upcoming battle over the redacted mueller report. thee westbrook reacts to committee hearing with major ceos of u.s. banks. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] morning, thursday, april 11. a3 hour "washington journal" is ahead. we begin with william barr's testimony yesterday before the senate that he is reviewing the fbi's 2016 investigation of the trump campaign's ties to russia. he cited concerns he has of what he described of spying on the campaign. what do you think of william barr's concerns and his use of that word, spying? republicans can give a call at 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000.

independents, 202-748-8002. you can also catch up with us on social media. on twitter it is@. --on twitter it is @cspanwj. on facebook it is facebook.com/cspan. you can start calling now as we show you the attorney general of the united states before the senate appropriations committee yesterday. [video clip] >> i am going to re--- be reviewing the genesis and conduct of intelligence activities directed at the trump .ampaign during 2016 -- a lot ofready this has already been investigated and a substantial portion has been investigated and is being investigated by the office of inspector general department. one of the things i want to do is pull together all of the information from various

investigations that have gone on, including on the hill and in the department and see if there are any remaining questions to be addressed. >> can you share with us why you feel a need to do that? >> well, for the same reason we are worried about foreign influence in elections, we want spying sure -- i think on a political campaign is a big deal. it is a big deal. the generation i grew up in, which is the vietnam war period, people were concerned about spying on antiwar people and so forth by the government and there were a lot of rules put in place to make sure there is an adequate basis before our law enforcement agencies get involved in political surveillance. i am not suggesting those rules were violated, but i think it is important to look at that.

i am not talking about the fbi necessarily, but intelligence agencies more broadly. >> you are not suggesting spying occurred? i guess you could -- i think spying did occur. yes, i think spying did occur. the question is whether it was adequately predicated. i am not suggesting whether it was adequately predicated, but i need to explore that. i think it is my obligation. i want to make sure agencies stayed in their own lane. we have rules about that. host: the front page of the new york times on this story, barr asserting spying in 2016 sites

questions, but not evidence. senator jack read asked william barr if he had any evidence of wrongdoing by the fbi or the special counsel. here is that exchange. [video clip] >> counterintelligence investigation involving the trump campaign. there was an investigation by director mueller into the 2016 campaign and other issues. have you any evidence there was anything improper in those investigations? >> i have no specific evidence that i would cite right now. i do have questions about it. >> this panel you are putting together. >> i am not putting together a panel. >> you just have interest in this, you don't have any evidence? >> i have concerns about various aspects of it. host: as we get your reaction, we will show you from reaction around the hill yesterday and continuing into today. here is chuck schumer yesterday

on twitter, the attorney general admitted he has no evidence to support his claim that spying on the trump campaign returned. barr musteneral retract his statement or provide evidence. perpetuating conspiracy theories is beneath the office of the attorney general. knows how counterintelligence investigations work. he knows there is ample evidence of attempts to infiltrate the trump campaign and fbi took lawful action to stop it. from the republican side of the aisle, jim jordan, ranking member on the oversight committee in the house, pursuing the truth, holding people accountable, exactly want -- what americans want. mark meadows, republican from north carolina saying attorney general barr asked if spying on the trump campaign occurred and he said i think it did occur. we see two years worth of

evidence -- the willingness to investigate is massive. accountability is around the corner. getting your thoughts on phone lines as usual. we will start on the line for democrats, paul in rhode island. good morning. got the name wrong, -- caller: you got the name wrong, it is carl. the reason i called is there are two different distinctions. when the fbi found out senator feinstein had a chinese driverst spy who was her , they notified her immediately. suspected attempts to infiltrate the trump campaign , they did not notify him. the first time around they said because when they went to notify with him was the

one they were looking at and the question was later, why didn't you notify him later? they did not have any answer. this is not even talked about. host: carl, one story on that from politico reporter andrew yesterday tweeted out this ofnt, that barr said, one his questions is why trump was not briefed at his campaign could be a target of foreign influence operations. he said on twitter nbc reported december 2017 that trump was warned about that in 2016. caller: okay, i don't know about that. i don't know why other people are bringing it up. one other thing is if you look at that panel yesterday, democrats are not interested into -- in the truth. they are looking to fulfill a suit theirutcome to

interests. they hate donald trump, let's be honest. nancy pelosi, they hate donald trump and one final point, why don't we just wait to let the evidence come out? mr. horowitz is going to be out by june at the latest and then you have this mueller report that has been operating very quietly. one other final point, they want donald trump's tax returns, which i think should go out. they should also get nancy pelosi's tax returns, you know? other wealthy individuals in the house and senate, there are plenty. nancy pelosi is very wealthy, she is a san francisco elitist. she does not understand working people. i am a retired manufacturing engineer. host: that is carl in rhode island. some information on some of the other reviews you were bringing

up, this from the washington examiner. you mentioned the inspector general -- who aren't on carter page and the probe continuing. u.s. attorney john huber of utah also was appointed to investigate the fbi and the justice department though mr. barr did not mention that yesterday. john in georgia, republican, go ahead. caller: yes. . am calling about the ag they want to get all the information, investigate everything, it will get you the truth. that host: is my comment. elizabeth in pennsylvania -- that is my comment. host: elizabeth in pennsylvania. caller: i wanted to point out we

now have an ag who is accusing people of spying, but admits he does not have any proof and i when we need to be careful an ag is working more for the president than the united states -- the people of the united states. take that one step further, the justice system can be used as a political arm and i think -- thank you. host: here is a few comments from our facebook page on this topic. christina writing thank god this is happening and thank you to attorney general barr. we need this because it looks all the world like the obama administration used our agencies to spy on a political opponent. michael writing spying on a political campaign having meetings with foreign corporations and spies, a.k.a. doing their job. that is michael fixing the attorney general's statement.

in theory,tie saying this is fantastic, but i feel like the results will be inconclusive with a lot more money spent. taking your calls on phone lines. for republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. matt on the line for independents. glendale, arizona. good morning. caller: you are going to find it was not only the democrats, it is the republicans, too, that were in on this spying stuff. host: what do you mean by that? caller: you have john mccain. john mccain -- that dossier thing, you will see that comes out. both sides hated him, that is the way it goes, man. host: do you think this is the

first step towards an appointment of a second special counsel? .aller: perhaps it might be too big. they may have to do that. host: that is matt in arizona. staying on the line for independents, brett. caller: good morning. i was just kind of wondering againid isis stand for, sa stand for again? host: foreign intelligence surveillance act. is ar: i don't think -- foreigner and i would like to know how they used this dossier that has not been proven true to fisa courtfizer -- and get a warrant. they let hillary clinton destroy

congress,lie to brenner and klapper, they lied to congress, cia, national .ecurity intelligence director all those lied to congress, but were never charged. them to goe to see back and find out what actually the fbi thought they were doing. i have got nothing against the do, great institution, but i believe there was some corruption going on between the leaders and other people of the fbi using a false document to warrant to spy on america -- on an american citizen. as far as i know, the

understanding i had was there was no collusion between the trump campaign or persons in the campaign and russia. we have got to find out what started it all. host: in terms of the sequence of events and the explanations we have heard so far, this is aaron blake who writes for the fix at the washington post, this was his piece yesterday after that testimony in the senate appropriations committee. aaron blake writing there are few things we know about the critics of the fbi's activities, which they have characterized as spying. one is the foreign intelligence surveillance act warrant to monitor carter page, but that came after he had left the campaign, so it was not technically spying on a campaign official and then there are a couple of other non-fisa related efforts to gleam information from page and george papadopoulos. there was clearly an information

gathering effort going on. the question is whether you consider hiring an informant to talk to campaign advisors to be "spying on a political campaign ." james clapper suggests even if you consider it spying, the target was russia and not the campaign, so the involvement of the trump campaign was more incidental. aaron blake in the washington post. this is tony in new jersey, a democrat. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. really quick, i want to say one thing. barr is cherry picking the answers to the questions and if you really notice, certain questions he has an answer to already and other questions, he wants to wait until this so-called plane lands. here is the kicker. what is really going to set this thing off is when they get this wikileaks guy over here under testimony and put him under oath

and then we will find out the real deal. i want to see how republicans are going to wiggle their way out of that. host: what do you think the real deal is, tony? that is tony in new jersey. some news this morning about wikileaks founder julian assange arrested by british police on thursday moments after ecuador announced it had withdrew his asylum for "repeatedly violating international conventions and protocol." foreign minister told news organizations this week that living in the embassy indefinitely is bad for assange's state of mind and his health, but that he has a right to a fair trial and fair defense . that story from fox news this morning. robert in massachusetts, line for democrats. good morning. caller: yes, good morning.

everything with all this spying, it is an investigation, not spying. when barr turns around and says his positionan in and then you take the mueller report, we need to see the mueller report a little bit way.ted in a sensible we have not talked about the third party. he said the third party, i don't want nobody in the third-party. the third-party he is talking about is donald trump's children. ivanka, mike pence, this is what is going to come

out in this report and the american people deserve to have that. we already know the truth, we just need more proof that us democrats got it right and that is the way it is. host: the attorney general saying he expects the redacted report to come out sometime next week. several questions about yesterday's hearing -- about that at yesterday's hearing. also questions about his comments saying spying did occur . getting your reaction. phone lines for republicans, democrats, and independents as usual. this is congressman adam schiff, the ranking member of the house intelligence committee saying the casual suggestion by the nation's top law enforcement officer of spying may please donald trump, who rails against the deep state coup, but strikes another destructive blow to our demonstrated -- democratic institutions. here is more from the attorney general yesterday on his -- how

his review relates to the fbi. >> i also want to make sure -- make clear, this is not launching an investigation of the fbi. to the extent of there were any issues at the fbi, i do not view it as a problem that is endemic to the fbi, i think there was probably a failure among a group echelon,s at the upper so i don't like to hear attacks about the fbi because i think the fbi is an outstanding organization and i think chris wray is a great partner for me and i am glad he is there as a director. if it becomes necessary to look over former officials' activities, i suspect i will be relying heavily on chris and look closely with him on looking at that information. that is what i am doing. i feel i have an obligation to make sure government power is

not abused. i think that is one of the principal roles of the attorney general. host: the headline on matt mccovey act --met's headline in the washington times looking -- saying barr closely looking into crossfire hurricane. here is what matt writes in that column. if laws were broken, those individuals should be prosecuted just as americans believe anyone who conspired or coordinated with russia in the election deserved to face up on emmett -- face punishment. the hunters have now been on the move for two years, now they are the hunted. matt in today's washington times. we want to hear from you. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. kathy, a republican from alabama, good morning. caller: good morning.

host: go ahead. caller: i am just calling to state the case that democrats -- right now they are saying barr should retract his statement about spying on the trump campaign, but i don't hear any of the democrats retracting any of the inflammatory statements they made themselves. host: which ones should democrats retract, kathy? caller: they should retract things like trump was a russian spy, that he is a traitor, that sort of thing. they have done nothing but make the trump administration hisrable since before administration started. i pray for trump every day that we can get back on an even keel

and people will understand the truth of what is going on. host: this is kathy in alabama. this is margaret, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. comment is about president wasp being told when he candidate trump about the russians interfering his -- infiltrating his campaign and he said he did not believe it because russian intelligence did not say it. that being said, all the chatter over the airwaves, hundreds of conversations they were having with the russians, not including all the russians coming in and out of trump towers, not including once he became president and got nominated, all the russians that came into the white house. had theo know when he summit with putin, 2.5 hours,

kellyanne could have gone into the summit, nobody went in there. the translator, he took her notes. everything president trump does, if russian intelligence doesn't say it, he does not believe our intelligence. i think it is wrong, it is not right. he has been dodging our intelligence since he was candidate running for president. host: do you think there are facts to backup your concerns in the full mueller report? caller: yes, and i would love to see the mueller report. host: do you think you are going to be able to see that when it comes out next week? those things and if so, why weren't those included in the summary that was released about that report? believe myause i opinion that president trump has already been notified about them and if he has not read them, they were read to him and i is going to barr

give his opinion, not mueller's opinion and not the aides that assist mueller in the investigation that have already done their opinions to release to the public. redo theirre to opinion. host: that is margaret in indiana. this is the president's opinion yesterday as he was departing the white house about the justice department's actions when it came to his campaign in 2016. [video clip] interested in,st is getting started -- the attorney general did a great job, getting started on going back to the origins of exactly where this all started because this was an illegal witchhunt and everybody knew it. they knew it and they got caught and what they did was treason.

what they did was against our constitution and everything we stand for. hopefully that will happen. host: taking your phone calls in this first hour of the washington journal. as usual, republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. sean is an independent in pennsylvania, good morning. caller: i think you meant john. hello? host: go ahead. caller: i want to say i think it is a bit hypocritical of the democrats to be attacking barr already. he has not named any names. what they did to kavanaugh with no evidence. i am an independent. .ctually, i am a libertarian host: you are going in and out, but i think we got your point. caller: james in massachusetts.

a republican, go ahead. host: thank you, john. i kind of have a theory about comey when he came out that time and theore election democrats spurned him for -- hillary clinton. i think he was probably doing a good thing when he did that that phone call he made where they talked -- i just feel they found out something was going on in new york that related to hillary and he realized there was something going on with the fbi and he wanted to even the

score and came out and made statements about hillary clinton. that is a theory i have. i am just wondering what people thought of that. thank you. in ohio,nita is next democrat paris good morning. caller: good morning. i just turned on your station after watching bbc america and i am watching british police dragging out julian assange. you can correct me if i am wrong, -- frankly, i think assange under -- american extradition. i will believe him before

anything the trump administration says. i want to see what the british get out of him because the ecuadorians told them you need to go. they seemed to be a bit more .horough you have a good day. host: on the arrest of julian assange, some tweets from julian confirmedlawyer, just julian assange has been arrested not just for breach of bail conditions, but also in relation to a u.s. extradition request. she tweeted from assange the u.s. warrant was issued in december 2017 and conspiracy with chelsea manning in early 2010. the latest from that, we will keep updated on that story as we go through the rest of our program, spending this first

hour on the attorney general's statements yesterday he believes spying did occur when it came to the trump campaign. want to get your thoughts on that and that word, spying, which has caused consternation from democrats. phone lines this morning, republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. s independent, 202-748-8002. brenda in arkansas, republican. go ahead. caller: i don't have a very good connection. however, i was telling the young lady, if you were paying attention to mainstream media, you were shocked yesterday. outside sources, they have been talking about this for over a year, close to two years. host: we will take your point, sorry about that connection. try calling again. we mentioned the consternation over that word, "spying."

senator schatz asked at one point during the hearing yesterday if he would like to clarify his words. here is that exchange. [video clip] >> i want to give you a chance to rephrase something you said because i think when the attorney general of the united states uses the term "spying," it is provocative and unnecessarily inflammatory. i know what you are getting at because you explained yourself in terms of answering senator graham's questions and the questions of others, do you want to rephrase what you are doing because i think the word "spying" could cause everybody in the cable news ecosystem to freak out and i think it is necessary for you to be precise with your language. you normally are and i want to give you a chance to be especially precise here. of all the sure

connotations of that word that you are referring to, but unauthorized surveillance, i want to make sure there was no unauthorized surveillance. is that more appropriate in your mind? >> this is your call, i really did want to give you a chance to say it how you wanted to say it and may -- make sure you did not misspeak because you have talked for a long time and you did yesterday. i wanted to make sure you use the word you wanted to use. >> i appreciate that. host: showing clips of that senate appropriations hearing yesterday. you can watch it in its entirety at c-span.org. search in the search bar william barr and you will find it. billy in tennessee, a democrat. good morning. caller: hello. i am 65 years old and i am on medicare and i have been watching all these people fussing and fighting on tv and i

,hink that the american people we just wanted to get the facts of what the congress is saying and what the senate is saying and to please just stop fighting. we are so tired of the fighting. we have a president that is a republican or if he is a democrat, it does not matter to the people as long as we get the facts and we understand what is .oing on in our country just so tired of the fighting and i don't want to hear the word spying. we are tired of that. we just want to hear what the president has to say about what is going on in this country and it, thatn try and fix is what we want to know. how can he step up and try to

fix things? host: do you think we will be fighting over the 2016 election all the way through the 2020 election? caller: i think so because in the past, all they do is fuss and fight, that is what goes on. that is what goes on in every election and i have been voting since i was 18 years old. i am so tired of it and i think the american people are tired of it and we just want -- we want saybody to step up and enough is enough. our: you are calling on line for democrats. what democratic priorities do you think democrats should be talking about in 2020? caller: in 2020? i think we should be standing up together anduping if we have a democratic president, if that is what

with thelet him work people instead of fighting with each other. i am so tired of it, i have listened to this all my life, fussing and fighting, i am tired . i am so tired and i want people to vote the way they think they should, vote for the right person and to stop the spying like the attorney general. is the attorney general and i think he is hiding stuff from us from that report, but i think we need to hear the voting in i think the the new election, i think everyone needs to vote their conscience and i think we need to vote together. everybody just get together, quit fighting. i am so tired of the fighting. host: that is billy in

tennessee. john up next in louisiana. republican, go ahead. caller: i watched all the hearings yesterday and thanks andc-span for having those win the attorney general used the word spying, everybody kind of set their hair on fire and started running in circles. all you have to go back is about three years, the fisa court things to unmask people like flynn, the things lab or said, brenner said, comey, mueller. it is obvious there was surveillance, spying, whatever you want to call it. spyingt he used the word is another way of describing the fact that there were american citizens who were surveilled, spied upon through -- many ways through the fisa court's. if that is not spying, i don't know what is. i cannot understand the angst

democrats have when you use that one single word. it is insanity. seattle,es in washington. independent, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you. wait until we see what the constitution of the united states is about. it means nothing. was it was wrote, it actually a white supremacy document so they can maintain the system in the united states. what barr is doing and trump, we see what he did during iran-contra. the elite canhat be excused of their crimes. what we are really going to find out in that mueller report. are bestnd barr friends and rosenstein, who actually was there during the

time is conspiring with barr to cover it up. we are going to find russia and trump and facebook and these people actually changed votes in the states where trump won. trump is acting like a dictator if you really look at it. his father, like he said the other day, is from east germany, which was a communist country. an apple does not fall far from the tree. host: that is james this morning . the attorney general was on the hill yesterday. it was his second day of hearings before congressional committees. he was on the house side and faced many of the same questions regarding the release of the mueller report. in his house hearing, he talked about how he is red acting that report for public release. [video clip] >> i am relying on my own

discretion to make as much public as i can. 20 ninth,er of march i identified four areas i feel should be redacted and i think most people would agree. the first is grand jury information, 6e material. the second is of the information the intelligence committee review -- it would reveal intelligence sources and methods. the third is information that could interfere with ongoing prosecutions. you will recall the special counsel did spin off a number of cases still being pursued and we want to make sure none of the information in the report would infringe upon either the ability of the prosecutors to prosecute the cases or the fairness to the defendants. and finally, we intend to redact information that implicates the privacy or reputational interest

of peripheral players where there is a decision not to charge them. right now, the special counsel is working with us on identifying information in the reports that fall under those four categories. the exigentrcode from the report and provide explanatory reports explaining the basis for each redaction. host: about 20 minutes left in this segment, getting your reaction to 2 days of testimony for the attorney general on capitol hill. that statement yesterday that the attorney general believes spying did occur on the trump campaign in 2016. here is a few of the comments from twitter as we have been having this conversation. jody writes it appears the fbi was watching russians and lead them to the trump tower meetings . if donald was not meeting

russians, the fbi was watching, he might be above suspicion, but that is not the case. tony writing i would think congress would want the facts and a full investigation. i hear a lot of people in congress screaming for there not to be a investigation. the only spying that did occur was russia infiltrating the clinton campaign to give ammunition to the trump campaign. when our ag lies to the nation, it is time for an honest one. you can join in at @cspanwj. the conversation happens through this program and well into the hours. susan in indiana, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to say i am registered as a democrat, but, really, when i go to vote, i am independent. therefore, i have voted for republicans as well as democrats . my comment was about barr.

and gettingng him information directly from him, i felt that he felt very uncomfortable. he appeared to be very uncomfortable when he used the word "spying." wase, all he was doing giving trump another soundbite, which he is off and running with it. i think it is a shame, it is a terrible shame what has happened and,e republican party figuratively speaking, my weught is our next election, should all go to the polls. people who listen and listen well and watch c-span and get information from the source like with barr yesterday, i think we vote democrat, straight

democratic ticket. i did not want to. i know there are good republicans out there, it is just that they are not letting their voice be heard. host: who is a good republican in congress? caller: i am trying to remember the gentleman's name. susan from alaska, i believe her name is susan, she appears to be a very good, solid thinking, sane thinking person. host: lisa murkowski in alaska. susan, you might be referring to susan collins in maine. caller: maine, yes. for those good republicans, and there are still -- there are some gentlemen in washington that are good republicans, but they are keeping silent because of the party.

i don't feel that dedicated to any party. i think, i see, i listen, i read between the lines. more importantly, when you have people like barr on television yesterday testifying, i watch carefully. that is why i drew my conclusion about him appearing to be uncomfortable, but he did what needed to be done for trump. thank you for listening to me. host: here is more of the attorney general on television yesterday. in exchange with lindsey graham, senator from south carolina over this review of what happened with the fbi in 2016. [video clip] >> do you agree that every american should be concerned as to whether or not a warrant was obtained against an american citizen with unverified information? >> absolutely. i think the fourth amendment is

one of our most cherished civil liberties. >> you think that is an appropriate thing to look at and you will look at it? >> yes. >> do you share my concern that if you are going to open up a counterintelligence investigation against a presidential candidate, that you have to have a very good reason? >> yes, absolutely. >> a counterintelligence investigation is designed to protect the target of foreign influence, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> it is not a prosecutorial effort, is it? >> no, not unless espionage develops. >> would it be odd that the candidate was never really briefed by the department of justice that your campaign may be targeted by a foreign entity? >> that is one of the questions i have. i feel, normally, the campaign would have been advised of this. >> can you think of a good reason right now why they would not have been? >> i am interested in getting

that answer. they had two former u.s. attorneys in chris christie and rudy giuliani involved in the campaign and i don't understand why the campaign was not advised. host: that was the attorney general on capitol hill yesterday before the senate appropriations committee. more cabinet members on capitol hill today and we will be there watching on c-span and you can join us as well. the agriculture secretary will testify on the president's 2020 -- hearing rightthat after this program, at 10:00 eastern. you can watch on c-span and also c-span.org and listen on the free c-span radio app. the acting defense secretary, patrick shanahan, and the joint chiefs of staff are among the witnesses at the senate arms -- armed services committee on the creation of the u.s. space force

. coverage begins at 9:30 eastern. you can watch as well online at c-span.org and listen on the c-span radio app. back to your phone calls. indiana,bunker hill, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. onspent $25 million investigation. what are we going to do? spend another $25 million? i don't see where we are going with this and i think it is going to be back and forth between democrats and republicans -- republicans and democrats. you cannot investigate every situation. i think it should be over. that's all i have to say. host: do you think you will get

more answers when the mueller report is released publicly with this redaction process? caller: i really don't think we are going to get anything that is going to satisfy anybody. a just seems -- it is just back-and-forth on republicans and democrats. there is no answer. host: same question we asked an earlier caller, do you think we are going to be talking about the 2016 election through the 2020 election? will.: we probably half of the country is satisfied and half of the country is not satisfied. as long as we are that divided, there is going to be no answers. that were we ever not divided? where the divisions ever not that deep and that start? caller: i am 73 and i do not

remember a time that we were that divided as we were now. host: when did things change? is this just with the trump administration? was this with the obama administration as well? .aller: both obama and trump it has been divided ever since and it does not make any sense. we are all americans and let's act like americans. let's vote, let's get the people we want in there. host: this is bob in brunswick, georgia. wanted to say i hope they do investigate corporate democrat because this whole thing is a hoax. hillary clinton and podesta stole the election from bernie sanders and they wanted to cover it up. they got chelsea manning in

jail. wikileaks, they are probably going to execute him. they are going to start a war. host: are you a bernie sanders supporter? caller: yes, i am a bernie sanders supporter. host: how do you think he will do this time around? caller: they will probably try to steal it from him again. the corporate media will probably do everything they can to slander him. that is the democratic corpora e the peopleo stop trying to do something for the people. host: that is bob in georgia. you mentioned julian assange. it some more reporting on that arrest that happened today. this from nbc news, a source directly familiar tells nbc news u.s. is making plans to seek extradition of julian assange from the united kingdom in connection to a sealed federal charges that have been filed in

the eastern district of virginia. assange's lawyer confirmed u.s. extradition. you mentioned you are a supporter of bernie sanders. here is a picture of bernie sanders yesterday on capitol hill in today's new york times. bernie sanders announcing a fifth version of his medicare -- all act, announcing the proposal he rolled out after the 2016 election. this is a struggle for the heart and soul of who we are as the american people. the washington times in their reporting notes he has the support in his medicaid for all plan of nearly every fellow senator running for president. senator kiersten gillibrand of new york, elizabeth warren of massachusetts, cory booker of harris havekamala

all embraced the sanders-led push for medicare for all. , a democrat. good morning. caller: i have been waiting for this day to arrive because watching the media for two years, people in their bubble. i happen to go and watch all the media and i have seen how republicans stay on their channels. before they said good republicans have remained silent . where are those good republicans? for two years we have watched talk to thenspiracy main stream on fox news and talk radio. have seen they have taken republican people who authorized those fisa applications. rod rosenstein is a republican and he signed those fisa apps.

report thatad a ig came out and said although those agents had political bias, that were revealed, that it did not affect the outcome of the clinton campaign. also, he referred to an existing ig looking at the russia probe. looking atueller was the russia investigation and into whether trump and his associates who have pleaded guilty in indictments against russia -- we have looked at that and we have seen how he did not come out and say that the russia probe was a hoax, that the republicans in charge -- host: for your information, on the probe i think you are referring to, the justice department inspector currently investigating whether the fisa applications were handled

properly. thice partment ig said his report on that could come in may or june. william barr, the attorney general asked questions about that ongoing investigation as well at that hearing yesterday. did you want to finish your comment? caller: yes, how this attorney general made a conclusion and gave fuel to an unsubstantiated claim that has been debunked. they released the fisa apps last year. they had no problem releasing classified information last year when it is to fuel this debunked claim that obama and clinton worked with russians to frame trump. i want republican leadership to be cornered by the media and asked whether they agree that they think the mueller and his team than the prior department of justice and the intelligence community framed trump. you are not doing your job, all

of you media, by allowing this to go on. and neither is -- you need to ask the leadership, macconnell, ryan. when he was asked about these claims, they backed away just like the ag did yesterday when he was asked, can you provide evidence? these are authorized surveillance. russians were routinely getting monitored by our department of justice for years now. host: that is diana in jersey. this is james in tennessee, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. it is sad to hear a lot of these callers. it seems like it is a great lacking of critical thinking skills and a matter of semantics. whether it is spying or . it does not matter if somebody is killed or murdered, the results are the .ame

the fact of the matter is he was spied on. they are worried about the words, the language that was used and it is always this sionary tactic being used by the democrats. i hope they get to the bottom of it. and attorney general who will look at the other side that has actually been committing all the crimes. i hope there is some accountability because these were crimes. i have been able to think critically like i hope the rest of the public starts to do because this is an american country. this is our country and it doesn't matter if you are democrat, republican, independent, we should not want

one. to happen to any caller: good morning. realistically, if president trump was not an agent provocateur of the russians, he could not have done any more damage to our country as he already has. he has divided us, we are almost in a position of a civil war between two groups. look what he has done at the border, look what he has done to nato, and dictators around the world. i was thinking the other day while he was having someone at the white house, that it look like hitler receiving mussolini. he could not have done any more damage than he has already done. let's be realistic about this. host: mike, last caller in this segment, line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to tell the callers out

there that this spying thing has been going on for years. trump has been spied on probably since the 1980's by the russians . they are in his building. he put them in his building read about 12 apartments in that building are now the home of russians. one of them, who they say was a big organized crime in russia, was on his floor, the 26th floor. he had his own office helping him on the campaign. these guys, they are not sitting in there playing cards. these are russian kgb guys and when you get an apartment in the same building as a possible president of the united states, they are listening to everything he says, everything his son-in-law says, his daughter says.

a goat -- what goes out on the emails, phone lines are tapped. host: we are waiting for the redacted mueller report. do you think there is evidence of this in that report that is expected to come out publicly next week? caller: i hope so. the whole thing should be released. people have to realize the big spiers in the world are the american government. we have always spied on everybody. the russians, the israelis, the english, everyone knows what everyone else is doing. host: that is mike, our last caller in this first segment of the "washington journal." plenty more to come this morning. up next, we will be joined by republican congressman fred upton, a senior member of the house energy and commerce committee. and later, we will be joined by john bies of the group american oversight to talk about the redacted mueller report expected next week. we will be right back. ♪

>> the complete guide to congress is now available. it has details about the house and senate. contact and bio information about every senator and representative, plus information about congressional committees, state governors and the cabinet. directoryongressional is a handy spiral-bound guide. order your copy from the c-span online store for $18.95. barbara bush has finally had enough. they were out of the white house. she did not need to bide her time anymore. that she took offense at it, that reporters were at her door asking questions about it, that it was just designed to and nancy reagan heartburn,

she said to nancy reagan, and don't you ever call me again. and she hung up. >> this week on q&a, usa today washington bureau chief susan page on her biography of barbara bush, the matriarch. >> at the very beginning, she said you will never see my diaries. at the bushare kept library but they are not available for public view until 35 years after her death. she was unlikely to let me see her diaries. in the interview, she said and you can see my diaries. gift.as an incredible 8:00 easternht at on c-span's q&a. >> "washington journal" continues. host: 17 term congressman fred

upton joins us now, a michigan republican. first, your reaction to the attorney general saying he will take a look into whether or not spying occurred against the trunk campaign. guest: based on what he said, i think he needs to follow through. the question i have reading the wall street journal this morning is, did the fbi actually let the campaign know? who did they tell? when did it occur? let's follow through. it is a pretty serious charge. host: do you think this is the first step for what some are calling for, a second special counsel? guest: i don't know that we need another special counsel. minimum, theye ought to do a cursory review and make some type of report. host: what about his use yesterday of that word spying? guest: it is a pretty broad

term, so that has to be defined. what was it he believes or alleges they might have done? what type of impact did it have on the campaign? when were they alerted about this? report, let'ser see where it takes us. host: do you think we are going to be talking about the 2016 campaign through the 2020 election? guest: let's turn the page. we need to find out the answers. it was obviously a shocking revelation. should it dominate between now and 2020? no, unless something is really there. host: one of the reasons lawmakers wanted to talk to him originally was about the mueller report and he talked about how he is handling the reduction process. are you comfortable with how the attorney general has handled the mullah report? -- the mueller

report? guest: he's got constraints in terms of what he can legally divulge. grand jury transcripts, how theytion methods, came to the conclusions they did in terms of the techniques they had. those things ought to be protected. he certainly needs to explain why it is, in terms of what he redirects -- redacts. that will be the big story next week when he divulges this full report. i think he is taking the right approach in terms of color , weng it so we the readers are all going to see it. we can connect the dots. why it is int terms of what he is going to redact. they will be another hearing where he will explain why he is

doing what he is. really divulges much of it has he can -- as he can. let's move forward. host: congressman fred upton with us until the bottom of the hour. you can join the conversation. republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. congressman, you mentioned recent votes on capitol hill. you recently broke with members of your party, joining democrats in their effort to condemn the trumpet administration's move to invalidate the affordable care act -- trump administration's move to invalidate the affordable care act. why did you do that? guest: a couple things. the republican mantra and what we were able to get through the house a couple years ago was repeal and replace. we had an alternative that a

number of us did care about. in michigan, we expanded medicaid. i supported what our government -- whatever governor did. -- what our governor did. we protected folks that benefited from that medicaid expansion. i think folks supported the idea that college students ought to be under their parents policy. often they are not working and ari dependent -- and are a dependent. that was in every republican alternative. it was certainly in the bill we had. i had an amendment that added billions of dollars to states that might have dropped that coverage as part of their essential health benefit package. if you simply repeal the affordable care act or obamacare as people referred to it, you would have -- without a replacement piece, all of that

safety net protection i outlined would be gone in the first hour. we had a debate a couple years ago as to whether we should just repeal it. leadership decided no. a good number of republicans would vote no because there was not a replacement. what was outlined a couple weeks ago was just replace it and we will come up with something, who knows? in the meantime, those people who benefited could lose their coverage and that is not where i was, not where i am and a number of republicans join with me and saying that was not the right approach. for: is it enough republicans to say we will revisit this after 2020 or do they need to put out a new replacement plan? guest: it was hard for us to work out the one that we did. i was in the trenches with both house members as well as senate members.

week, politico, the hill, et cetera, key republican senators said we are not really working on a replacement piece yet. the president said we will do it after the election. there is not going to be movement on a replacement piece between now and 2021. host: is this something republicans on the energy and commerce committee could push? guest: we could, but we are not in the majority. we do not have the votes to even ask for a hearing. you are not going to see any serious effort to have a replacement piece between now and 2021. the president spoke a little out of bounds on this, caught everyone flat-footed. nobody knew this was coming. speaker pelosi is pretty adept at moving legislation forward. she's got the votes and she

quickly has a resolution of disapproval, knowing there would be a number of republicans like myself saying we do not have a replacement piece, we cannot repeal it knowing there are important provisions that need to continue. host: al is up first, calling from new york, independent. caller: i just want to know why would somebody like barr make a statement without proof? this has been going on with donald trump forever, where they have no proof. they just keep making statements. that is further dividing the country which is more divided than ever. that is my question. guest: i did not watch the hearing. we had a number of different events i was involved in. i am the top republican on the energy subcommittee, so we had a hearing at the same time that barr hearing was.

i think he was responding to a question. i don't know if it was a republican or democrat that asked him the question, but he responded and certainly now i think a good number of members on both sides of the aisle are going to say what is the evidence, what do you know, when was it shared and how does this relate to the whole question of the mueller report? another page forward. responding to a panel. request on the host: on thehost: idea of whether he had any proof, this was his exchange with senator jack reed when he was asked about proof of wrongdoing both with the fbi and the mueller investigation. [video clip] >> there was a counterintelligence investigation by the fbi with respect to 2016 provincial election involving the trump campaign. there was the investigation by director mueller into the 2016

campaign and other issues. ofe you any evidence anything improper in those investigations? >> i have no specific evidence that i would cite right now. i do have questions. >> this panel you are putting together -- you just have some interest in this, you don't have any evidence. >> i have concerns about various aspects of it. host: concerns about various aspects of it. no specific evidence. is it out of bounds to say that he believes there was spying? guest: no. i don't think it was out of bounds. hearingesses at any don't necessarily know what the questions are. jack reed is a very accomplished member of the u.s. senate, a former house member. he is known to be a serious legislator. he did not share that question

in advance. barr, irney general think he was just speaking from what he heard. he said he had concerns. he did not want to close the door. he did not have specific evidence he was going to cite, but he will continue to ask questions and there will be some folks within the agency that give him some documents and at some point, maybe in the next week, we will see how quickly they react. he can come back with something that may or may not lead to further investigations. oklahoma,roken arrow, bob, a republican. caller: good morning. a couple things. representative upton, how many times a day do you get asked about all of these scandals because it just seems to me like they are continually getting in the way of us getting anything done in congress. secondly, i think that barr has

done an outstanding job. i spit up my coffee laughing when he talked about spying yesterday because that is the last thing democrats want to talk about. host: congressman? aest: i get asked about it lot of times a day, -- not a lot of times a day, not even once a day. it is certainly out there. i was the one that said let's let the investigation go forward, find out what they find out, give the american public a report. i think we republicans were relieved when he came out with his four-page summary. it is appropriate we have the hearings that we have and we will see where it takes us. i think what you are trying to suggest and you are right on, we've got so many other issues we have to deal with. we need to govern and move forward. we have a whole host of

international issues and national ones as well, in terms of the deficit and how the economy is continuing to roll forward. usshould not let this trap from other responsibilities. host: andrew in massachusetts, a democrat. caller: good morning. to thisant to say republican is when trump disgraced mccain the way he did, you should have booted him out immediately. ,ith the affordable health care it should be kept in, and you guys should try to fix it up and as far as the investigation into trump goes, you should let the and yous run through it

guys in congress and the senate go through the bills that have to get passed. if the democrats find what they if they prove they were wrong, they should apologize. the one thing holding it back is the fact that if trump is constantly refusing to show his back taxes, it means he has something to hide. host: we got your point. a lot of topics. guest: first was john mccain. john mccain was a dear friend of mine. i'm sure he was on your show quite a bit. a hero in my book. i did make a joke that he asked me to go to north dakota and i said what did he do wrong?

he was a good guy, a really good guy. he and i teamed up a lot of years ago to double the money for the national institute of health. he was the republican lead in the senate and i was the lead in the house and we were successful in getting that in and signed by president clinton. we have a lot of issues we have to deal with. the mueller report is just one of the issues out there. i think it is time to move forward, to govern and deal with the different issues we have to focus on. host: one of the issues congress continues to deal with is border security. you are somebody who has supported the building of a border wall but you also wanted -- you were also one of the republicans who voted to block president trump's declaration of a national emergency. why? guest: it is a crisis, especially when you see these

reports, the folks who were apprehended in the last day or so, another caravan moving toward the border. in terms ofines legitimate trade going back and forth, sometimes two or three hours long. at the end of the day, we need border security including a wall but we need to work together on this. saidresident to his credit congress, do your job. send me a bill that we can actually begin to see real immigration reform, whether it be the dreamers, docket kids, the folks who are here. i met with a number of agriculture folks in the last two weeks, the whole migrant agriculture farm issue is huge, and they have been stuck.

we have not seen legislation move forward. i am part of a group called the problem solvers. we have begun the work on looking into a number of different ideas that we can move in a bipartisan way that i think we can get through the house and the senate to get these things done and to begin to relieve this crisis that is otherwise going to be there without congress taking action. host: we talked about you breaking with your party on the aca, on the national emergency, are you breaking with your party more than you have in the past? guest: i have always been for immigration reform. there were a number of votes we had in terms of spending resolutions dating back to last december. you may recall that the senate passed a vote unanimously included money for border security and everyone thought that was going to be the bill to keep the government open and

word came down from the white house that the president was not happy with that and in the house we did not have the votes to get it done. it got blocked. i did not want to hold hostage the departments that were not tied to homeland security. -- the agriculture appropriation bill was one of those, transportation, it had nothing to do with homeland security. there was no reason to have it. telling those workers not to go to work, you will get paid at the end, not tied to the homeland security bill at all. in the end, we had 300 votes in the house and we included money securityall and border and opening up the government. host: about 10 minutes left with congressman fred upton, a 17

term congressman, republican from michigan. joseph has been waiting in maine. independent. caller: yes. i would like you to give us your definition of a lie. that is what i would like you to tell the american people. three or four times now you are blaming democrats. parties, you had both both houses and did nothing. can say you are a big immigration man. what did you do? there was a bill on the president's desk giving him wall money and he did nothing. you are protecting the president with your lies. what is your definition of a lie? that what inot sure said here is anything close to a lie. i supported immigration reform last year. we had a bill in the house and did not have the votes to pass

it. i voted for that. only withard and not former speaker ryan but others in a bipartisan way. one of the things of the book -- about the problem solvers is we are a bipartisan group of about 50. what can we do about immigration reform? at the end of the day, we have a legislative process. whoever has the most votes, the senate had 54 votes on a couple different immigration proposals, but they did not get the 60 to get it done. in the house, we had a number of different proposals. at the end of the day, we did not have the 218 votes. broad strokes the of a fair immigration deal? guest: a couple things. you will see a bill that nancy to name thetitled

first hr bill. hr six is going to be immigration. it will involve protections for dreamers, the kids that came in and have beenur here 18, 19 years, they have gone to school, they speak the language, they come from every country on the planet, and this is their home. through no fault of their own, they are here and they don't have roots back to wherever they were, poland, nicaragua, wherever. this bill is going to provide some protections. i think that if you want to become a citizen, you go through the normal process but they are not going to be quote, here improperly and subject to deportation. host: there will be a path to citizenship. guest: likely there will be.

there will be more constraints. a fairly simple bill as it relates to that. it will pass in the house and a good number of republicans i think will join and there will not be in agriculture component. i represent southwest michigan. this is a time of year where we are looking for workers to come. weeks, from asparagus to apples, we will need a lot of migrant workers that we did not need last month. from grapes to apples to peaches to strawberries, we need a workforce. there are no real agricultural programs large enough to accommodate what we need and that got some growers literally need -- literally leave $100,000 of unpick crops

crops field -- unpicked in the field. -- to have a temporary process that both the employer and the worker themselves won't feel that they are going to be subject to arrest and deportation. obviously we will make sure that they don't have criminal records and are paying their taxes and it looks like we are getting some good green lights on working together to try and get something done in the next couple of months. host: speaking on agricultural issues, the agriculture secretary will be on capitol hill today and we will be heading from this program to that hearing when he is before the senate appropriations committee. you can continue to watch here on c-span and c-span.org. a few more calls for you. kimberly in washington, pennsylvania, a republican.

caller: good morning. i have a question and a statement. the question is, when they talk about a border wall, they don't elaborate on the human trafficking going on. i wonder why. a lot of people would rather shut the wall down then see one person get abused and killed. as an american, like most of us here, we see because whenas one you have one side not doing anything about the injustices from the other side, then you start to think they are in it together and that is why this investigation lasted so long. i thank god for mr. barr. all, humant of trafficking is an awful situation. it was important that the house , a congress passed this act

continuation of the violence against women act which has a host of different programs, some of which combat human trafficking. it is a huge problem that was a major piece in usa today. i want to say it was two and a half full pages long. where this has really taken off in a terrible way. we need to work with our locals and state officials to try and deter that. the president has made it clear, and i support border security including a wall but the president has said we don't need a wall that is 2000 miles long. that is not really part of the equation. at the end of the day, we need to take steps along the border to stop some of this human trafficking. as it relates to the mueller wanttigation, you did not

those questions to go unanswered. we need the report. it started with republicans and democrats supporting the conception of this. they needed to take the answers and we are finding the answers and they will take us where they will. will take you home to the wolverine state, michigan. tyrone is waiting, democrat. caller: good morning mr. upton. old and i am a vietnam veteran and most of my young adult years, i grew up in the state of michigan. mayorng the governor and work together for the betterment of all of my citizens in the state of michigan. there was also a senator from up north that the mayor used to work with.

the got legislation through state government and they worked on behalf of all of our citizens, all of our people. having said that, i am going to reserve my comments about the mueller report until i can see the entire copy of it, unredacted. theuld love to see republicans and democrats work in the form i used to see the governor and mayor work together , for the people of the state of michigan. guest: tyrone, thanks for your call. is michigan delegation pretty proud of that. we had a meeting in the last number of days, our entire michigan delegation, both senators and most of the house delegation.

your representative is most likely andy levin. we were talking about issues that unite us. just a couple weeks ago, the president came to michigan. he reversed his budget decision on a limiting money for the great lakes restoration. this was something that virtually all of us in the michigan delegation worked very hard on. host: how much money are we talking? guest: $300 million. to reverse it one way or another. the president confessed when he came to michigan, he was going to reverse himself and appropriately stunned the audience and he got a standing ovation when that occurred. projects,michigan working on a new lock in the upper peninsula.

out,ow if that lock went it would double the unemployment national rate. we have locks that are 60 years old and need to be replaced. our roads are in pretty bad shape, we need an infrastructure process. our delegation is ready to go to work in a bipartisan basis on a number of different issues. on a major conference in detroit, an annual conference at the end of may every year, a number of us will be there to talk about how we are working together whether it is on a civility package or issues that really impact the citizens across the state as well as the midwest. go blue, go green. host: we will get to one more call, robert in texas, a republican. ifler: i would like to know the people have the power to

vote in people or the investigators have the power. case, in this particular i think you are referring to the mueller investigation, they really had carte blanche. it was an independent investigation. had had the money, they however many dozens of folks. they did subpoenas, they conducted over 500 interviews. they were unfettered in terms of what they could do. they had a whole number of different areas without oversight, certainly without control of the house or senate, knowing they were going to make a report. the attorney general did a brief summary that everyone saw and the full report, some 400 pages

with some reductions is going to be were -- reactions -- redactions is going to be and someto the public excellent nations in terms of the decisions that were made but it was without control by us. host: do you trust robert mueller? guest: i do. i am not a lawyer and i am not on that committee. i don't know him, but it needed to occur. there are stones being thrown his way by both sides but at the end, he was going to submit his report and we are grateful for his service and we are glad it is over. host: do you trust william barr? guest: i do. i worked a long time ago in the reagan administration. i know him a little bit. i have watched him on tv. i think his candor has been good. he has a lot of facial

expressions that show he is a pretty thoughtful guy and i appreciate the job he is doing. host: representative fred upton from michigan, his seventh -- in his 17th term on capitol hill. good to see you. up next, we are joined by john bies of american oversight. later, we will take a look at regulation of so-called megabanks with bloomberg jesse westbrook -- with bloomberg's jesse westbrook. ♪ on american history tv, saturday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures in history, from tulane university, the legal history of abortion in the united states. sunday at 4:30 p.m., a space scientist recalls his work on the apollo missions. at 8:00 on the presidency, a discussion on the president's retreat, camp david.

this weekend on american history tv on c-span3. simply threeas giant networks and a government supported service called pbs. in 1979, a small network with an unusual name rolled out a big idea. let viewers decide on their own what was important to them. c-span opened the doors to washington policymaking, bringing you unfiltered content from congress and beyond. in the age of power to the people, this was true people power. in the 40 years since, the landscape has changed. there is no monolithic media. youtube stars are a thing. c-span's big idea is more relevant today than ever. no government money support c-span. its nonpartisan coverage of washington is funded as a service by your cable or satellite provider. c-span is youre,

window so you can make up your mind. >> "washington journal" continues. host: john bies is on your screen, he previously served as a deputy attorney general in the obama administration. currently he serves at american oversight. what is american oversight? guest: american oversight is a watchdog that works through open records requests and litigation. host: how is it funded? guest: we don't disclose our donors but all of our work is transparent on the website and if people have questions about what we do, they can go to the website. on thehe tagline website, amplifying congressional oversight. discuss how you plan to do that. guest: one of the things we have done over the past year or so is recognize that when congress

makes oversight request to the government, it has some ledge of -- some leverage. requests and if the agencies are not responsive, we can sue and have a quart minutes the production of information we are entitled to and that can leverage the information we get and the information congress gets to make sure the american people can see what the government is up to. host: congressional oversight on the senate side was focused on the justice department. we learned the attorney general has questions about the overage and of the surveillance efforts surrounding the trump campaign in 2016. this was the attorney general on capitol hill. [video clip] >> i think spying on a political campaign is a big deal. it generates -- in generations i grew up with, during the vietnam war, people were concerned about spying on antiwar people and so forth by the government.

there were a lot of rules put in place to make sure there is an adequate basis before our law enforcement agencies get involved in political surveillance. i am not suggesting that those rules were violated but i think it is important to look at that. i am not just talking about the fbi necessarily, but intelligence agencies more broadly. >> you are not suggesting that spying occurred. well, i guess, i think that spying did occur. yes i think spying did occur. but the question is whether it was adequately predicated. i am not suggesting that it was not adequately predicated but i need to explore that. is usually very concerned about intelligence agencies and law enforcement

agencies staying in their proper lane. host: we mentioned at the top, your work at the obama administration in the justice department. were you there in 2016? guest: yes. host: what do you make about the attorney general's concerns about spying? guest: i share the attorney general's concerns that any spying any intelligence agency does be adequately predicated. the use of the term spying, which is a loaded term, when law enforcement professionals undertake predicated investigations and use ordinary tools, i don't think spying is an appropriate way to describe it. you can tell it is a politically loaded term by the fact that within 24 hours, the nrc said the hunters have now become the junta's -- the hunted. i think using that language gives me some concern that he has prejudged what happened but i agree with -- i agree that all

investigations on either side should have adequate predication before law enforcement tools are used. host: you talked about the reaction yesterday in the circles you run in, and among former obama officials, to that hearing and that word. that: there was concern that term was playing into a political attack made against the department and the fbi. it is important in the long run for our country that law enforcement efforts of the department and the fbi be viewed by the public as good-faith efforts to find out what happened and follow the facts where they lead. when that becomes politicized, everyone loses. host: on capitol hill over the last two days, the attorney general received a lot of questions about the mueller report, the reduction process --

the redirect -- the readacti on process. guest: there are two questions i will be looking at when we get a chance to see the report. the attorney general laid out some categories of topics or types of information he might redact. for instance, grand jury information or classified. is he going to take a very broad view and undercut the public's ability to understand what the special counsel's investigation found? the second question is not just what is released publicly but also what is given to congress. that is not necessarily the same thing. congress could have access to information that may not be appropriate for public release. congress routinely gets ordinary classified information, so i don't see why that type of information could not go to

members or cleared staff. host: are there any legal guidelines here, guidance for whether the attorney general should take that narrow view or that broadview? law and the is case d.c. circuit judge what qualifies and a lot of -- how he applies those rules will be telling as to how robust he plans to be. host: your group uses the freed of them -- the freedom of information act a lot in your efforts to get this information. -able?s information foia most: from my perspective, of the information is probably subject to foia. obviously if there is classified information or grand jury information, a foia would not be entitled to it.

for the most part, the findings of the investigation, the actions they took, historically is information that should be subject to foia. host: john bies with us until the top of the hour, chief counsel at merrick and oversight -- at american oversight. americanoversight.org is the website. he was the former assistant attorney general and legal counsel to the obama administration. we are taking your calls as usual. mike is an independent in missouri. caller: good morning. is thatould like to say william barr wrote a 19 page interview to donald trump telling him how he would not be holding him responsible for anything he has done. secondly, i would like to ask does astion of why

presidential appointee still have more power to see the mueller report then our elected officials? that is completely wrong, especially when william barr auditioned for the job to protect trump and if that is the way our country, the laws in our country read, that a presidential appointee who has auditioned for the job and told trump ahead of time that he was going to let him slide has more officials our elected , then we need to change that law. host: john bies? guest: i understand why people have concerns about the fact that it appears the attorney general took a decision on how the obstruction charges would apply when it looked like he was advocating and potentially speaking as sparse -- as personal counsel for the president.

host: remind folks about that memo. guest: in summer of last year, barr when he was in private practice, wrote a memo that he sent both to the white house counsel and the justice department advocating that the obstruction of justice statute cannot constitutionally apply to certain things like firing the fbi director. obviously you want the attorney questiono look at this with a clear and open mind and it looks like he prejudged it. i agree that elected officials in congress need the information in the molar report to evaluate -- in the mueller report to evaluate. congress is the appropriate place to adjudicate whether the president engaged in something that warrants a response like impeachment.

it makes sense -- it makes sense to me that the departments should work together with congress and give it the information it needs to evaluate that question. host: luanne from oklahoma is next, democrat. caller: good morning. like we need to take a deep breath and wait until the release of the mueller report and take it from there. we all have an opinion. host: are you satisfied with the release of a read acted report -- redacted report? caller: exactly what does redacted mean? guest: it means that some of the information in the report may be blacked out so the public cannot see it because in the justice

department's view, it is not appropriate for public release. host: what are the categories for not being appropriate? guest: attorney general barr in his letters to congress identified four categories he is contemplating rejecting -- redacting. information that is classified, information that may impact ongoing investigations or prosecution and information that impinges the privacy rights of peripheral third parties. will hetion is how defined those categories and how broadly will he apply them and whether or not that information goes to congress. nicholas, ailyn, republican. caller: ethic it is unfair to criticize the attorney general using the words spying when he was merely reflecting back the word that was posted by the question during the hearings.

host: lee attorney general saying i do think -- the attorney general saying i do think spying occurred. did he need to use that word back and say that is what he believed happened? caller: i think the word was used in a colloquial sense. host: do you think it was inflammatory? i think he was -- it was expressed in terms of the action itself whether it is called surveillance or spying. they are basically the same action. the question is, is it legal or not and what he was doing is saying he may have questions on the legality of it and he wanted to look into that. host: john bies. guest: i agree, he said he wanted to find out if the investigation was predicated. what he did not do during the

hearing was explain why existing review by the office of the inspector general which is looking into this question and also a review that the former -- also looking into some of these questions did not articulate any reason why those existing reviews would not be sufficient to meet his concerns. i do think the folks who do this kind of thing day today at the fbi and apartment of justice, using the term spying has connotations that does not portray what they are doing for our country in a way that is fair if they are acting within the law and following predicated lines of investigation. host: those reviews you mentioned, are they subject to foia and are you trying to find information about what is being included in that? guest: they are both subject to foia. we have requests submitted.

the inspector general typically will put out a report that is public, so we have not done foia 's yet but we are looking forward to what we will see their. host: when was the freedom of information act made into law? guest: the late 70's. host: has it been expanded or narrowed in how groups like you can use it? guest: there have been a few amendments. one in the 80's, one in the 90's and one a couple years ago. all of those have had the motive of congress trying to make the law more expanded and effective. host: is that something that is unique to the united states? guest: a lot of countries have different public records laws and a lot of states in the united states have their own public records laws. they are different in small ways but i think they have the small

-- they have the same impetus to get the public information on what the government is doing on their behalf. host: why do you think the effort has been to expand this law? guest: congress has seen over time that agencies have a natural inclination to keep things secret so they want to counteract that by providing tools to get that information out. host: do you think it is mostly a push and pull between executive and legislative branch that the public benefits from? guest: i think so. host: john bies with us, chief counsel at american oversight, until 9:00 or so. taking your phone calls about his group, its work and this ongoing discussion about the mueller investigation and the attorney general's comments on capitol hill about spying on the trunk campaign. john has been waiting for you in maryland, independent. caller: good morning.

guest: good morning. caller: i am a first time caller and i would like to ask the gentleman if he would like to see congress see the whole report, released and staff members, i disagree with this man. we did not vote for staff members to see official documents. sieve upe leaks like a there. the only way to get this done would be to put three democrats and three republicans at andrate times to look at it they will be able to see it on both sides of the aisle, and then we will see which is being leaked and they can come back to those three people. they have to come in six weeks

apart so that the washington post and all the other papers can't get the leaks. let me have his response. guest: i think this is an important historical moment for our country and congress has an important job to do in evaluating whether there -- what happened and whether there is any response that needs to be taken. to do that thing, i think it is important that they have the information they need, a job assigned to them by the constitution. i think for our historical moment, it is important they have those tools they need. host: fredericksburg, virginia, james is a republican. caller: thank you for taking my call. are you a republican or democrat? we will let him answer.

guest: i voted for candidates from both parties in my life. i most recently have been voting democratic. caller: that gives me a birdseye view of where you come from. secondly i would say, you think , in there bad right now next two years, we are going to be in a situation that is so dysfunctional, it is just totally unbelievable. think -- if you were to look at glenn beck's reports, which i don't like to say that, i believe he has a great birdseye view on what is going on. i could be positively wrong. i wish you the best but i would ask you to please don't fall becauseng to democrat

it is going to be so dysfunctional for our country. we have already damaged it so much. i fear it is not ever going to be repaired. guest: i think part of our , ouron in our organization goal is to get information out about what the government is doing and people can evaluate that for themselves. what is important for us is that people have a chance to do that, to see what the government is doing on their behalf, how their taxpayer money is being used, why the government thinks what they are doing is lawful. those are important things for the public to know, to perform their own role as voters and participants. host: when was american oversight started? guest: march of 2017, shortly after trump became president. host: was it done in response to the trump administration? guest: i think the impetus was

partly because there was a concern there was a moment where government ethics and transparency and accountability would be important. host: will american oversight be around if a democrat wins in 2020? guest: our plan would be to continue doing our work no matter who is president. americanoversight.org if you want to check them out. a few minutes left with john bies, the chief counsel of american oversight. rob is in minneapolis, democrat. caller: the question i have has to do with what information is considered grand jury information and will there be an overlap between what is in public domain and what is on the grand jury? how is that sussed out so that somebody does not redact everything? guest: courts have traditionally viewed grand jury information as words in the role of criminal

procedure and the information that cannot be made public is information that reveals what happened in the grand jury, what questions were asked, what the grand jury wanted to see. if this information exists independently of that review, the fact that a grand jury looked at those documents does not affect whether those documents themselves are grand jury materials, just the fact that the grand jury looked at them needs to be protected. host: in new york city where alex is waiting, independent. caller: good morning. if there is nothing to hide from people, if he feels exonerated, why wouldn't the mueller report be intact? [indiscernible]

-- do whatever he wants like putting our soldiers lives at risk. [indiscernible] thank you. guest: we are hopeful that the attorney general will do the right thing and make a very robust release of the mueller report, making public everything that can lawfully be made public and giving congress the information it needs to perform its role. host: mike in new york, republican. caller: good morning. issue withe to take a couple things your guest has said. when you asked him to define the four things that would be from thed -- redacted mueller report, he gave definitions that were very iffy,

as if the attorney general have the option of doing. he is required by law to make those reductions -- redactions. spine,g about the word the -- a spy, the attorney general was asked by the democrat interviewer if he thought trump was spied on. he said i do believe he was spied on. that he started using the word spy. republicans, is, you have to stop letting democrats define words. abortionistswith and they changed it to pro-choice. they started with illegal --igrants, then they went

illegal aliens, then they went to illegal immigrants, and now they are immigrants. they are illegal immigrants. guest: the categories i listed were what barr listed out what he -- in the letter he sent to the hill. information with regards to grand jury information, but the question is, is he going to apply those requirements broadly or narrowly and what is he going to show congress, which does not have to be the same thing he shows the public. in the watergate era, the grand jury, the department of justice work to give grand jury information to the committees on the hill to evaluate whether or not president nixon should be impeached and we would hope the attorney general would joining congress in a similar action

here. host: time for just one or two more calls. john is in michigan, a democrat. my question is, i heard on the news that the president can pardon himself. does our constitution allow for the president to pardon himself? guest: that is a question that has never come up historically. there was a brief moment during the nixon era when the department of justice heavily considered that. legal experts i think have different views on whether the president can pardon himself. it would be extraordinary power if you could essentially be the judge in your own case and get yourself out of trouble. it would mean the president is effectively above the law. oregon,st call from robert, a republican. caller: good morning. i don't mean to be critical but

i find it rich that this fellow started his company right after trump came into office. i'm sure he has his reasons. we have been told that donald on to thenot spied mainstream media and through c-span. it came out yesterday that he was spied on but we do not know if it was legit. he could have been told. to what went on with the investigation with hillary clinton in regards to bakercomey, mccabe, page, rosensteins to wearing a wire, with the 25th amendment.

i find it rich you are avoiding this. the american people are not dumb. the comparison on what went on , i do notry clinton think there has been a fair due process between what went on with hillary clinton and donald trump. the last is imploding -- the left is imploding because of man hasr said but the been following the law set up by congress. how mr.t is troubling he raisedfied, serious questions but he did not provide explanation to the committee or the american people as to what he meant, what was giving him these concerns and why the investigations would not be sufficient to address them?

i agree that an investigation should be predicated, is he asking whether or not the investigation into other political figures were adequately predicated? where is the source of his concern about the investigation? why does he think the inspector general's review is sufficient? he did not answer those questions and without providing more information and using loaded terms like spying does a disservice to the department of justice and fbi and to the american people because they create political controversy and without content or answers, you are leaving people to have -- react lyrically. at americanies oversight.org, we appreciate your time. host: next, we turn our

attention to regulation of mega bank with bloomberg's jesse westbrook. we will be right back. ♪ >> booktv has lived weekend coverage of the los angeles times festival of books from the university of southern california campus starting saturday at 1:30 eastern featuring the author of guns down at 2:30 and 4:00, the book not that bad. dope sick. 7:00 james donovan with "shoot for the moon." at 2:30politano discussing her book how safe are we and a four quart after justine bateman with "fame."

bret easton ellis with his book and at 7:00, conservative radio talkshow host larry elder with "double standards." watch live coverage starting at 1:00 -- 1:30 eastern saturday and sunday on booktv on c-span2. the c-span bus is stopping at middle and high schools across the country to present awards to the winners of our student video competition and throughout this month you can see the top 25 winning entries every morning before "washington journal" and watch every student documentary and behind the scene when it online. -- behind the scene winners online. "washington journal" continues. host: bloomberg's jesse

westbrook joins us to discuss the largest banks. thesed maxine waters call ceos of banks to capitol hill? guest: because in 10 years since they last appeared in congress after the 2008 meltdown, had not been there as a group in 10 years, there is no legislative plan, any legislative plan in the works would not get very far because republicans control the senate and democrats and republicans do not agree on bank regulation. it was an opportunity to grill the banks about issues near and dear to democrats, income inequality, minority hiring, lending in underserved communities, whether the banking system is safer, how does dodd frank work.

host: here is maxine waters from her opening statement. maxine waters: over the last 10 years, bank of america has paid fines and j.p. morgan chase has fines,3.7 billion in citigroup has paid $19 billion in fines, wells fargo has paid $11.8 billion in fines, goldman sachs has paid $7.7 billion in fines. morgan stanley has paid $5.4 billion in fines but it appears that have treated those finds as simply because of doing business. bring ine mega banks massive profits, since the profits they have collectively made over $780 billion in profits or nearly five times the amount they paid in fines.

despite the compliance failures under their watch, no one has made out better than the ceos, one made as much as $30 million per year and another with 486 times the amount a median employee at the bank is paid. it will be profitable for the banks to swindle consumers, investors, small businesses, if no one will hold them accountable. as policymakers, we must evaluate what it would take to rein in chronic lawbreaking at the biggest banks. we should not reward them for this behavior. unfortunately, that is precisely what donald trump and his allies in congress did with the passage of the tax scam. 'sst: jesse westbrook in bank preview of the hearing say the wall street plan was to let jamie dimon takeover.

guest: he is the only ceo that has been there throughout this entire process. he was the jp morgan ceo during the financial crisis and all of the other wall street banks cleaned house. lloyd blankfein was i goldman sachs but recently left. jamie dimon has been in the spotlight in the congressional drilling's beard we all remember when they were being called up constantly and harassed. someonemon is seen as who shines in the spotlight so to speak. a lot of them have never had their congressional grilling. host: maxine waters also warned the rest of the ceos not to let the j.p. morgan chase ceo take over the hearing. guest: he did not really take over, it was a strange set up and having them all their, the house, so many lawmakers, a

short time to ask questions and we never got into sensitive issues with the hearing. there would be a question about money laundering, which is a very complicated topic with a lot to unpack but within 30 seconds or five minutes, it would be on to income inequality or whether the banks should lending more to people in guam. it was a lot of different things. host: bloomberg covered it yesterday. , as we jesse westbrook discussed this hearing yesterday with the ceos of the megabanks, phone lines, republicans call 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. a separate line if you work in the financial sector. 202-748-8003. dimon fromplay jamie

the hearing yesterday. >> any 2008 financial crisis, the u.s. government took on president action to stabilize owe a debt of gratitude to the policymakers and are proud what we did to help, the markets in turmoil went to california, new jersey, illinois, we raise for our clients $1.3 trillion, assisted in fair rates and in many cases far below what the market would have allowed. we provide more than $100 billion to local governments and municipalities and schools and hospitals and not for profits over the course of 2009. at the request of the united states government in an effort to stabilize the system, we bought bear stearns and later purchased the washington mutual. for ourgan was there clients and customers through good times and bats and did not run. 250,000o thank the

employees of j.p. morgan chase for their efforts during these difficult circumstances. since the crisis, reforms have made banks safer and sadder in three areas, capital, liquidity, resolution recovery. almost doubled the highest quality capital protected against losses, one of the most extreme stress tests the nearest body fat to combine losses, all of the 34 banks is 6% total capital. large banks have tripled the liquid assets to protect against unexpected cash flows and resolution planning has created incredible frameworks unwinding in large banks. it will not happen again. legislators deserve credit for the rules in place. host: jesse westbrook, jamie dimon saying it would not happen again, how did lawmakers respond to that? guest: it was a tough bind for democrats for them to say it will not happen again, that would mean dodd frank did not work which was their signature legislation and very much a democratic bill.

there was not a lot of skepticism that there will be another crisis. something that came up a lot is that if there is another crisis, maybe it will not be in the big regulated banks. talked about how so much lending post crisis has moved away from the regulated banks into private equity, hedge funds, it was brought up that now 50% of mortgage lending in the u.s. is done by non-banks. almost all automobile lending. that leverage lending came up, which is really booming in recent years of extending very risky financials to companies already highly indebted but there is concern that in an economic downturn, a lot of the couplings will default. host: what kind of companies are those and where is the leverage lending boom creating the biggest risks?

guest: before the crisis, a lot of debt was in households and household mortgages is what caused the crisis. now it is corporate borrowing. fed and other regulators have talked about this. what wall street is involved in that lending, terry involved, much of it is being done by financial firms not directly overseen by regulators, like the fed, so there is a question about who is monitoring that which was brought up yesterday. host: talking about regulation of so-called mega banks. taking your phone calls this morning, republican scum independents, -- republican, independent,s democrats, and those who work in the financial industry. joe. are you with us? caller: yes, thank you for taking my call.

waters,ten to maxine and the other senators and representatives on the line. why don't they get back into their own operation? they are legislators and the policeman and they do not lead -- do not need to look at the banks, they need to redo the laws on mega banking. go back to where they belong and alonethe mueller report as the whether it is to be classified. host: we will stick to mega bank s in this segment, redoing the laws, what is happening right now? what legislation is moving through congress? guest: there is none on mega banks. under the republican-controlled

congress with president trump in the last congress, they made an aggressive attempt to go after dodd frank, that was the opportunity but the senate is closely divided and they needed to pull democratic votes but no one is going to vote for anything on the democratic side that makes life easier for vicki morgan. -- j.p. morgan. they had a narrow bill that did a lot for regional bills like suntrust and capital one, but banks that are seen as systemically risky to the greed of wall street, that is where they ended up and then democrats took control of the house and i would not expect additional legislation on banks. host: i'm issue was bank policies yesterday on gun industry financing. explain what that industry is? guest: banks have funded gun companies, they have long done that and after the mass shootings, some of the banks

have pulled out of that, bank of america has pulled back and citigroup has pullback a lot. democrats think that is great but republicans think it is not so great. i think it speaks to the perilous issue when banks are involved in things that are social policy. money is the liquid that makes the economy run and banks have their fingers in everything. ,hey will always be scrutinized if there are certain businesses like guns, certain segments of the population do not like them, banks will get hammered. that is the difficulty of being the center of this. host: sean duffy of wisconsin, a republican not so happy about the bank policy when it comes to the gun sector was talking with the ceo of bank of america brian moynihan. >> the second amendment is the rule of land -- law. >> your policy does not agree

with the second movement? >> we asked the companies who manufacture these types of arms for sales to citizens if they would amend their practices to put a governor on it so our teams would not be in a position, we have people represent everybody, every idea in america. >> if you take a role on these guns, we have had guns in america for a long time, things have happened recently are , is it guns or has something else changed? maybe you should look at what else is going on in america that would make people take up a gun, using knife, a machete, or u-haul, something is happening and to take away the rights of law-abiding citizens, i would tell you that does not comport

with my view of america, and if you will not look at the movies and families and the deal games, -- video games, we find it problematic. host: that was sean duffy yesterday. if you want to watch that, see the hearing in its entirety on a bysite at c-span.org, search brian moynihan or jamie dimon of j.p. morgan chase. put that in the search bar and it will come up. we are speaking with jesse westbrook, this team at bloomberg covered it and they cover financial regulations. michigan, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. mr. westbrook, i think it is unfortunate that some of the brokers didl street not go to jail.

as a result of their dealings in the crisis. subprimeknew the securities, some were junk, especially goldman sachs. goldman sachs got a bunch of credit default swaps because they knew at some point people would stop paying their mortgages. everybody blames the little guy who took the mortgage that they could not afford but actually the big firms knew they were packaging junk and selling it all over the world. i would like to know if you think the repeal of glass-steagall had an effect and why they reexecuted glass-steagall? glass-steagall was the

bill that barred investment banking and commercial banking from being together in one firm. that was revealed and people blamed it for creating these megabanks, supermarket banks that do everything. i think that size is a problem and to the degree glass-steagall caused these banks to get bigger , there is probably something to look at. i do not know whether that bill would address the complexity of the banks we have now but i -- maxine waters made a point of this yesterday, are these banks too big to manage? setting aside whether they fail, if they will need another taxpayer rescue. we would all agree that is if we are headed for another crisis, but they are so big that, can you keep tabs on everything

going on in that bank? that is a fair question. we have a special line for those who work in the financial sector. don is on the line from san clemente, california. caller: good morning, how are you? host: you are on with jesse westbrook, go ahead. caller: i have been in the mortgage business for many years. clinton,ted with bill the crash. he implemented the reinvestment of 1977, and told andrew cuomo, the head of five -- hud at the time, $13 went to -- and fannie mae and freddie mac, we were doing 125%

of second mortgages on equity and we would raise that to 200%, and this was in the 1990's. that opened the door to these investment, and like bear stearns, who were funding a lot of our loans that i was doing. everyone blames bush. that is not the case. it started with clinton did -- clinton. host: jesse westbrook on the blame. guest: i think they are all to blame. the financial sector is very complicated, i do not understand it that well and i cover it for a living. i think politicians are always behind the curve. they are interested in the economy growing. and sometimes short-term decisions we make, we do not see

the long-term consequences. deserves blamen and bush probably deserves blame. who knows what obama and/or trump may have done which will cause a problem 10 years from now. host: new haven, connecticut, debbie on the line for those who work in the financial industry. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead, you are on with jesse westbrook. caller: hello, mr. westbrook, and good morning, c-span. a lot of -- i have just purchased a home before the crash. when i found out in originating mortgages is that a lumpy products they sold -- a lot of the products they sold gave a low interest rate in the younning but in two years

would have to refinance in order to keep the interest rate you had. nobody,ound was that and i seriously say this, nobody i did loans for could not afford them. people could afford a 2% or a 1.5% interest rate on a mortgage. you could afford that. you have a credit score of 640, 620 even and it was fine. some people had good credit. 620 is considered good. you are paying your a few bills on time and the credit card you had you are paying on time. after two years, the criteria would change and now you needed a 680 two refinance.

andcredit is still the same you are still paying your bills and everything was fine but when forcriteria changed for 680 the same product, you cannot refinance because you did not have the 680. one month you are fine and at mortgagesonth, the went up because the rates became variable. 12% and of course you cannot afford that. your mortgage rate could have been -- payment could and then $1200, the middle class could afford that. that was not a reasonable. but nobody could have afforded a $3000 mortgage. guest: it has been well documented that a lot of the

products the financial industry down to mortgage brokers were peddling before the crisis were not in the interest of the consumer. it would be hard for anyone to argue, we had loans where the interest rates would explode after a certain time. a product outmuch the door philosophy on wall street. you had big banks financing these loans and peddling them to german pension funds and insurance companies in japan. now,otive, which we know was to get someone to take out the loan, no one cared about the consequences of that. you have posed crisis things like the consumer protection bureau which was supposed to fill the void of making sure

that being a regulator, making sure financial firms were not peddling mortgages, loans, etc. to customers that cannot afford them but that agency has been filled with controversy since the creation. republicans have painted it as the most evil regulator that has ever existed in the western hemisphere and democrats have said it is the only regulator that is really looking out for consumers. probably it is somewhere in the middle. it has gotten a lot quieter under president trump who does not think very highly of the regular. host: five minutes left with jesse westbrook from bloomberg. see their work at bloomberg.com, they cover the hearing yesterday that feature the head of seven so-called megabanks. matthew in raleigh, north

carolina, republican. caller: what is going on today, brothers? host: what is your question, matthew? caller: you hit it on the head when you are talking about the exploding loans. in my house, your house, i am sure you have checkbooks, checking his account, savings accounts -- checking accounts, savings accounts, i will not make this in-depth but i am thinking, when the housing market tanked, that was when we came out with obamacare. remember that? talking about the same stuff, global health care, the world will come to an end in 12 years. host: you were talking about a lot of issues being brought into this hearing yesterday on megabanks. did health care get brought up? guest: health care did not get brought up, it was asked in a

sense of whether the banks were providing decent health care to their employees. that was touched on briefly. there was a debate whether the banks have a responsibility to their employees to have a living wage, cost of living is rising. -- they oweemployer something to their employees and our public companies and this is the capitalist system we decided on an most bank ceos run the company concerns with their shareholders and they want expenses capped at a certain level and no bank will pay a hour when the going rate is $20 per hour. host: another issue was stress tests. what is that?

guest: the pivotal response to the crisis, it puts banks through these hypothetical scenarios, very grave financial situations where, if we had a recession and employment -- the employment rate surge dramatically -- the unemployment rate surged robotically, it would make sure the banks could keep lending with an economic downturn of that severity, saying if we had another crisis, what would happen to these banks? it is important because, while the tester hypothetical, what the banks have to do to pass them are real. you have to have a bigger capital cushion to protect against losses and have more liquid assets. stress testing everyone agrees has been effective. you will have big banks, that is what we decided, we did not break them up after. frank, stress testing is important because you want to see if they can survive here.

host: are they pushing for a bigger cushion? guest: not aggressively. that is basically been left to the regulators. fed has more tools at its disposal were capital could get higher but it is a push-pull because the more banks court capital, the less they can land to make the economy grow -- lend to make the economy grow, democrats complain that the free money is not being used to lend to consumers and healthy economy grow that reward shareholders by buying back shares and increasing dividends. that is a fair point. the tax bill that was brought up when banks got the savings, a lot of it went to buying back shares and increasing dividends. host: carl in los angeles, democrat. caller: good morning and let's

get together and reunite. glass-steagall, we take the and thet of investment megabanks need to be broken up. only a couple banks left. thank you. guest: on glass-steagall, we talked about it, one of the things regulators and members of congress thought at the time was that, if you will breakup u.s. banks, they still have to compete on an international level with the european megabanks, some of the asian banks. if no other jurisdiction will breakup their banks, how will we compete with much smaller banks on a global stage? not saying it is right but an argument that was made. host: jesse westbrook from bloomberg, bloomberg.com to see

his work and he is on twitter. thank you for your time. guest: thank you for having me in. you whatt, we will ask stories you're interested in today in washington. we are covering the reaction to the attorney general's testimony yesterday, president trump today expected to meet with the south korean president and hearings today on 's and mobile calls -- on spaceports and robo calls and the nomination of the new interior secretary. let us know what you want to talk about today in washington. we will be right back. ♪ the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. knocked thesewho

buildings down will hear from all of us soon. [applause] ,> c-span's newest book historians rank the best and worst chief executives provides insight into the lives of the 44 american presidents through stories gathered by interviews with noted president will historians. explore the life events that shape our leaders, challenges they faced, and the legacies they have left behind, published by public affairs, the president's will be on shelves --will 23rd but you can april 23 but you can preorder company today at c-span's.org -- c-span.org or wherever books are sold. journal" continues. host: for the last 25 minutes our phones are open to talk

about today in washington, what stories you are interested in talking about. we cover the reaction to attorney general william barr's testimony on capitol hill and president trump will meet with the south korean president today and hearings on capitol hill on 's and rubble -- on space space force and robo calls. republicans call 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. reactiong the ongoing to the attorney general's testimony before the senate yesterday, and the house the day before that. we covered it all on c-span and you can watch the hearings in their entirety at our website, c-span.org, search william barr. ,mong the questions he received

the continued interest in the full robert mueller report and when it will be released. the attorney general said he expects it to be released sometime next week. the usa today with an editorial cartoon looking at what they think is happening behind the scenes with william barr, showing a barbershop and william barr with a chainsaw taking us to the robert mueller report and saying i will redact a bit off the top. a caller in oregon, democrats line. what topic are you interested in? caller: i am permanently interested in the torturing of these children on our southern border. people go on to other, they are distracted by other things while the children, congresspeople that left from my state were

refused entrance to see what these people are doing to these children. only a devil what want to torture children. the orange headed guy in control, deregulation all over the place, to destroy air and water for all of us, all life, come on, humanity, we best wake-up. host: this is bernard in new york city, republican. good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. the president of the united thats made the statement involved.reason i wanted to speak about adam proof, he said he has and he is on the intelligence committee, that the president of

the united states committed treason. we must remember that went all over the world. he damaged america by telling the lie. the chickens are coming home to roost. host: this was the president yesterday as he was leaving the white house offering his view on what the justice department did when -- to his campaign in 2016. president trump: i am interested in getting started and the attorney general is doing a great job, getting started on going back to the origins of exactly where this started. this was an illegal witchhunt and everybody knew it and they knew it and they got caught. what they did was treason. what they did was terrible. it was against our constitution and everything we stand for.

hopefully, that will happen. host: this was his attorney general on capitol hill yesterday before the senate appropriations committee with the headline from that hearing, william barr will review the 2016 this isn't on the russia probe, the attorney general with suspicion but no evidence. this is william barr yesterday before the senate. spying onrr: i think a political campaign is a big deal. the generation i grew up in, the riod, we weree concerned about spying on antiwar people by the government. there were a lot of rules put in place to their -- to make sure there is an adequate basis before law enforcement agencies get involved in political surveillance. i am not suggesting those rules were violated but it is important to look at that.

i am not talking about the fbi necessarily but intelligent agencies more broadly. >> you are not suggesting that spying occurred? william barr: well, i guess you could -- i think spying did occur. yes, i think spying occurred. >> let me -- isliam barr: the question whether it was adequately predicated and i do not know but i want to explore that, it is my obligation, we should be concerned about intelligent agencies and law enforcement staying in their proper lane and i want to make sure that happened. host: reaction to those statements by the attorney general regarding spying on the trump campaign in 2016, 1 of the stories we're tracking today in washington, asking you what you are most interested in. cindy in texas, independent.

caller: i wonder why they have not brought forward barr's son-in-law got a job a week before the report came out. s youngestied to barr' daughter and his other daughter got a job in the white house. i would think that would be breaking news. host: you do not trust the attorney general? caller: no. host: do you trust robert mueller? he has not come out and said there was no wrongdoing at all. investigating the russians for hiking into our voting machines -- hacking into our voting machines and the name donald trump keeps coming up, they will investigate him. host: this is lonnie in north carolina, democrat.

caller: good morning. i have a couple things i need to ask you. ag.rt mueller is the host: he is not. caller: i am sorry, william barr, he is viewing the robert mueller report but i do not stafftand, what gives his the clearance to look at an unredacted report but he will not allow congress to look at the unredacted report? doesn't congress usually have a then williamnce barr's staff? what in the constitution says they have top security clearance to look at the report that the gang of eight cannot look at?

what law says his staff can look at it before beginning of eight desk before the gang of eight? discusslliam barr did his redaction methodology and what he is going through before releasing this report publicly. here is what he had to say on tuesday. william barr: i am relying on my of discretion to make as much public as i can. in my letter on march 29, identify areas i feel should be redacted and i think most people would agree. the first is grand jury and theion 6e, material other material is ice will think will reveal sources, and information in the report that could interfere with ongoing prosecutions.

you will recall that the special counsel did spin off a number of cases that are still being pursued and we want to make sure none of the information in the report will hinge upon the ability to prosecute the cases or three fairness to the defendant's. finally, we intend to redact information that application the privacy or reputation of peripheral players where there was a decision not to charge them. right now the special counsel is working with us on identifying information in the reports that fall under those categories. code thealler excision's from the report and provide explanatory notes describing the basis for each redaction. host: 15 minutes before the program closes and we are asking

what you are interested in watching today in washington. you see some of the stories we are tracking at c-span. we want to hear from you. ithaca, new york, line for democrats. caller: good morning, c-span. i love what you do and keep doing it. -- i saw the exchange between maxine waters and steven mnuchin. aims. , theat speaks volume disrespect steven mnuchin gave the maxine waters, maxine waters have been exceptional for our country. the way that steven mnuchin treated her yesterday is the way people the republicans and the way this administration is treating the democrats. the mueller report needs to be

given to the congress in full. actions, the's way he speaks to the public and space about people he disagrees with is not only on healthy it should be not allowed. this is not the way you set an example, not only to our country but to the rest of the world. it is not a witchhunt, it is called responsibility and we need the mueller reports and we need mueller to be brought before congress so we can hear what he has to say. not the retractions or what william barr has to say, we need what mueller has to say. host: the exchange between steven mnuchin and maxine waters , the chair of the house financial services committee took place on tuesday and if you want to watch it, c-span.org where you can search steven mnuchin in the search bar.

that exchange making international headlines. here is bbc news, the treasury secretary clashing with the congresswoman is the headline. tallahassee, florida, independent, gene. caller: good morning, c-span. i am registered as an independent. seen thever in my life corruption that is going on in washington, d.c. these days. i have an idea that i happened to look upon the other night. i think it would solve a lot of the deficit. i would like to see all the democrats go to mexico, hungarya, even moved to and join george soros. in lincoln,s hal

nebraska, republican. caller: i was thinking about force, it will always be nasa. this is the way this man works, he puts these things out to distract us from his litigation. theill see the end of mueller reports because it will eventually come out to us. we can't give away our ways of getting things done. what was the other thing? , the actingce force defense secretary will join john todayd -- joseph dunford on the senate armed services committee for a hearing on space force.

it is already underway. go to c-span3 to watch the hearing live. c-span.org or listen to it on the free c-span radio app. john in johnstown, pennsylvania, democrat. caller: how are you? when the president of the united states badmouth the fbi and secret service to other leaders of the world, that is treasonous to me. there is no other explanation for that. unredacted should be and seen by the american people as we pay for it and we should see it. redacted, he wants may as well say he will redact the whole report, ridiculous. the is my main complaint, -- someone say he did not commit treason but he did, when you

badmouth agencies to leaders of other countries, he extols the virtues of dictators and knocks around country down, can you believe that, that to me is treason. host: 10 minutes left. stay here on c-span after we finish at 10:00 and eastern because we will take you to the senate appropriations subcommittee dealing with agricultural issues, sonny perdue, the agriculture secretary, will be testifying today, airing on c-span.org and you can listen to it on a free c-span radio app. mitchell in cincinnati, ohio, dependent. caller: are you ready? host: go ahead. the robert mueller report should be fully disclosed to the public. comments,one makes putting their opinion out like they are doing.

, he isult of the report trying to get people on one side, the republicans, and right now they are -- host: talk to your phone and turned on your tv. what are they doing? caller: is this better? the robert mueller report should be -- host: we got your point. turn your television down and speak through the phone. norman in kansas, independent. say we i would like to have the finest president in this country in years. keep --it is good they is finally bringing out what people have done to him and how the man gusted up against

what people have done to him -- host: you talk, democrat, good morning. -- utah, democrat, good morning. caller: call your senator early today to tell them to vote against the nomination of david bernhardt because we have already has a president who is exhilarating the giveaways. in utah we have had a sharp increase in the number of parcels given away to the oil companies, that gorgeous land will never be recovered. time the, he cut the permitting process takes to start development. david bernhardt is a corrupt oil lobbyist who will only exacerbate the deplorable problem our public lands being given away. call your senator early this morning.

tell them to vote against david bernhardt. host: how long have you been tracking his work? it seems like you're interested in this topic. caller: i am heartbroken to see our beautiful public lands in utah being destroyed. i think everybody is familiar , monumentsnd grab being shrunk, they were beautiful areas that all of us in utah and everybody in the world could have enjoyed for years to come but now this administration has reduced them in some cases like 70% to 80% of now available to the oil companies to put up oil derricks and they cannot be mitigated after the oil companies have destroyed them, after the oil goes out, they are

permanently destroyed and we need public lands in utah as we thrive on the tourist economy, especially in the southern half of utah. , davidot just utah bernhardt will pollute the entire country. today is our last chance to avoid having that happen to us. host: we are expecting a vote on david bernard -- david bernhardt's nomination about -- and to learn more about him go to our website and search him and watch his confirmation hearings last month. she mentioned this story making the rounds in the papers, president trump signing executive orders yesterday seeking to make it easier for firms to build oil and gas -- a moveas part of growing backlash from some state

officials and environmental activists. pamela in joplin, missouri, republican. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i just want to say that i have been watching, i have a passion watching politics since i was 17. i have voted on both sides of the aisle. and notor the person necessarily the party. that i do not you right but -- i lean most of my family are democrats, longtime democrats. vote -- will vote democrat again. the democrats treated justice kavanaugh and attacked him

without due process. years russian probe into the donald trump campaign with no , and noe, no reason evidence or proof. and they have the audacity to say -- democrats have the republicanssay that , on theey general barr current campaign -- trump campaign, that he does not have evidence of spying. host: that is pamela in missouri. we are talking about today in

washington, tracking a number of stories today. one more story from the hill newspaper, an interview today with white house economic adviser larry kudlow. he was asked about the nomination of herman cain for the federal reserve. >> republican say herman cain cannot get the votes, is the administration standing behind herman cain? larry kudlow: we are at the moment, he is at the vetting process. this paperwork is in. he is being looked at by the fbi. >> to the senate? larry kudlow: that is correct, it will. >> you plan on moving forward? they were fellow: the process -- larry kudlow: the process is going on at the white house and the president said yesterday he is supported and i do not want

to prejudge it. startedalready consultations with the senate , they will gotee through their own process. i do not want to prejudge it. there are allegations and so forth. this town is full of allegations. sometimes true and sometimes not true. i want to give hermann a decent chance to go to the process. theoes that encompass charges from the women? vets,kudlow: when the fbi they do it well. host: a few minutes left in the program, taking your calls about what you are interested in in washington. in a few moments we will take you to the senate appropriations committee for a hearing with agriculture secretary sonny perdue.

you can see the room getting ready for that hearing on the ag department budget. milton in sebastian, florida, democrat. caller: good morning. when special counsel robert mueller completed his report and attorney general barr initially commented and answered questions that he will release as much of the report as was legally code.le, i took that as to me it meant that attorney general barr was going to do his most to release as little of the report as he could get away with. thee was no reason why total unredacted report cannot be released to the appropriate

house committees who have security clearance. to have access, total access to that report. why the houseason committee chairman who is requesting president trump's income tax returns should not get them under the law. but there has been nothing but procrastination and confiscation -- from the trump administration. i just feel that as we go along the report will eventually come out. i don't see why congress at these cannot have total access, total access to it right now. host: do you think there is a smoking gun in the report?