-- makes a difference. >> by exercising and protecting our right to vote we decide of america continues to be run by the people for the people. that is what it means to be an american. >> you can watch every winning studentcam documentary at studentcam.org. here on c-span this morning, "washington journal" is next with phone calls and headlines. at 9:30 we take you to the justice department where attorney general barr holds a news conference to discuss the redacted release of robert mueller's report. >> coming up on "washington journal," the american conservative report and the potential impact on campaign 2020. also, new york times reporter

andrew jacobs joins us to talk about his recent piece on how publiclys barred from identifying hospitals working to contain the spread of dangerous pathogens. [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] ♪ host: it is the "washington therel" for april 18 and are several ways you can follow attorney general william barr's press conference uninterrupted and without commentary on c-span. at 9:30, you can stay on this network. you can watch online at c-span.org and listen with our radio app. the redacted report will be delivered to congress between -- on cd. look for it to be posted after that. check c-span.org later on to read the redacted version. president trump has a scheduled event at the east room of the

white house at 10:30 and to what extent he will address the mueller's report is anybody's guess. with the release of the report, we will take your comments on it in this first 45 minutes. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. an independents, 202-748-8002. you can make your comments on twitter if you wish @cspanwj and our facebook page at facebook.com/cspan. 2017 where thef original order from the justice department came out setting up the mueller report and here is what it was scheduled to look at. it was scheduled to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 election. robert mueller is appointed to prove as special counsel for the united states department of justice.

. -- including any links or coordination between the russian government and assist -- and individuals associated. annie matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation and other matters within the scope of the law. that was set up by rod rosenstein may of 2017. that brings us to today, the release of the redacted report. 9:30 is where you can see the press conference. watch that at c-span, c-span.org , and our radio app. here is -- here to tell us about the various teams are preparing is john bennett from roll call. good morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: could you start by talking about the white house's perspective? reportsly in light of

that the justice department talk to them about the report. guest: before that report came out, i was at the white house yesterday kind of late morning and the sense was they still, at that time, had not received that briefing. kind of the feeling was they were waiting to hear a little more before they really put their strategy in concrete, so to speak. a senior white house official told me how they respond today call.% the president's we know he does not have a communications director. bill shine, that was early march -- it all feels like one day sometimes in the trump era, and trump is kind of serving as his own communications director. he is going to make the call on how he responds and what the senior official told me was it

is largely going to depend on what the report says. they do feel confident and i think what you are going to hear from the president and others after the report is released is attorney general barr's bottom-line line conclusions in that four page summary that went to congress has not changed. there was no criminal conspiracy with russia and there was not enough evidence to establish a case of obstruction of justice by the president that would be, if you could even indict a sitting president that would be able to be prosecuted in a court of law because that is how mueller looked at it read everything was a criminal bar that everything had to clear. nothing the special counsel looked at cleared that bar. that is what the white house is going to hammer home no matter what the report says. you will hear it over and over. you will hear it over -- all

over the weekend. the president is going to marley -- mar-a-lago and i expect him to hammer that on twitter. do you expect the president's lawyer to serve as a rapid response team once they digest the report and look at the findings? guest: i do. i think that is where we look back and get the bulk of the response from team trump until the president comes out around 4:00 p.m. on the south lawn to board marine 1 and go on and joint base andrews and fly to south florida. -- the rest of the personal, legal team reacting to this. at the white house, they don't

want to get out in front of the boss. we have seen what happens when aides get in front of donald trump. he will be talking to rudy giuliani and, absolutely, i think he will weigh in. i think they will weigh in. the strongest after this comes out until the president speaks. room0:30 event in the east -- we have seen that before and he makes the calls on these kinds of things. i would not expect questions at the 10:30 event and the way they set up the east room, not really good for impromptu q&a. alreadydemocrats talking or complaining about the press conference today, that came from the head of the house judiciary committee and we have seen statements from nancy pelosi and chuck schumer.

this is an interesting -- for two years, robert mueller was a white .night for democrats confident mueller was going to find apparently more than he did. there was no smoking gun. we will see how much there is actually there in the meat of the report. now democrats will be somewhat critical of the report. they are already -- this morning speaker pelosi and chuck schumer already out with a statement demanding that bob mueller

testify and slamming the attorney general saying he is shielding the president and handled the whole report rollout in a very partisan way. barr is giving that 9:30 press conference. before reporters even come out, they won't -- he is going to talk process and that is going to frustrate democrats and they are going to be very critical of william barr. we will see how critical they are of mueller. they are in a very, very tricky spot. host: john bennett serves as rollcall's white house correspondent. thank you so much for your time. guest: thank you. host: 9:30 is where you can watch that press conference right here on c-span, c-span.org , and our radio app. you heard our guest talk about the events scheduled later on

for the east room of the white house, whether the president makes comments there about it is anybody's guests. we will get your reaction to today's release. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. is steve, go this ahead. caller: thanks, c-span. it is pretty obvious barr is going to put his spin on what is report, thatacted he has put enough cover on it for the president. this is just more wool being pulled over the public's eye. i think democrats will have to get the unredacted report at some point and whatever happens, happens at that point. if they have nothing to hide, then why are they putting out

such a narrative on everything and putting a spin on everything? host: do you plan to read it for yourself once it comes out? caller: i don't think so, i doubt if i do. i will just let all the media put the spin on it and i will see -- filter out what i can filter. i am going to have to apologize because your signal is breaking up. robert in washington, d.c., independent line, hi. caller: good morning, how are you doing, c-span? host: i am fine, thanks. caller: i am wondering why it is taking so long for them to bring out this report.

trump is the second president to be put into office by the russians. the second is another president has been put into office by the russians and guests who it is? george h. w. bush. host: you think the report is going to talk about russian influence to the point that the president was put into office by the russians, you think that is what it is going to find? caller: i highly doubt it. the report compared to the 1991,ation we had in everything we talk about now is going to blow it away. host: richard rogers off of twitter says why won't trump let the mueller report speak for itself? bill saying cannot wait for the latest trump 2020 adds. remember, never trumpers and democrats who have been begging for this. that is some of the reaction from our twitter feed. our facebook page is facebook.com/cspan.

we will hear next from cornelius in louisiana, republican line. hi. caller: hi, how are you doing? god bless you, c-span. i have been investigated by mueller, and stuff. i know he is no good. he put four innocent people behind bars during his administration when he was the fbi director. two of them died behind bars. i think mueller is a never, ever trumper. even the republicans tried to use that dossier. i am glad barr is coming out with this and trump can be triumphant. i am an african-american republican, i support trump. these never, ever trumpers and democrats try to destroy trump. mueller destroyed me.

i am trying to get a part and stuff to read i hope you do a special on presidential pardons. host: that is cornelius in alexandria, louisiana. one of the names that came up during the course of investigations was james papadopoulos. he with an op-ed this morning. toing my time as an advisor the trump campaign, federal intelligence and law enforcement agents used operatives to contact me in person and by mail to discuss rumored coordination efforts with russia and extract evidence of collusion crime. these men spied on me, hidden behind the cloak of public personas. confirmedpapers have stephen helper reported -- reported the australian intelligence. you can read more of that in the

wall street journal. i think nancy pelosi has a lot of nerve calling republicans partisan, she is kind of the queen of partisan. as a democrat, i am confused. for two years i have been told they have proof against the president and there is reason to impeach him and every time i hear a democrat talk, they sound like they have proof and they sound like they are positive and and i am kind of confused, it is kind of like they are making up stories. if the president did do should bewrong, he prosecuted. if they prosecute him, they really need to prosecute hillary, too, because there is more proof against hillary and

even mueller. i am just confused. host: here is the statement from the house speaker and the senate minority leader in a statement saying attorney general barr's handling -- his irresponsible testimony before congress and his plan to spin the report in a press conference later this morning hours before he allows the public or congress to see it have resulted in a crisis of confidence in his impartiality. the only way to begin restoring public trust in the handling of the investigation is for mueller to provide public testimony in the house and senate. one of the others criticizing the press conference at 9:30 by the attorney is the house judiciary chairman, joe nadler, speaking last night at a press conference about today's event. [video clip] >> the attorney general appears

to be waging a media campaign on behalf of president trump. the very subject of the investigation at the heart of the mueller report. rather than letting the facts speak for themselves, the attorney general has taken unprecedented steps to spin mueller's nearly two year investigation. he summarized the report and cherry picked findings in his march 24th letter to congress. he withheld summaries written by the special counsel that were intended for public consumption. he has brief to the white house on the report before providing congress a copy, which has helped them repair -- prepare a rebuttal response for the president. now, the evening before the report's scheduled release, the department of justice has informed the committee that it will receive a copy between 11:00 a.m. and noon, well after

the attorney general's 9:30 a.m. press conference. this is wrong. it is contrary to the attorney general's own words to the committee. "i do not believe it would be in the public's interest for me to attempt to summarize the full report, but to really sit -- or to release in serial or piecemeal fashion." the attorney general appears to once again put his own spin on the investigative work completed by the special counsel and his team. the fact of the attorney general is not releasing even the redacted reports to congress until after his press conference will again result in the report being presented through his own words rather than through the words of special counsel mueller . here is thatoncern the attorney general barr is not allowing the fax to speak for themselves, but is trying to bake in the narrative about the

report to the benefit of the white house. justurse, he is doing this before the holiday weekend, so it is difficult for anybody to react. this is wrong, it is not the proper role of the attorney general. the department of justice in a court filing in the roger stone case today said that some members of congress may it access to some of the redacted information only for use in secret. the judiciary committee has no knowledge of this and it should not be read as any agreement or assent on our part. host: this is dan from georgetown, massachusetts, independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for having me on. wow. listening to representative nadler here, wow.

day, you starty the day to a new world. just talking about all the things the democrats were doing during the mueller investigation. you had trump saying the same thing all time through, witchhunt, no collusion, that is what he is still saying and said from the beginning. democrats are bouncing all over the place. we like him, we don't like him, we hate him. the attorney general is going to say something before the release of the documents, that is unfair. what? what? it is outrageous what is going on here. host: once the report comes out, what do you plan to do with it? do you plan to look at it yourself? what is the intention? caller: it is the report.

we are listening to big government. we are american citizens here, we are supposed to question big governments. host: what does that mean toward the release of the report? caller: what does it mean? skeptical of anything that comes from our government, that is what our constitution says. host: let's hear from juliet in arizona, democrats line. caller: did you say this is julie you are speaking to? host: in arizona, yes. caller: yes, this is the democratic line. i am more than disgusted by barr. he has a history of doing what he is trying to do now with the iran-contra affair under george w. bush. host: meaning what? caller: he is trying to do it

now again and i think, as americans, we paid for this report to come out. what do we need somebody to tell us it is a summary -- it is not a summary to congress. and tomorrow, before anybody has papers in their hand, and spin it out. howcould spin it out, but is anybody going to question you when they do not have papers in front of their hands? i think he is trying to get in front of the narrative because he is not working for the american people. he does not even care, at his age, about his own reputation. he is just another lackey of trump. the people did not vote for him. host: that is juliet in arizona. let's hear from samantha on the

republican line in washington, d.c. caller: good morning, i am a lifelong republican. i am 79 years old and i am the so-calledat now republican party is doing in endorsing a tyrant's behavior and underlining -- underlying the constitution of this country. people better wake up, it is no longer the republican party, it is the russian party. host: where do you come to those conclusions in light of the mueller report? caller: i believe the mueller report should come forward for americans and congress to do their due diligence. the people we have in congress now, especially in the senate, are an insult to the caliber of people there in watergate. host: when you say the report, do you mean the release of an unredacted report? report.an unredacted

we all need to know because this man in the white house is not a republican. he wants to be a russian mafia boss. host: that is samantha in washington, d.c. it was not too long ago the attorney general appeared before members of congress to talk about various things, including the mueller report and he explained his purpose or reasoning for red actions to that report. [video clip] >> i think it is important the public have an opportunity to view the reports of the special counsel's work and i said i would work diligently to make as much information available as i could. you will recognize i am operating under a regulation that was put together during the clinton administration.

i am relying on my own discretion to make as much public as i can. in my letter of march 29, i identified four areas i feel should be redacted and i think most people should agree, the first is grand jury information. the second is information that the intelligence community believes woodrow teal -- reveal -- community believes would reveal intelligence information. the third is information that would interfere with investigations still being pursued. we want to make sure none of the information would impinge upon the ability of prosecutors to prosecute or the fairness to the defendants. finally, we intend to redact information that implicates the

privacy or reputational interest of peripheral players where there is 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. we will colorcode the excision's from the report and we will provide explanatory notes for eachg the basis redaction. if a redaction is made because of a court order, we will state that. we will distinguish between the various categories. this process is going along very well. today,hat brings us to nine: 30 specifically, a press conference by the attorney general that will take place at the justice department. even though the redacted report will not be released, as you

heard chairman nadler say, until 11:00 reportedly by cd. that will be taken to congress and distributed. we are taking your calls on it. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents, 202-748-8002. that 9:30 event, you can see on c-span, c-span.org, and our radio app. the president will make comments in the east room at 10:30. whether to the extent he makes comments about the extent of the record -- about the report is anybody's gas. romney in texas, democrats --is anybody's guess. barr is just like all the other pathetic trump lapdogs. he goes before congress and claims he is going to be above water and transparent and turns

around and does the opposite. the best thing that needs to happen, mueller needs to go before congress and testify what he thought, what he knew. all this other is just a sham. it is pathetic, is what it is. barr is so far up trump's ass that -- it is pathetic. host: that is ronnie in texas. can you hear me? host: yes, you are on, go ahead. caller: i am independent and it is upsetting to me how much division there always is and everybody being vilified. i am just wondering why mueller could not come out and give a statement saying things are being followed, procedures are being followed, the red actions

protecttions are to citizens that are to be protected. it is not protecting trump, it is protecting citizens that have a right not to be exposed. host: do you think if he said those things it would resolve concerns people have expressed? is seeni think mueller as a neutral party. i thought barr would be seen that way, but apparently not. i think mueller has a responsibility to come out and say procedures are being followed. we just need some sanity. we don't need to be constantly choosing sides. host: when you say you don't think william barr is performing as he could is this because of redactions?ons -- caller: i am saying lots of people are all of a sudden vilifying him and i would like to understand -- as far as i

understand, he is following procedure and i don't think he is choosing one side or the other or representing citizens. he is doing the redactions to protect citizens. host: ruben is next, go ahead. caller: i stand with adam schiff . we know there was interference from russia with our voting. we know there was a meeting at trump tower with moscow. we know there was an investigation and i stand with adam schiff and mccarthy and all those other ones that try to be --s adam schiff should treason. we spent all this time waiting for them, anybody that calls themselves a true american patriot should want to see the full report. mueller should be subpoenaed.

in the words of adam schiff, this is not okay. francis in massachusetts, hello. caller: hello? host: you are on, go ahead. caller: hi. i am siding with the president on this. i am little leery on how this thing all started. it did seem like it was a coup by the deep state and the government and look at all the firings. strzok andage and all these people that left government kind of set something up because they wanted hillary clinton to win, they did not want anybody else to win. it did not matter if it was trump or anybody else. i believe when president obama 2012 inlary clinton in the primaries, i think she was given a deal, you are next.

host: when you say you support president trump, does that mean you are going to read the report or not read the report? how are you going to approach it? caller: i am going to read the report. i have been following it for two years. i am retired, i have nothing better to do. i have watched every tv station and i just don't believe any of that occurred. from wilmington, delaware. karen on our independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. quite confused. people are demanding this report with all the classified information be unredacted and released. basically, what people are demanding is that our government, our senators and mr. barr do exactly what julian allnge did in regards to

the classified, unredacted information that he released on his website. i am not invested in this emotionally. i look at this in the independent view. to me, there is no difference in what they are demanding this attorney general to do and they need to be careful because once they cross that line, then julian assange should be free and that is how i feel. host: alain off of facebook says look at all the spin, the man is innocent. wendy schneider off facebook the barris will be report, not the mueller report. john saying i hope everyone is ready for either a snow job or a great big nothing.

in pennsylvania, democrats line, calvin is next, hello. caller: yes, this is calvin. i have a question for you, pedro. when this investigation was recently, donald trump made a statement on tv. comes out and says something like if they want to release the full report, let them do it. you have the ok from the president to bring the entire mueller report. host: let me hold you off for a second only to show folks william barr heading into the justice department. preparations underway for that press conference at 9:30. c-span, c-span.org, and our radio app. calvin, go ahead. caller: this makes no sense. he might as well just give the

final ok on having this complete report shown to the public. now all of a sudden william barr is redacting some of the information. why? host: we just showed you some sound, the attorney general last week in testimony talked about the law and the reasoning he gave when it comes to the redaction of the report. if you go to our website at c-span.org, two hearings that took place last week at length talked about the report. if you type william barr, you will find all those things available to you. line, goodican morning from oak hill, florida. you are next up. caller: good morning. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: good morning. how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: i have a couple of questions -- it is not really a question.

as far as the mueller report coming out today redacted, i don't think anybody should see the full report based on we -- the fact that we have privacy and security for people to be able to testify without being disclosed. you are going to ruin the entire justice system if democrats continue down the road they are going, it is not going to stop. it will happen to every person who gets elected from now on. i watched the media yesterday on another network where you had maxine waters accused the president of about seven different major crimes saying there was positive proof and everything else while the commentator sat there and never challenged her. all they want is dirt. dirt sells and that is what they are going to push and if there is no dirt in this, they will come up with other dirt. that is why they are already pushing tax returns. democrats have opened up

pandora's box. host: there is a radio host in washington, d.c. named larry connor, had a chance to interview the president at the white house about the release of the report. here is a portion of that interview. [video clip] >> you will see a lot of strong things come out tomorrow. attorney general barr will be giving a press conference. maybe i will do one after that, we will see. he has been a fantastic attorney general, he grabbed it by the horn. what has happened is unthinkable ok and page and comey and mccabe and all these characters and brandon and klapper. you look at what comey did as the director of the fbi, it is a disgrace, it is a disgrace to our country and i hope i am going to be able to put this

down as one of my great achievements. host: that was the president in an interview with the white house. 10:30esident will talk at addressing another event, he might address the mueller report. later, he will head to mar-a-lago for the easter holiday weekend. of the report at 9:30 or later this morning at 11:00 to congress and 9:30, a press conference with attorney general william barr. virgina, robert. independent line, hello. caller: good morning, everyone. barr is only the attorney general for donald trump, he is not the attorney general -- i think he should be going himself for telling -- going to jail himself for telling lies. trump is saying everybody should

be ashamed, he is the one should be ashamed of himself for telling all the lies and having secret talks with the russian president and with the saudi arabia people. host: what is it about mr. barr's performance that you question? caller: because he was saying he is going to release the redacted report and it should not be redacted. they did not redact it when bill clinton was under investigation. they delivered it to congress on next day, no redaction it. all these republicans are following this man right to their own grave. host: will you read the report once it is out? caller: yes, i will. host: what do you think you will get from it once it is released? caller: i would like to get the unredacted report from mueller instead of barr because i do not trust none of these republicans.

they are going to be a lapdog for trump until he gets defeated. defeated, heis will start a war or something, so we will not get him out of the office. host: jesse in anaheim, california, democrats line. caller: thank you. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: oh, hi. has no business giving this report. it was supposed to go to congress. he has redacted that report and given his interpretation. this isn't about his interpretation for whatever he is going to redact on 400 pages. this should have gone to congress and the people, not to trump and not to barr. this is a scam. that is why people do not trust

what is going on. we have a right to know what is going on in our government and not by one person. report for two years. where is he? why isn't he speaking up? i am sure he is not satisfied making their barr statements and not telling the public the total truth of what that report says. that is jesse in anaheim, california. the completion of the mueller report gets turned over and thatam barr set to release at 11:00. it will be released or delivered in a cd format and deliver to the appropriate committees. a public version will be made available today all leading up to today. john in georgia, republican line, hi. let me push the button first,

sorry about that. john in georgia, sorry about that, go ahead. caller: i have a couple of comments for maxine waters, adam schiff, and jerry nadler. once this investigation witchhunt is over and the attorney general starts investigating these three with their secretive texts about trying to oust and unseat a crazy. president is for some of your callers who called in and said we want the unredacted report, they don't know the constitution. the constitution protects people . that is why one of the amendments is in the constitution, if you are called before a grand jury and they find nothing on you, would you want your name out there?

look how many families they have destroyed on this witchhunt. it is time for democrats to wake up, quit being crybabies, and let's get together and work together. host: in california, independent line. you are next up. caller: yes, thank you. i have a question. i don't understand the process. how many people in our congress have the security clearance to read the unredacted report and sensitives information in it that would be -- for our security, the report should not be public for everyone to read to protect innocent people. i am disgusted with republicans and democrats.

--m a shamed to be democrats a sandbox,kids in there is no compromising and the people's business is not being taken care of. host: axios reporting the mueller witnesses and reporters expect the report to include a massive detailed scenes. they believe if mueller's reports expresses -- presents the information in the detailed way -- it could lead a casual observer to think the president tried to obstructed justice. -- whether the president saw to to obstructed justice. whether the scenes were included in the report and they don't

know whether the attorney general bill barr redacted ahead of today's release. that may be a topic of discussion at 9:30 when the press conference takes place. watch on c-span, c-span.org, and our radio app. in illinois, republican line, hello. caller: i have the highest regard for mr. mueller and mr. barr. mr. mueller, a vietnam combat leader and would put you in jail in a heartbeat if you did something wrong. trust this man, give this report a chance. that is what i am asking everyone in this country and never be ashamed to say you are a united states citizen. host: greg will be the last call for this segment in north carolina. go ahead. i agree with the last caller, the young lady from

philadelphia who said she is a shame to be un-american, she should not be. i am a lifelong democrat and now i have to call on the independent line because i do not really have a party. i am flabbergasted that a party has so trashed its brand that they will spend all their time on -- time and effort on whatever it is they are trying to do. host: when you say this effort, do you mean over the mother report -- mueller report? caller: it has become increasingly clear the time spent on this issue is not about justice and fairness, it is about trying to gain power. there is nowhere to go anymore. you cannot be a republican, you cannot be a democrat. the system needs to be changed. i am looking forward to reading the mueller report.

i am looking forward to seeing how my money was spent. i think that is it key part about -- key part of what they are trying to do, divide this country to hold onto this rigged two-party system we have. greg in north carolina, the final comment in this section will continue conversations about the release of this report, but also 2020 with james antle. he will join us next in the program. andrew jacobs will talk about his recent piece looking at drug-resistant outbreaks at america's hospitals and why the cdc is barred from sharing that information with the public. at 9:30, that press conference, you can watch on c-span. we will be right back. ♪

>> it is important our congress and members of congress can come together and focus on passing policy and legislation that is meaningful and impactful and important to the people. if they dismiss petty politics and come together and protect the american people and do their jobs. announcer: high school students from the u.s. senate youth program talk about their experience spending a week in washington. >> though you may be a different political party and have different views, we all want to make a better world for ourselves and the generations after us. >> i think right now, our young people are very inspiring and we are passionate about our ideals and especially seeing all the delegates here this week, i have confidence in us that we could come together to reach a consensus that is educated and informed and crosses party lines. isthe one thing i can say

especially as i look around me at so many future leaders and so many fellow leaders of this rising generation is we are involved and we care so, so much. if one incredible thing has come from all of this, it is that we are all awake. announcer: sunday night at 8:00 a.m. -- 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. >> the c-span bus is stopping at middle and high schools to present prizes and awards to the winners of our studentcam competition. you can see the top 21 winning entries every morning before "washington journal" and watch every winning studentcam documentary along with those honorably mentioned and behind-the-scenes winners online at studentcam.org. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: james antle joining us with the american conservative. he serves as their editor.

good morning to you. guest: good morning. host: remind people what the american conservative is. guest: it is a bimonthly magazine and a website. the releaseg up to of the report, what is the worst case scenario, best case scenario for the president? guest: i think it was clear based on what we know about robert mueller that he was unlikely to precipitate a constitutional crisis based upon a close call. even on the basis of attorney general barr's summary of the mueller report, it appears up structure of justice was a close call. will we find -- will we see a redacted version of the report, was collusion a closer call than the barr summary indicated? if it is, that would be the worst case scenario. what kind of damming things even if in the report,

the bottom-line conclusions more president.nerate the the best case scenario is that it does not really add much to what we already know. all the examples we believe are going to be shown where they evaluate the question did the president obstruct justice, these are things we already knew. is it things in the public domain? tweets, may be dressing downs of aides already in the newspaper. will democrats find more examples of things like the trump tower meeting with russians? will they find things like that or will all those things be things we already know? i think the more that is new, the riskier it is for the president.

it doesn't really change the existing political dynamic. host: what ultimately do you think will satisfy democrats at this point? guest: i am not sure anything really will. release of thehe report or the summary of the report, there were two competing theories about what was going on. one was that mueller was building up to a bombshell that was going to reveal some level of trump involvement. and the presidential campaign was going to reveal some level of wrongdoing we did not know and the other theory was the indictments tell us what we know and the indictments do not charge anybody with any kind of crime related to the election, related to some kind of conspiracy with russia. these indictments are what mueller getting -- can prove in court.

there are a lot of democrats that seem to be hopeful that when you look at the fuller version of the report, that there will be more things that will come up, that there will be another shoe yet to drop. we seem to back -- be back in the same dilemma we are in before the barr summary was released. host: our guest is with us until 8:30. 202-748-8001 for republicans. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. last year you wrote when it came to the report it was entering a clintonian phase. what do you mean by that? guest: with the clinton scandal, they would be smoke or even billowing smoke, but the four alarm blaze would never really emerge.

there may be people that go to jail, which was the case in the whitewater scandal, there may be things that were unseemly and don't look good politically, but in terms of anything that would cause you to "lock her up" or anything like that, that never tear realized and i think there is a clintonian aspect of the russia scandal in that a lot of it does rely on how you parse and define certain terms. what does collusion mean? i think we will have a lengthy discussion of the definition of pollution once we see the fullness of this report. some will say that is shifting the goalpost and others will say let's try to get precision about what we are talking about since collusion is not precisely a legal term. host: the report to be delivered via cd to congress later today muellercalls for robert to testify himself. what is the likelihood of that?

guest: i think there is a very good chance we hear from robert mueller probably in not some independent way, but testifying before a relevant congressional committee. i know democrats are going to push hard for that to happen. i think there will be some people who will be more satisfied to hear the conclusions from mueller's mouth himself. to the extent that there is anybody viewed as a sort of neutral arbiter although not by everyone, but if there is anyone viewed in that light, it is mueller himself. since the summary has been released, there has been a strong democratic effort to impeach barr's credibility. i think that will continue even after the press conference. i think there has been an effort to cast the press conference as a way of spinning the results of the report before the report is released. i think a lot of people have that view of barr's summary as

well. when and if we hear from mueller, although i think there is a good chance we do, that has the greatest potential for satisfying those with an open mind of anything we are likely to hear today. host: i asked you about the worst and best case scenario. for william barr, how does he he beut of this and will so-called damaged goods? guest: i think he is not viewed -- it will have implications for his reputation. he already served as attorney general and had a good reputation, he did not really need to do this to come into the trump administration. i think his relationship with congressional democrats will be more contentious. i think there will be -- did he or did he not live up to the promises he made about how he would handle mueller's findings and what degree of transparency there would be? i don't think as yet, he has

follow the schedule he said he would follow and i do not think there is, as a get, much reason to criticize him, but he is, in fact, being widely criticized. host: jim antle joining us. this is from texas, independent line, julie, you are next up with our guest. go ahead. guest: i am sorry. i did not know we were supposed to have a guest, but my question does relate to him. he mentioned the clinton smoke, which actually blends in with what i was going to say. i have been watching congress every day for months and even during back when clinton was running against obama, i have been keeping up with this. at one time, i had a government clearance, level was secret. if i had done what mrs. clinton had done, i would be in prison.

if they are going to keep harassing the president, i think they should go back and investigate coney wasn't he the fbi director that cleared her? i think they should go back, reinvestigate her, investigate him investigating her, check his finances because it was shortly after that he removed himself from the job because there was a lot of collusion and dumping of files and that is when the whole russian scam started. host: we will let our guest answer. guest: i think that is the other side of this, you are going to see -- democrats are going to be raising questions about whether we know everything there is to know. i think republicans, at least day subset of them are going to begin raising questions about the origins of the russia investigation. if there was, in fact, no collusion, then what justified the surveillance or spying -- if that is your preferred

nomenclature, of a major party's presidential campaign? there certainly was enough russia contacts and suspicious activity that could justify it, but it certainly isn't about -- is about a small thing. and the fact we had both major candidates under investigation during the campaign, that raises a lot of questions. we have heard democrats question the propriety of what went on during the hillary clinton email investigation and i think he will continue to hear republicans raising those questions about the trump-russia probe. host: we heard that from the attorney general last week? guest: yes, we did, and he used the word spying and that is set up why the reveal of the mueller report was going to be so contentious read his use of that word, even though i think you can justify the use of the word, was seen as using language that would please the president and may be showing a bit of

skepticism himself about the origins of the trump-russia investigation. what shapewe seen this investigation will take or if it will take place in the first place? guest: we don't know exactly to be some kind of effort to build on what the inspector general of the justice department did, talking about some of the people on the fbi team who were involved in the investigation, some of whom were removed from robert mueller's , the insurance policy, there has been a lot of talk about what happened with regard to whether there was some effort to remove the president under the 25th amendment of the constitution. the president is going to try to frame this as an effort to overturn the election results and throw him out of office. you will hear a lot of democrats try to defend the integrity of

the investigation. there were a lot of things going on that needed to be looked at in the context of russian interference going on. host: from pennsylvania, john, republican line. caller: good morning. have become totally confused on what the word conservative means. all listened to michael cohen testify for a couple days and it was years before cohen testified that mitt romney, who i considered conservative, came out and told us exactly what michael cohen said, that trump was a cheat and a liar and a con man and there was no sons thing as a -- no such thing as a trump university. confused that these

conservatives suck up to trump when he bankrupt for can see casinos.four got $1 billion worth of tax relief and did not pay taxes on that. and ingets in office the, when they reported $666 billion deficit, the media response was we are going to get this huge tax cut and now our deficit is skyrocketing to $1 trillion a year and the conservatives just love him. host: thank you. guest: you are talking about worst-case scenarios for president trump in the mueller report. the worst-case scenario that they appear to have avoided, i

guess we won't know until we see the documents but what they appear to have avoided is that the mueller probe could have gone deeper into trump's business history. that was a real concern when michael cohen got wrapped up in the investigation, that this was going to be -- this was going to veer from a trump-russia investigation to looking at all of the loose ends of trump's business empire which given a lot of the controversies and characters who have been involved, could have been potentially very dangerous. there are areas where trump's business interests in russia could have meaningfully -- and russia could have meaningfully intersected with the purposes of the trump-russia probe. does sound as if we could be refuted by what we learn later

but it does sound as if the president dodged that bullet. host: in texas, kathy, democrats line. caller: hello? host: you are on, go on -- good morning. caller: i think barr took it usn himself to try and tell what was in the mueller report. i can read, i've got a dictionary. i believe that congress should .et to see the whole thing [indiscernible] host: we've got your point, thanks. guest: the attorney general was going to be in a tough spot regardless of what he chose to do. if there was a long period of between when the report

was submitted to the justice department, if there had been a long silence, there would have been questions, what are they hiding, why haven't we heard anything. washe redaction process ongoing. obviously if you do try and summarize the findings, then there are questions. is the summary an accurate portrayal of what mueller found? is this pre-release spin? is this putting the most favorable take possible on what mueller actually discovered? the attorney general was likely to be criticized regardless of what he did. the one thing you can say in his favor is they have up to this point done the things they said they were going to do, roughly in line with the schedule they said they're going to do them. host: would you be surprised if

there is a leak of the unredacte d report? guest: i would not be surprised and i think it is particularly likely if there is something redacted that democrats find meaningful. it is possible that republicans may decide there is something in that castsd report the investigation in an unfavorable light. i would not be surprised at all. i do think the main things we are going to hear about will be from this redacted version. virginia, on our independent line, dj. caller: i have been watching this go on for two years and what people forget is barr may have just come in, but rod rosenstein has been there throughout the whole procedure and that is who he has been

dealing with. therefore, any information he got was with rosenstein. i believe that it is going to be a fair decision either way and the american people are going to have to accept it. what i find interesting is all the news channels have been reviewing nadler. it seems like they are concerned because they did not get it first to put their spin on it. now they will say this is barr's spin and not the real report. it is so petty that it is getting monotonous and the democrats are going to shoot themselves in the foot when it comes to the election because they are doing it to themselves. people are sick and tired of hearing this junk. it is what it is. when the report comes out, read it and make your own decisions. that is the joy of being independent. host: thank you.

are alreadynk we seeing from the congressional investigations, in particular the intelligence committees in both the house and senate, that there was a partisan breakdown on how you viewed the evidence. it will not surprise me if that is exactly what the reaction will be to the mueller report. in the lead up to its release, we are already seeing democrats have a particular view of what the evidence shows and republicans have a different view. a lot does come down to what we think the president's motives. i think it is particularly important on the obstruction of justice question. this report is going to detail a lot of behavior, but shown in a granular detail that has the mning.ial to be da appears theyt

concluded, given the absence of an underlying crime, given the fact that there could be more innocent explanations for the president's words and views, given that this is just a close call, that they decide that they were not going to recommend that anything happened to the president. there are justice department regulations that prohibit or recommend against the indictment of a sitting president but there is nothing that wrote -- nothing that prevents the report from taking a firm position on it and letting congress decide what it wants to do, impeachment being the mechanism with which we constitutionally deal with wrongdoing by a sitting president. of course there is nothing that stops congress from making its own conclusions. seeing the full report, regardless of what barr or even mueller says or recommends, but it becomes politically difficult to make that case if mueller and barr do not endorse the idea

that the president obstructed justice. -- howhat do you think much do you think this report becomes an issue in campaign 2020? guest: it does not move the needle very much one way or the other. i do wonder how it affects the salience of impeachment. i wonder to what degree democrats, important donors like tom stier continue to push impeachment and leaders like nancy pelosi continue to push back against it. a lot of people's perceptions of are driven byport their opinions of president trump. those opinions seem to be pretty baked in the cake at this moment. it will alter the presidential landscape that much other than how do you address impeachment. impeachment is certainly less likely than it seemed at other points or other scenarios from

what mueller could have found and it is going to take a lot for that to change. something pretty damning in the mueller report that we did not know was there would have to be there. there is still going to be some but they will be others who say we have an election coming up. there is not much likelihood the senate would convict and we don't really have something that is going to get any kind of bipartisan support. let's move on and try to remove the president via the traditional way, the ballot box. the president is obviously going to use this as an example of how the swamp, much of washington, the deep state, all of his enemies, his opponents are out to get him and they have taken

their best shot and this is all they can come up with. at least based on what we know now, it appears to more or less exonerate him. democrats will emphasize the less, trump will emphasize the more. if investigations into how the whole probe got started reveal anything useful to the president in the campaign, we will hear a great deal about that. host: democrats line from michigan, this is raymond. caller: how are you this morning? host: fine, thanks, go ahead. theer: i was watching rachel maddow show last night and she had really good information. the federal her,

judges are getting the whole report. judge walton, it seems he is a republican. allaid he is going to get of the report, everything and he -- he will make a decision. the editorial of the washington post this morning does talk about judge walton, saying there may be no satisfying end to this national saga until an independent referee steps into sort out the controversy. there --bility for few further review, accusing barr of creating an environment that causes the public to be concerned. the judge raise the possibility that he would demand an un redacted report.

host: guest: any time -- guest: anytime you have reductions, you will have -- reaction -- redactions, you will have questions. that you would see some redactions. if no one trusts the people involved in the process, it is going to raise questions and the old independent counsel statute had the independent counsel report to eight a pan -- report to a panel of judges. under the rules governing this investigation, robert mueller's special counsel was effectively an employee of the justice department. he was reporting to deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. jeff sessions was attorney general and had recused himself to the great displeasure of the president. he reports to attorney general barr now who has not recused himself from this investigation. are fromremoved you

the trumpet administration, ethic it is easier for critics of the administration to accept whatever information is released is the whole story but those are not the rules that govern this particular investigation. host: illinois, republican line, joe, go ahead. , iler: the problem i have don't understand how robert report would issue a that had information that needs to be redacted. why would he put in national security or grand jury information into the report when he knew it had to be redacted and that it would cause a controversy that would help the democrats continue with this story? it makes no sense. guest: there are going to be people with high security clearances reviewing this information. clearly there will be people in the intel committees, leadership of both houses that will get to

review this and they will see some of the redacted information. there is an element of this that is public assumption and an element that is not but the caller is correct. anything that is redacted is going to raise questions. host: from clinton, pennsylvania, independent line. ray, hello you are next. caller: this whole thing by the democrats is nothing more than barr. to impute coming down from all of these other people, they're going to try and make him look like it is payback time. he is going to straighten up what happened. it is going to go all the way to obama. how old were yusor during the clinton administration -- were you sir, during the clinton administration? guest: old enough to remember it. caller: you say there was smoke but no fire.

i was in law enforcement. there was a sealed indictment on hillary clinton about the rose hawthorne documents never released. the reason they did not prosecute her, because she lied to the fbi and those documents were later found because she says she did not know what happened to them. they were later found in her study next to her bedroom and turned over to the secret service and that is when the investigation came up. the grand jury finding was sealed. go after that and you will find out why hillary clinton should never have been in the white house. guest: that is going to be the conclusion a lot of people reach no matter what the mueller report says. world skated. as much as questions have been

raised about barr, certainly there will be questions raised about james comey, klapper, brennan. at the very least, i think you can question the judgment of people who are so important in intelligence and investigatory roles, behaving as partisan opponents of the president as they clearly have in their post government life. maybe they did not behave in this manner while they were still working in government but they have certainly colored people's perception of them in a way that does not make them look like they are neutral arbiters of this dispute. host: we will continue with the mueller report. , thatoes it say to you this headline where you see several democrats in the 2020 field working to be on the fox news network to be on a town hall? guest: on the one hand you have a large percentage of the democratic base that sees fox news as an illegitimate news organization, a propaganda

outlet for the president and they don't want democrats to grace the network with their appearances. they think it normalizes fox news. ,he counterargument to that this is a way to reach a large number of people, maybe some of whom are supportive of the president but could be persuaded otherwise. why would major democratic candidates want to pass up a chance to appear before this audience? l on foxanders' town hal news appeared to go pretty well for him. because a lot of democrats won't appear on that network, it does confer some advantage to the democrats who do because they are getting a share of that audience that a lot of other democrats are willingly passing up. host: is democrat -- is bernie sanders the leader at this point as far as the pack is concerned? guest: he is pretty close. if you look at the polling data, it is really between him and joe

biden and biden has unannounced he is actually going to -- has not announced he is actually going to run whereas sanders has announced and he is actual -- he is actively campaigning. a front runner is typically someone who is leading more or less in all of the polls. the polls go back and forth between whether biden or sanders is leading. we don't know what biden is going to do. it does look like he is going to run. he may do what jeb bush did in , and then once he formally declares, he has to instance himself from those efforts from a legal perspective. as long as biden does not announce and there are controversies and criticisms, it raises some uncertainty and bernie sanders at the moment, given that the two of them are the ones with the highest name

recognition, i think bernie sanders is benefiting. host: how do you view the the --on being paid to guest: one of the main things he has going for him is his personality. there are a lot of people who have reacted to president trump. they don't like the style, they don't like the tweets. they don't like his rhetoric. the mayor is saying let's turn things down a notch. that can be very attractive in very 20 -- a very attractive message in 2020. a lot of democrats will not be receptive to that. label want somebody who will fight trump on his own terms -- they will want somebody who will fight trump on his own terms. somebody in the general election that would react favorably to going back to the pre-trump way of doing things. it is a difficult argument to

make as mayor of south bend as opposed to a senator or governor. he can argue that president trump had even less experience than he did when he became president. host: our guest, james antle, chief editor and american conservative magazine. our next caller, thank you for waiting. caller: going back to the start of things, at least my start. i remember one thing about what president trump said on his inauguration day, that when we have the obama administration there behind him, he said that their victories, the current administration have not been your victories, and he was talking to the people out there listening to the inauguration. on election night

when hillary clinton would not come out on stage to accept a defeat and if not that, at least thank her supporters for staying with her. not too long after that, we learned that magazine had preprinted out madam president issues of their magazine for what they thought was going to be a for sure win for hillary clinton. also, -- host: what would you like our guest to respond to? caller: i'm sorry? host: what would you like our guest to respond to, specifically? caller: about the report coming out. don'tmocrats certainly get the basics of things. classified information needs to remain classified. --y wanted the report,

report out in a couple of days. the people can't see that this president trump is trying to save this country. they can just go and jump in a lake. definitely have the democrats decide to react to this report is going to have some degree of political significance and president trump is going to frame anything they do as intent to not move beyond the russia hoax, beyond the witchhunt, that they will continue to attack him rather than try to deliver something to the american people. clearly the democrats are going to be looking through this report and anything they find in it that does not comport with the barr summary, that does seem to be incriminating or raise political questions, they are going to have a decision to make as to how far they want to pursue that, both from a political and legal perspective. host: in chicago on our

republican line, this is paul. caller: good morning. ijust wanted to say that think this is the death rattle for the deep state apparatus. they had control over this country for the last 60 years and i think this is what this is. host: meaning what? i believe that they had control over this country for a long time and i think like with the clintons on that deal on the back of the airplane, loretta lynch, where was the investigation for that? what about the young news reporter that got killed two days after he said he had information about her 32,000 emails? no investigations. host: are you surprised by these continued calls for investigations into those matters? guest: i'm not. it is going to be similar to how a lot of democrats will feel let

down by the mueller report. many critics of the clintons are not satisfied with the outcomes of any of those investigations, not satisfied that those were serious investigations. thesee cases some of scandals were not investigated at all. it is interesting question given that both trump and hillary clinton were to some extent under fbi scrutiny during the campaign. many democrats felt that hillary was treated unfairly and many republicans felt the president has been treated unclipped -- unfairly. by releasinghat public information during the campaign, hillary clinton was put in more political jeopardy as a result of these investigations. president trump and people in his orbit were not put in that political jeopardy but they were put in greater legal jeopardy. paul manafort is facing quite a bit of prison time, and nobody

comparable in the clinton orbit faced that kind of risk. host: dave in north carolina, you are on with our guest. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: i would like to ask mr. antle how would the republican party allow itself to be pulled down by this president? theave seen him take on emoluments clause. we have seen him have his family over -- outsourced overseas. we have seen his son-in-law go over to saudi arabia and buddy up to the saudi family. dot is this party going to to take this president, who is not able to perform his job, out of office? host: thank you caller. guest: that illustrates another

point that regardless of what comes out of the mueller report, there are other avenues to investigate the president and to cause political problems. it is not limited to this russia investigation. whether hear more about he is profiting from the presidency. there will be an effort to get his tax returns released, especially now that the democrats control the house and have the ability to subpoena. they control the investigatory committees. even if mueller is the end of this tickler chapter, it is not the end of investigating the president. host: your take on the news out of north korea, possible testing of a new weapon and wanting mike pompeo out of future negotiations. what does this mean for the administration? guest: it was always a

precarious situation, given that we have entered into a lot of negotiations with north korea that did not bear fruit. were thestic administration's expectations, concessions you could extract from north korea? this kind of news jeopardizes further negotiations. wehave reached a point where were at a dangerous situation with north korea. i think at the very least these negotiations pulled us back from that particular ledge, but it is going to be hard to sustain the momentum behind diplomacy if it is not yielding tangible results and the north korean government continues to act belligerent. host: laverne in virginia, go ahead, democrats line. caller: i wanted to ask the , aboutan, your guest

attorney general barr coming out having this --d host: press conference at 9:30. caller: yes, press conference. don't he think that general barr should wait until the whole report comes out so that people have more understanding of what he is saying? guest: a lot of reporters in particular have raised that question. that it would be difficult to ask meaningful questions at this press conference if you are not looking at the report, you don't know anything other than what he is describing to you which was the criticism of his summary of the report that had already been released. fors not terribly uncommon

the release of a major document like this to be preceded by a press conference but it is not terribly uncommon for the reporters attending the press conference to have some kind of embargoed copy of what is about to be released. my guess would be that they would be fairly skeptical that that embargo would hold as much as they would like and that may be a factor in their decision. it rages legit -- it raises lujan a questions -- legitimate questions. i would be interested to hear if we see any elaboration beyond the summary. to what degree does barr quote mueller's own language. does barr use the press conference primarily to describe the findings of the investigation, or does he use it primarily to defend his conduct in releasing the report, or is

he simply going to summarize what we are going to see happen next? it will be interesting to see how reporters engage with him and interact with him. how hostile of a press conference is this and how much do we hear from deputy attorney general rosenstein? host: jim antle of the american conservative. thanks for your time. at 9:30 you can see that press conference live on c-span, c-span.org and our c-span radio app. one more guest joining us, new york times health and science reporter andrew jacobs. he is going to talk about a story looking at drug-resistant outbreaks in american hospitals and why the cdc is legally barred from sharing that information with the public. 9:30 is when you will see that press conference at the justice department. we will give you a chance later on in the program to respond to that as well. we will go to a break and then

come back with andrew jacobs of the new york times. ♪ >> i think the legacy of rochester's ongoing. --rochester embraces this embraces its role as the city of compassion, our mission is to make people feel welcome, that this is a home away from home. >> c-span cities tour is on the road, exploring the american story. located 90 minutes south of

minneapolis, rochester has been the home of the mayo clinic since its founding in 1864. >> mayo clinic is a good neighbor in rochester. mayo clinic helped rochester achieve international recognition. in many respects, mayo clinic would have never happened except the city of rochester. it was the intimate nature of rochester that allowed this incubator to expand and become a world presence in medicine. >> we will speak with local authors in the city of 115,000. ♪ come gather round people ♪ >> most people think that bob dylan is leftist or somehow associated with the hippie movement of the 1960's, the voice of the generation which was a label he detested. you really can't say he is exactly left or right. most people have a misconception

about what bob dylan is. >> watched c-span's city tour -- cities tour of rochester on c-span's book tv and sunday at 2:00 p.m. on american history tv on c-span3, working with our cable affiliates as we explore the american story. >> "washington journal" continues. host: a recent story in the new york times took a look at drug-resistant infections that occur within hospitals and their resistance to antibiotics and the culture of secrecy as it is described in the headlines, surrounding these infections. his findings is andrew jacobs, new york times health and science reporter. thank you for joining us. what infection are we talking about in this story? guest: this is a fungus. it is a recently discovered bug that was found in japan in the

ear of a patient in 2009, and has spread all over the world. in the u.s. it has killed about 600 people. host: when it comes to that information, how does it work, how does it do its work as far as killing people? guest: people with weakened immunities, people who are already sick, people in the hospital who cannot fight it off. it has really taken off in new york and new jersey and illinois and a few other states around the country. people who gete it do not respond and 50% die within 90 days. host: as far as the causes of the outbreak, why the concentration in hospitals? guest: the origins of it are a bit of a mystery and how it got here is a mystery. why the concentration in hospitals?

it is a very tenacious bug and it spreads through hospital equipment, the hands of nurses, people visiting. it is extremely hard to kill. a hospital in the u.k. in london had to tear out everything in its icu because it could not get rid of it. the same of a hospital here in new york. a room where a patient died, they could not get rid of it. they would clean it thoroughly and test for it and it was still there. they had to dismantle the entire emergency room to get rid of it. it is extremely tenacious. host: mr. jacobs, in these cases, sometimes people would get an antibiotic or antifungal. why not apply those in these cases? guest: they do use antifungal medication. the problem is this particular fungus is very resistant to those drugs. on tuesday, the cdc announced

they found one strain of this fungus that was resistant to everything. it is pretty serious and seems to be getting worse. at the moment there is no drug that can conquer it. host: when it comes to letting the public know about this. your reporting on it obviously but what is the federal government releasing in terms of these types of cases? guest: the cdc will release generic information about these outbreaks but will not identify the hospital or nursing home where this takes place. this is because there is a tacit agreement with the states not to force them to report. it is up to each individual state's apartment of health to do that and -- department of do that and very few of them will -- department of health to do that and very few of them will. you will not want to check into a hospital for elective surgery

if you know they are having an outbreak. hospital officials and state workers say the reason is they don't want to scare away patients. they fear people will not get medical care because they are afraid of infections and that is worse than these bugs. most people will not be affected by it. if you are immune system is healthy, if you are young, you are likely to not have any ultimate -- any alternate. host: andrew jacobs of the new york times, if you want to ask him questions about it, you can call on the lines. we have divided them differently, for those who live in the east and central time zones, it is (202)-748-8000. in the pacific time zones, it is (202)-748-8001. perhaps you work at a hospital, your number is (202)-748-8002. mr. jacobs, when it comes to the larger issue, the use of

antibiotics and the resistance, can you talk about how that applies in these cases where you see these types of infections being resistant? guest: this is a huge problem, much bigger than this one bug. kill -- 700,000 people die each year from resistant infections. that figure is growing and by 2050, it is predicted by -- predicted that 10 million people a year will die to resistant infections, more than cancer. it is a growing problem that is getting little attention. the problem is there are very few drugs in the pipeline, very little incentive for drug companies to develop these drugs. basically we are stuck with the supply of antibiotics we have had for years and these bugs become resistant. the more antibiotics you throw at them, the more they mutate because they want to survive.

a lot of that is because americans overuse antibiotics. 30% of the prescriptions given are unnecessary. used inntibiotics are agriculture and animals. a lot of scientists say this is what is fueling the resistance epidemic. that renderste and these drugs useless. host: on the federal level and washington, d.c. there is concern among legislators about resistance, including sherrod brown of ohio. can you expand on his efforts? guest: he introduced a bill that would address some of these issues, but it has been stalled in republican committee, and that's about it. there is nothing much more going on. a lot of advocates say there needs to be a national effort to get more money into the research pipeline.

perhaps tax credits or incentives to get drug companies to develop these medications. host: our first call comes from amy in florida for our guest, andrew jacobs of the new york times. thanks for calling, go ahead. me, has theyou tell infection reached the florida area yet? any,: i have not heard of but that does not mean it is not there. some hospitals will not test for it because they are afraid to be associated with this. i got any mail from a nurse in a hospital in new york who said they are not even testing agents -- patience for it because they don't want to -- patients for it. it seems like it would reach because people travel

and there are connections between florida and new york but i cannot answer that question. host: a story in the new york times talks about a case found in chicago. guest: illinois is the other hotspot. they have had over 100 cases and in some nursing homes, half of all of the patients have tested positive. a woman who went to the hospital to have a procedure, a biopsy and she was likely infected through the instrument used to do the biopsy. the fungus was resistant to those drugs and she died. host: david in connecticut, thank you for calling. you are next up. good morning. david in connecticut, hello? caller: hello. host: you're on, go ahead please. caller: i am calling about this new disease.

[indiscernible] guest: you are concerned, is that what you are saying? it should be a concern, especially if you are already sick, if you have a weakened immunity. it is a threat and the problem theou don't really know health facility you are going to, whether or not they have it. there is really no way patients can research and find out which hospitals have been infected. the truth is, over time, it will eventually spread everywhere. at this point, it seems to be contained to a few states. host: there is a line in your foster,at quotes nancy the vice president for quality and patient safety of the american hospital association,

saying publicly -- publicly identifying health facilities as a source of the outbreak was an imperfect science. can you comment? guest: you have a hospital like in new york city, bellevue, that gets all kinds of patients from ,ll over the city, very sick nyu, a referral hospital. they will see a lot more infections, resistant infections than a rural hospital in virginia. if you were going to compare apples to apples that way, it might be unfair. if you were to flag a large referral hospital like nyu as having resistant infections and compare it to that rural hospital, it is a difficult thing to chart. there probably is a way to have more transparency that would at least allow patients to make that decision for themselves,

especially when they are going for an elective surgery or getting a hip replaced. perhaps you would go to that rural hospital in virginia where there have been no reported outbreaks of resistant infections. host: from mason in mississippi, go ahead. caller: i am wondering if there is anything i can do to create any kind of buzz about this? guest: artistic perspective? caller: anything i can do do a passionto project about this. guest: i don't know. it sounds like you have the imagination. i can't help you with that one. host: it goes to the larger issue that you spoke about, about transparency and getting that information out to the public so they can make decisions about these kinds of issues. guest: that is the heart of the matter and there is a lot of resistance from the hospital industry.

even the department of health around the country -- departments of health around the country are resisting. a state legislature introduced a bill that would force hospitals to release this kind of information and it passed the assembly -- it passed the senate and went to the assembly and died after a norma's opposition from the state hospital association and department of health. enormous opposition from the state hospital association and department of health. host: is there an established protocol within the hospital on how to treat this or do they receive guidance from the cdc? guest: both. the hospital will report to their state department of health. the cdc is often called in and they will come and explain procedures.

procedures are still emerging and they are not always successful. , there arebugs, cre a lot of other bugs that are resistant and the procedures are .ore established handwashing, you want to there are auipment, lot of things you can do. a lot of times these cleaning carts will go from room to room and carry these bugs on their wheels. there are a lot of things that can be done and the cdc is very hands-on. state to not force a reveal the location of an outbreak. host: more about the story on the new york times if you go to their website. andrew jacobs is one of the

authors of these -- co-authors of the story. from michigan we will hear next from kathy. caller: before i forget, the carts at the hospital i work at do not go into the patient room. they sit outside in the hallway adjacent to the wall. there is a lot of infectious disease situations throughout what i amal, and seeing is such extreme poverty and infections are so completely preventable. amputations, to me it is mind-boggling. the infectious disease doctors are some of the hardest working clinicians in any facility anywhere. everything changes. antibiotic in an 20 years.

now it is just standard. guest: what do you mean by poverty? host: go ahead. guest: i was curious about the poverty angle. i see a lot of children that are not clean enough and as they become adults, because they have never learned to clean their bodies enough, to stop infections from occurring or if you are diabetic, it is so preventable but for a multiplicity of reasons, they come in and it starts with a toe amputation and then the foot and then below the knee. that is not normal. host: thanks for the input. mr. jacobs. obviously cleanliness is

a big issue. i think for the resistant pathogens, i think a lot of them are required in the hospital -- are acquired in the hospital. i don't know how much of the cleanliness factor at home plays a role. but sure it doesn't help drug-resistant bacteria are often circulating in hospitals. the focus needs to be on hospital cleanliness and procedures to sort of vanquish these bugs in institutions. host: michael is next in kansas. go ahead. caller: this is michael parker. mr. jacobs, nice to talk to you. first and foremost, this kind of reminds me of the measles thing going around.

when this fungus mutates or get stronger, then what? for those of us who have stronger immune systems, you said there is already a strain that cannot be treated. onceis the cdc going to do it becomes a pandemic or something like that? i know that is what the callers are worried about. guest: let me start by saying people should not be panicked because even the multidrug-resistant strain of c. auris are not going to become sick by it. you can carry this fungus. -- youe really have to really have to have your immune system compromised. measles, you can be vaccinated against. that is a simple public-health issue about vaccinations.

unfortunately a bacteria and fungal affection -- infection, there are no vaccines at the moment because there is no connection between the two. doing asay the cdc is much as they can to contain this. ands a tough bug to kill i've gotten a lot of emails from researchers and scientists working on this issue. hopefully something will come along. i hope the larger issue -- i think the larger issue for all americans to consider is the use of antifungal drugs in agriculture. fungicide is that used on crops. that is a big issue. a lot of experts say that by onng these antifungals agriculture is what is fueling assistance because you are

killing off all the fungus in c. auris fillse the void and is resistant to these drugs and there you have it. there were a lot of people who say we need to focus on, what we can focus on is the use of these anti-mac -- antimicrobials in agriculture and raising animals. host: by the way, if you go to the cdc website, they have a page devoted to hospitalized patients and fungal infections. that is at cdc.gov. in jupiter, florida, john, go ahead. john in jupiter, florida, hello? caller: i am curious to know about all of these illegals streaming across the border bringing various pathogens to us. i am wondering if you know where the source of this has been determined yet.

also the drug-resistant chinese pneumonia that is also going around. c. auriswould say the was first identified in the ear of a japanese patient in 2009. these are coming from people who take planes here. the first people to bring candida auris were wealthy, some of them from the united arab emirates. also an american woman who went overseas for elective surgery in india brought it back. to be honest, the people bringing these pathogens are people who have money and take planes. i have not seen any studies about migrants crossing borders with pathogens. i think this is actually a problem that tends to be first world. people who have enough money to go from one health care facility to another.

i think the focus on migrants is probably misguided. host: what sparked your interest in reporting on this? --st: i think we feel like first of all candida auris popped onto the scene last year and there was almost no coverage in the media. we started poking around and tried to meet patients and we were met with incredible secrecy by hospitals. we talked to maybe a dozen different hospitals and then when we asked if we could meet a patient or talk to a patient, they shut us down. they realized this kind of attention was perhaps not good for their public relations image. that drove us further to keep pursuing it. of course the caseload kept growing. in general, antimicrobial resistance, fungal and bacteria is a serious problem that is not

getting enough attention. 10 million people are predicted to die a year by 2050, more than cancer. that is a lot of people. orbelieve that more effort attention should be focused on this problem to address it before it becomes huge. host: harry is next and he is in georgia. hello. caller: thank you sir, and good morning to everybody out there. i have several questions. number one, i live in the atlanta area. the airport here services more people than any other airport in the world. if it is so hard to sterilize a hospital room after this fungus is in the room, how about airport gates? it would be very hard to clean up the whole airport wouldn't it

or is there something out here in the open that is killing this in thethat isn't hospitals because they work so hard to keep hospitals clean, to keep this from coming around? maybe this thing would be attacked out in the open where it is not attacked in the hospital now. are you say older people susceptible, i hope that doesn't mean us in our late 60's because that would be too bad. host: we will let our guest address those two things. guest: i don't think late 60's is that old but the important thing to realize is these pathogens, they are everywhere, everywhere you go. there is really no way you can contain them. wheresue is in hospitals,

they are doing invasive medical procedures, using tubes and scopes that go into your body, incisions, iv lines. because they are everywhere and they are also in hospitals and greater concentration, when you have a procedure, you are infected that way. it is not that it goes through your skin, it's about having invasive procedures, providing a pathway for those pathogens to reach your system. i would not worry about airports. there is really no way to kill it because once you start focusing on killing them everywhere, it is impossible and you are creating more opportunities for these bugs to mutate. the more you throw antibiotics at them, the more they try to mutate to survive. this being older

elderly is not a risk factor. i think it's about being older and having a health issue that compromises your immune system. frankly, most people don't need to worry. we are doing this because we want people to raise awareness and pressure for change. a change both to the way prescribing is done. people love to run to their doctor when they have a sniffle and get an antibiotic. doctors often comply. we need fewer prescriptions. we need less use of antibiotics and antimicrobials. we also need to have more incentive for the pharmaceutical industry to be developing these drugs because right now there is very little in the pipeline. host: pipeline.

read more of the guests findings -- just's findings -- guest's .indings at new york times.com in about a half-hour, the justice department is where we will take you as far as the attorney general's press conference at 9:30. he will talk about the release of the redacted mueller report. you can watch that at c-span and c-span.org starting at 9:30, and we will let you talk about the report and its release up until that time. you can call on (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. .ndependents, (202) 748-8002 we will take those calls when we return. [bellringing] >> i think the legacy of

rochester is ongoing. more rochester embraces its role as a city of compassion, healing, wellness, hospitality, i think our mission is really to make people feel welcome, that this is a home away from home. >> c-span spends city tours on the road. chester, --to ross rochester, minnesota, 90 minutes south of minneapolis. it has been the home of the mayo clinic since its founding in 1864. >> mayo clinic is a good neighbor in rochester and helped rochester achieve international recognition. mayo clinic would have never happened except for the city of rochester, the small town, the intimate nature of rochester that allowed this incubator to expand into a world presence in medicine. >> we will speak to an author,

in this city of 100,000. ♪ >> most people think bob dylan associatedor somehow with the hippie movement of the 1960's, the voice of the generation, which is a label he detested. he really cannot say he is exactly left or right. most people have a misconception about what bob dylan is. cities tour of's rochester, minnesota, on c-span twos book tv. on american history tv on c-span three. working with our cable affiliates as we explore the american story. >> "washington journal" continues. host: you can comment on the release of the mueller report today at 9:30.

republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8001 (202) 748-8002 -- (202) 748-8002 . it will be delivered to congress in cd form. with us is the publisher of noble house box. what is the role your publishing company will take in the mueller report? if you makeel that it available as a book, it will get to more people. a lot of people do not look at the online versions offered by the government, or bother to contact the printing office to get an expensive printout is a manuscript. if it is available as a book, it will get more widely read. it will be in home and public libraries, and people will have a chance to see what they paid

for. host: your publishing company got the rights to publish the book. how? guest: it is a public document. we already own it as taxpayers. host: how did you get permission to publish it as a book? guest: by being an american citizen. you do not need permission to publish something that is a public document. host: we have been talking about this idea of a redacted report. how does your version treat those? guest: we will publish the report exactly as it is released to the public. it will include whatever redaction's attorney general has put in. host: when will you expect that report in buck form to be published by your company? -- book form to be published by your company? guest: we hope by 10 days. host: will there be an online

version? guest: yes, we will publish it as an e-book. documents, thet thing with them as publicly released as they are often not very high quality, not very readable. for example, the torture report released by the senate was a really poor quality pdf that was unsearchable. we will make these things so that they will be searchable, usable, nicely laid out and easily readable, and try to improve that way. host: we have heard about the number of pages expected in this report. how do you turn that around in 10 days? guest: it is quite a difficult endeavor, but we will throw our entire staff on it. we may even have volunteers come in to help us with that. we have to get the goodwill and

good effort of everybody in the process, from the people working on it in production right on down through the people that will work with the printers and the truck drivers who deliver it. host: in that process, what is the most time-consuming? is it the layout process? us, it isht now, for as much of a mystery as to everyone else as what this document will be, what kind of form will it be. a pdf? be apd off -- then we will know how we have to make it. it might be very easy to make, copy a pdf, or something that is difficult. the redaction's make this difficult because there is no way to type a reduction so maybe we have to do that by hand.

it depends on how it is released by government. if we have to do it by hand, that is quite a process. we will work around the clock and hopefully it will take our office workers about three or four days to get it made and then sent to the printer and the shipping. that is a process that at its fastest will be about five days. host: go ahead. guest: that is why i am guessing about 10 days here. there is still this element of mystery in not knowing what exactly will be released, how many redactions. host: will you charge for the final product? guest: yes. host: how much? guest: $9.99. host: some people say they have paid for the taxes -- with the taxes already. why should they pay for the book? guest: they should pay for the book expenses.

the massive market that was developed so that books can be and getess expensively to more people, especially young people, that was an idea in the 1940's and i think it is relevant in this case. i will not be able to convince -- printers to print this but it will be a minimal cost available to more people who want it. they will not be able to get it without some expense. host: the final product that you make will be just what is released in the report? strongly --el very some of our competitors, there will be several publishers making this book. everybody has a different idea of how to package it. one of the competing issues is going to include an introduction by alan dershowitz, who is a trump supporter.

i feel that shows you how if you include that kind of other material with it, you are giving the book a sort of bias that is unavoidable. i think the american people deserve to be respected enough to read this on their own and understand what is in it. there will be a world of discussion. we will not be talking about anything else in the media for the next several weeks and perhaps even months. there will be plenty of analysis outside of the documents that people wanted, but they should get the documents and nothing but the documents. host: how much interest will be in your product and how many books will you print? guest: 50,000 copies. right now, looks like we are going to ship close to that number, so we may be going back for a reprinting soon. it has been a very encouraging response. people want this document and want to be able to read it on

their own and not be told what is in it. mpbooks.com is the website if you want to check it out. pbooks.com. host: thank you for your time. this is where it will all take place in just about 20 minutes, the justice department, where the attorney general, william barr is planning a press conference to discuss the process behind the mueller report, ahead of the report being sent to congress at about 11:00. we will get your comments on the release of this report. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8002, independents. jordan from california on the republican line is up first.

caller: i think that guy that was just on, i cannot remember his name, is on a gravy train with biscuit wheels. younows very well that cannot get a fully redacted version until the patriot act. you have to wait for years and years, and selling a buck to people, he is just scamming them -- book two people, he is just scamming them. host: grayson in athens, georgia, independent line. caller: i was trying to get in to mr. johnson. i could not disagree more with the previous caller. it is going to be redacted, of course, but it is a very nice service this man is providing. $10 is nothing. i think the guy is doing a great civic duty. a service for everyone.

it kind of reminds me of mr. lamb and c-span. say about the concernedport, i am that we have got people -- it is kind of funny, because we are talking about the book form this morning -- so much of this delusion is circulating around the fact that people were able to use a format of social media to confuse people, and i think that shows a lack of literacy on the part of many americans. there is not a lot of effort -- not much we can do as a government or a country if people can't be somewhat discerning when they read things in whatever format, whether it is social media or a redacted book. host: from california, the

republican mine. sayer: the only thing i can is that mr. president, donald trump is the executive officer of our government. nobody is against him. that the saying president, donald trump cannot be against any ideologies because he is head of the government. they call the branch the executive branch of government. nobody can have power to go against him. host: 9:30 this morning, just nowt 16, 17 minutes from when attorney general william barr will go before the podium at the department of justice and talk initially about the release of the redacted report. todayss gets a copy later , available on the website of the department of justice.

we will put a copy on c-span.org. you can listen to the whole press conference without interruption on c-span, c-span.org, and listen on our radio app. we will put all of the relevant material on our website. gines -- new jersey, john on the independent line. ander: thank you, pedro, thank you, c-span. i do not care what all your viewers say. it is not up to them to say anything about this report because the report stands on its own. has done this for and in two years, the attorney general goes out and makes an opinion -- it is an opinion, only on his opinion -- that we are giving the president a pass.

allowed should not be until the whole report has been in the congress and discussed thoroughly. the viewers out there are saying that we are illiterate. we are not illiterate. we need something to read. before you call us illiterate, they are not going to take this report by the attorney general se.he united states as per host: rosalyn in ohio, democrats line, as reporters start to gather for the press conference. caller: thank you for taking my call. what i would like to know is how is it a book company can have the mueller report and congress does not have the mueller report? i am quite sure that mueller has more than one copy and all of

congress should have it, and should be able to discern what is in it. then they will give it to the people. host: congress will get a copy at 11:00, redacted copy. caller: the redacted copy from what i understand. host: correct. caller: it should be the full report. is this going to be the full report that is going to be published by a book company and congress doesn't have it? i think mueller should be put on the stand today. host: the previous guest set a copy of the book will be exactly the contents of the released report today. do you plan to watch the press conference at 9:30? caller: yes, i am going to watch it, but that is not the complete report. i think mueller should come on and i'm quite sure he has another copy somewhere. he should give it to congress,

because this man is trying to undermine our government, and his cohorts, and we need to get him out. host: kurt in new jersey, go ahead. caller: thank you. i am kind wondering, of skeptical sitting in the middle of this whole thing and watching both sides, i would say why aren't books being written about the inspector general's reports that will come out? i would like to see both sides. it is kind of fun to watch. our country is going down the drain. president trump was innocent, so why does this gossip have to come out? host: andre is in glendale, maryland. caller: my opinion is this -- i think all of these problems can be avoided if the full mueller report is released to congress. this is my argument.

congress is capable of handling sensitive information. that is what they do. that is their job. if we cannot trust them with this information, how can we trust them with other information with the military and other stuff? secondly, we can take a lesson from the watergate situation. everything was released to congress, is my understanding. [indiscernible] they were able to use that information to do what they were supposed to do, so this is not something new. this is not uncharted land. it is something that has happened. if we cannot trust congress now with the mullah report, it means we should not be -- the mueller report, it means we should not be able to trust them with anything. the fbi report about

and cia, why can we not trust them? washington state, republican mine, go ahead. caller: just talking about how the reductions should be in there, because we have secrets we don't want to get out. there are certain things that are operational. we don't want the enemy to know how we do things. there are people in there who don't need to be outed because they have nothing to do with any of this. there need to be reductions. it is just silly to think that congress would keep those secrets. they have proven over and over again that they can't keep a secret. all those reductions that are in there are for them too. host: the new york post and others reporting, when it comes to the release of this report, several saying it will not be heavily redacted.

to what extent that is, not sure yet. that is some of the reporting taking place in the lead up. stick around for about another hear from and you can the attorney general, william barr. we can expect the president at 10:30 in the east room in the white house. this was a previously scheduled report. watch for those things to happen as well. this is tom, washington state, democrats line. caller: it is remarkable what some of the previous callers have been saying and how they did not listen to what the gentleman from the publishing company was saying. it is a service he is providing. people need to listen and understand what is happening before they call in. you really do not need to see any more of the mullah report to

know our president is guilty -- the mullah report to know our president is -- mueller report to know our president is guilty. we have enough information to know. this is a monumental day in our nation's history, a fork in the road. i am very eagerly awaiting the report. host: michigan, independent line, adam is next. caller: i agree with your last caller, everything he said. frankly, the country deserves the mullah report. -- mueller report. we paid for it. we are not children. we need to shine some light on this. 2020, not me,rnie us. jason in maryland, hello.

caller: hi. hi. host: you are on the air. go ahead. caller: i just feel like the investigation was -- and also i feel like that whole collusion with will be proven, it will be proven it was there. host: thanks, jason. in,minder for those calling turned on your televisions. john in north carolina, democrats line. caller: good morning. i wanted to let you know that job soditioned for this

he can live for this man. he already did it for bosch and now he is doing it for this -- bush and now he is doing it for this man. they have been going back and forth to the white house briefing this man and the lawyers on what is in the report. for some strange reason, nobody is really talking about that. all the cronies that are in congress and in the senate are pulling this garbage right along with them. that is why they are not going to win this time. they are going to lose and lose big. the republican is basically dead. 's,ple who cheer at this fool trump's so-called rallies should be ashamed of themselves. at the children that sits behind this man when they are at the

rallies, cheering along with their parents. they are being literally brainwashed. host: we are showing you pictures of the justice department, just about a few minutes from now, six minutes for the planned at 9:30 press conference featuring the attorney general william barr, rosensteinein -- rod , deputy attorney general, both expected to speak today. whether we will hear from the deputy attorney general is yet to be seen. hello.s next in montana, caller: i have been watching this for quite a while. i am an independent. i voted for obama twice, but it would not matter who gives out a report. againstd anything good the president, the democrats will come out and say, we are not going to believe this guy,

we are not going to believe this guy. it is a complete farce. been watching this for two years. what's going on? they are embarrassed because they thought they had the last election won. travis is next in olympia, washington, republican mine. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just wanted to point out that nadler, when clinton was going toough all this, he seemed defend keeping all the grand jury stuff by law -- just what the law is -- redacted, but when it comes to trump he wants to open everything up. it is just how they play the political game on people's ignorance of the law to get everybody stirred up. , protect when clinton

clinton and all the information there, which is supposed to by law, but when it comes to trump, they say they want to see everything. host: if you go to the house judiciary website, there is a press statement by the chairman nadler who called for the cancellation of this press conference that will take place in a few minutes from now. joyce is next in new jersey, hello. caller: thank you for taking my call. host: go ahead. caller: what i would like to say is mueller wrote the report. he investigated this. why isn't he giving the report instead of barr? now we have got to believe him after he lied in 1989?

i do not think i want to be a citizen in the united states anymore because this place is bent. the president is the stupidest cat i have ever seen. host: california, independent line, go ahead. caller: i just wanted to say, we have got guys like nadler, blumenthal, schumer, who are a bunch of subversive people jews who hate this president. host: we will leave it there. maggie is in virginia, republican mine. -- republican line. caller: there was a report in the new york times at the white house got the information before from mr. barr. they have been talking for the last few days before releasing, having this press conference today. my comment is why congress, why mr. barr did not share the information at the same time

with congress? i agree with the previous caller who said the president is such a powerful man in the government, that nobody can speak -- can go against him in his administration. that is what she was alluding earlier. is, when we ast humans, we learn from history. this is not the first time this happened. over and over again, we fail to learn from history. host: we are just a few minutes away from the start of this press conference. we will take you to it as soon as it starts. democrats line, west virginia, tom. caller: when they say "redacted," isn't that really censorship? , go: monte in spring, texas

ahead. caller: i would like to remind everyone that it no point during the whitewater investigation was anyone charged, was anyone arrested, nor was anyone caught up in a surveillance net because they were communicating with a town agent, that was known be an espionage agent of a foreign entity. that is the difference. that is why we need this report released. the seriousness of what whitewater was compared to this, it cannot even be compared. let's look at the facts of the matter. host: you can watch us at 9:30 on the network. c-span.orgck this at online or later on, and if you have our c-span radio app, you can listen to it. you can find that at the various stores of the device you use. this is just about to start. steve in illinois, republican

line. hello. in illinois, caller: i think this investigation here on the mueller report has taken two thes, and if they had opportunity to nail president trump they would have. thingk they are doing the on the border because they want all these people to come in, because they will be so grateful to them, the democrats, that they will vote for a democrat. this has got to be addressed. this has got to be stopped. -- inbrian in virginia virginia, democrats line. caller: we are rolling down a slippery slope to authority authoritarianism, and nobody is above the law. we need to make sure the attorney general follows the law of the land. host: the justice department is what you are seeing on the

screen, reporters gathered for a press conference that was announced yesterday featuring the attorney general william barr. ,e will take you to it again without commentary and without interruption once it starts. in ashburn, virginia, independent line. caller: i want to comment on the publisher coming out with the new report. he said something that was blatantly untrue. alan dershowitz claimed he was a supporter of alan -- donald hillary,n he voted for vis-a-vis his own comments, and does not support donald trump it only comments on the legality. in my opinion, this man just tried to basically

[indiscernible] his competitor's book. host: we are being handed some papers in preparation for the conference that is just about to take place. we will take calls up until the time it starts. in old town, maine, barbara. caller: i just want to say that the republicans have been loading the lower courts and i hope that it is not all -- that i believe that mueller has farmed out the important stuff because he knew this was coming. he knew that he would be blocked and that congress would not be able to get a hold of anything. the two minuteot warning from one of the associates at the justice department, to the start of this press conference. donna in michigan, republican line. caller: i am opposed to the book being published by this company to have a charge for it.

i think it should not be charged. i am opposed against it. hi. host: we heard your comment. we have got your comment previously if you want to add onto that. caller: i will be watching and i'm totally 100% for this country being made great again. almostst thinking that $500,000 for this book coming out at $9.99, follow the money. host: in maryland, reva, hello. caller: i think everybody should read the document themselves, not just depend on what pundits say. not glad melville house is doing any extra stuff on their. that's on there. -- on there.