrow, their arms discussassociation will what it means for north korea's nuclear weapons powers. and american conservative union met slap will be here to discuss president trump's performance richard: will be here to discuss his newest documentary. that's all for today's washington journal. we will be back at 7:00 a.m. tomorrow. ♪