stricker's on the recent anniversary of the jonestown massacre. washington journal is next. ♪ it is saturday, november 30, the last day of the month. good morning. welcome to the washington journal. perhaps like the thanksgiving turkey, impeachment continues to be the main topic of discussion and debate on capitol hill. but what about the other issues, the leftovers, if you will pardon the tortured analogy. canadaout the u.s. mexico trade agreement. immigration and border security, or climate change and the issues involved there? we would like to ask you what public policy issue in washington -- is washington not addressing that you think they should be. here's how to join the

conversation. call for democrats --for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. you can also send us a text at (202) 748-8003, include your name and where you are texting from, you can also tweet us and we are on facebook at facebook.com/c-span. we have a number of posts already with ideas on issues that congress and washington are not focusing on that viewers think they should be. adam posted that the legalization of cannabis and recreational and medical, stopping vaping deaths and allowing the fda to do its job. when they resized passing the budget in turn limits. air,or marie, clean quality education, improving infrastructure, and income inequality.

on the u.s.-mexico canada trade agreement, some movement on that funds -- that front. mexico's president wrote a letter to nancy pelosi, here's a story from the wall street journal. mexico's president urges quick u.s. ratification, president of the door has urged house democrats to ratify the u.s.-mexico canada trade agreement, a key engine for mexico's faltering economy, saying his country has met its commitment regarding labor issues. in a letter sent to house norker pelosi, mr. ober senate -- the president says that there will be changes in mexican labor laws which includes making collective bargaining in mexico more effective, a major demand by democrats to add protections for u.s. workers. the article points out that the usmca has been ratified by the mexican senate. president trump on the same

issue in sunrise florida -- sunrise, florida, urging congress to pass the usmca. [video clip] replacing the nafta catastrophe if nancy pelosi will sign it and send it. the usmca, the u.s.-mexico-canada agreement. everybody wants the agreement, but she does not want to give the people of our country victory. i don't know. all she has to do is move it forward and a lot of people will vote for it. but it's one of the greatest deals ever. at a certain point, canada and mexico, they been waiting for many months and they will say, let's forget about it. you have to sign it, everybody wants it, she has to put our country first. for a tremendous win florida farmers, and all farmers, for growers, ranchers from all over our country.

yet she and the democrats, they just have done nothing. they are doing nothing. they are doing nothing. it's a terrible thing. it's a terrible thing. host: the president on tuesday theng passive -- passage of u.s.-mexico-canada agreement. the is your response on public policy issues that washington is not addressing, call in at the following numbers, for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. one opinion from the dallas morning news, dems can win on trade with the trade pact with mexico and canada. let's hear from susan, in baltimore, on the democrats line. caller: hello? host: good morning, you are on the air. deficit, and there's

no conversation about it right now. every once in a while you hear somebody sure about -- chirp that isn't it odd that the republicans have created this burgeoning deficit and they are not talking about it. as an average american i'm concerned over this debt that we are creating. and democrats can pick up this baton, since the republicans have dropped us. .- dropped it and talk about how we can reasonably tax people and deliver services to be -- to people and reasonably pay down our debt. i'm concerned about what we are leaving for our children. i hope that some of the democratic candidates start talking about it a little more. i think the republicans are

afraid of it because they created it with this tax break. that's all. host: joe is next on the republican line from north carolina. hello. , based on what she said about the democrats and .he debt we will go farther in debt , with universal health care and all that. we will never get out of debt if we do stuff like that. to startrats need passing some of the stuff, instead of worrying about trying to get rid of the president. it's treasonous what they've done. that's all i have to say. host: on the independent line, cindy, what public policy issue do you think congress is not addressing that they should be?

caller: thank you for taking my call. one thing i have not heard is gun control. we talked about a lot every time there's a mass shooting, whether it's at a school or a mall, and we talk about it and everyone is so earnest to try to do something, and we just listened to trump talking about the trade agreement that the democrats are holding but what about the gun bill -- thatment i'm sorry, what's his name, the speaker of the republican house -- the republican party -- oh goodness, i'm sorry. host: that's ok. speaking out, lucy mcbath who had a son that was killed by gun violence has been urging the senate to pass the legislation that the house has already asked, this. [video clip] saturdayyears ago this

, i still mourn the loss of my son. that is the reason that i have come to washington. myself and all of my colleagues are on a mission. that senatory day mcconnell refuses to take up this lifesaving legislation, the blood of every human being in this country that continues to die at the hands of unnecessary gun violence is on his hands. to senatorading out mcconnell and the republican party, do what is right. protect the lives of the constituents that even you represent. to do anything less is a tragedy to democracy, and a tragedy to the oath that you took to protect and serve the people that you represent.

, it is past time to do what is right. host: critical of mitch mcconnell on twitter, this is wild and wonderful, playing the thanksgiving theme, the leftovers are sitting on mcconnell's desk, what public policy issues do you think washington is not addressing that they should be? from ralph, in new york, on the democrats line. caller: good morning bill, always good to having host, i'm a uaw worker from upstate new york. i call on the usmca trade agreement nsa that business interests are pushing for it to pass but i don't see the labor movement urging its passage. i don't think it's a better deal than nafta was at protecting worker rights and labor standards in this country. i think they should go back to

the table and negotiate a better deal for the american worker. i thank you. host: in terms of the union what are yourat, union members saying about it? , it won't still week -- it is still week and it will not stop the flow of jobs to mexico. as far as worker rights and collective bargaining, it tells you a lot that if business is pushing for it and labor is not, then it it is not a good -- then it is not a good deal for working people. host: we have washington post story today saying that according to a mexico official, the terms may be finalized for the trade deal soon, further in this article they write about where things stand on capitol hill. pelosi and house democrats led by richard near -- richard neal have been holding out for changes that would ensure enforcement of the agreement in a way that would help american workers and prevent outsourcing

of u.s. jobs overseas. trump has accused democrats of delaying about on the measure, but democrats have countered that they are waiting for trump to provide final details of the agreement. on theear from jean, republican line, in orange, texas. of these issues that people are talking about are one,tant, but my personal i'm a senior citizen on social security. i have not heard one thing mentioned by democrats or republicans about how they are the people who have worked for years and years and paid into the social to have thisem money to help and get through.

the thing about social security is they have started treating we are wantinge handouts. this is something i were 44 years to get. host: let me ask you, how long have you been retired or on social security? caller: 10 years. host: are you worried about yourself in particular or the children and those younger than you that are coming -- that will be coming into retirement? i'm worriedt now about myself. it sounds selfish, but i don't have enough to live on. i don't know one month to the next whether i will be able to purchase food. i have tried to get help, but for some reason, i don't know how to play the system i guess. i can't get help. but i'm not too concerned about that. i am concerned for the other people that are on social

security that are a lot worse than me. they need to help. think honor thy mother and father just went out the window. a lot of people don't want anything to do with their parents anymore when they get elderly. to pry,d i don't mean but would you feel comfortable sharing how much you get an social security monthly? get $1151. that's what i have to live on because my health issues. and i still have to play -- to pay medical co-pays. i have an medicare advantage plan. i'm grateful for that and i'm grateful for everything i have. but i know that it needs to be addressed. they treat the social security to takeyou know, i want a trip so i will dig into my

savings for that. these people were depending on the social security. host: good luck, and thank you for sharing your story. we will get some updated reporting from cnbc, the headline anyway, you can read more at their website, the social security retirement age could go up. here's what that won't be easy. story, carlil that posted this on facebook, he says addressing the funding of social security and medicare for senior citizens to keep viable for future generations. one of the issues we are asking that, the issues washington is not addressing prominently. on thefax, virginia, democrats line, john. i would like to have john podesta or nick pope to talk about the increasing

evidence of ufos, i've seen a lot of programming on the history channel and travel channel indicating that it's a real phenomenon and the government is simply not talking about it and we need a comprehensive report. carl, in oxford, massachusetts, also on the democrats line. caller: good morning, thank you for c-span. when we talk about protecting there are three whistleblowers, two have been arrested. one of them is in exile in russia. if they -- it suppresses democrats and republicans, if you suppress the truth from the american people, we have a right and it -- it's in the first amendment. it will affect c-span, i would hate for it to affect c-span

because this is one of the few avenues we have to exchange ideas. i think manny is out of jail already. an americanis not citizen and he's being punished aboutaking information our government, our military. and snowden is exiled in russia. i have a real people, feeling that these hearings going on with the impeachment, i think this was a fictitious whistleblower. i don't think even exists. and you don't hear about it on mainstream media. i would like to have this brought out. host: thank you carl, we will

talk about a related story about government surveillance in our next hour. virginia is next in florida on the republican line. caller: the first thing i want to talk about is our fishing industry. how they have decimated that with all the regulations. i think it's terrible that we have to get imported fish and we don't even know what's in it. care.bout universal we would not need that if they would stop the gmo's in our food supply. there is more sickness and illness in this country since they started spraying and spraying our crops with poison. i didn't mean to cut you off, please go ahead. caller: also i think social .ecurity has been robbed

and i think it should be made -- that the democrats should be made to put that money back that they stole out of social security. ,hey are all living in mansions and they are corrupt to the max. and i thank god that donald trump came in, because we would all be living on the street. host: we are asking you about public policy issues that you think washington is not addressing and they should be addressing. for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. susan bonamici from oregon tweets this morning, she says we stand with world leaders committed to climate action during the climax and five.

passed the act to uphold the paris agreement, and we are crafting policies to fill the void from the administration's dismissal. even though the house and senate was out, there was another friday protest, here's the headline in the hill. jane fonda steps up the climate fight as part of fire drill friday. she held her eighth consecutive fire drill friday progressed -- protest on capitol hill. she was seen on livestream calling on americans to reform the ad cultural sector and change their eating habits. she says we will have to seriously understand the impacts of cattle ranching on the climate and eliminate eating meat, we don't need it every day or at all she said. she started these fire drill fridays in october and modeled fridayreta thunberg's for the future campaign.

the protest is scheduled to run for 14 consecutive weeks. let's hear from lori, from wisconsin, on the independent line. caller: thank you. with the trade agreements, these are designed the agribusiness and it does nothing to help the family farmers. leavee lose when people the land is control of our food supply. people have to realize that, when farmers are going bank is constant -- in wisconsin by the hundreds. often being purchased by foreign interests. in the same trade policies driving u.s. people from the land have been driving migrants in south and central america as it crashes there. and that along with our imperial wars with resource extraction

and arms trade and the war on drugs, this is driving migration and fueling the horror at the border. we have to pay attention to what we are doing there. we are imprisoning people, we are putting people on both sides, they are trapped on the others and they can't get here. this is climate change driven, this is policy driven, we have to get agriculture out of trade agreements and we have to take control of our food supply, control of our water, and stop the murder of indigenous people around the world. the remnants of what we have left of nature. ,e are destroying everything there is a dream of a techno-utopia that they will feed us with algae, it's insane. that's the policy i would like to see addressed. host: on the democrats line we have kathleen, from dayton,

ohio. caller: i want to thank c-span for being the most incredible national classroom going that everyone can have access if they can afford cable. , many of us prior to the massacre here, have been pushing for gun reform for a long time. we want to encourage, or push, senator portman to move the gun legislation forward in the senate. we are watching you senator portman. we have anton, ohio, issue. they call themselves not-for-profit but they are for profit, a multibillion-dollar health care network called premier health care. they have closed the hospital called good samaritan, and 93-year-old hospital, in a 75% black neighborhood. we have a federal investigation into disclosing under the civil

right -- into this closing under the civil rights act. we are asking senator sanders and senator warren to stand with us in this predominantly black neighborhood in front of the remnants of this one large that the o'rourke rack company is destroying. -- racking company is destroying. we have an investigation because the lack of access to health care that this neighborhood has had for decades is now being destroyed. there's a national issue with rural and urban hospitals being shut down by these multibillion-dollar for-profit health care systems. senator sanders, senator warren, come stand with us in dayton, ohio, in front of the destruction of good samaritan hospital. it would help with your voting in the black community and also national attention to this issue. host: kathleen mentioned her

first topic, gun legislation, calling for the advancement of the gun legislation in the house to pass, urging senator portman to pass that. on the state level, here's the reporting on the hill for the virginia elections, hopes rise for gun control groups after virginia elections. fresh off of their success of helping to flip control of the virginia legislature, gun control advocates are turning their attention to 2020 races in texas and colorado which will likely present tougher hurdles. , in newhear from matt york, the top issue that washington is not addressing that they should be. caller: good morning. one, nobody has mentioned that we have this problem with immigration. thatre we not working on democrats? and being in a rural area, the usmca is important. i'm hearing about this union

pushback, if the unions quit blackmailing companies they would not be moving out of this country. this whole thing with the impeachment farce, where the democrats are defending the constitution is hilarious, because they only avoid judges -- appoint judges that ignore the constitution and they fight against judges that actually believe in the constitution. to hearamazing joke some of the hypocrisy spilling out of their mouths. thank you. host: the house and senate are back on tuesday from the thanksgiving recess. before the break we heard from how speaker pelosi on what lies ahead for the house. legislation, check 260 seven days, paycheck fairness, 239 days, equal pay for equal work. act,iolence against women 231 days. 225 -- savernet,

the internet, 205 days, that's for net neutrality. climate action now, 203 days. the quality act and discrimination in the lgtbq community. the safe act to protect -- raise the waging -- raising the wage to 15 hours -- to $15 an hour. act to protect pensions was 119 days ago. the grim reaper says that this will die in the senate but this is alive and well in the public and we have to make it too hot for him to handle. but it is also instructive. and i will say this, the number will continue to grow. 275 bipartisan bills

sitting on mitch mcconnell's desk. i have named some of them just now. host: nancy pelosi laying out the pending issues ahead for the house and senate when they return, including prescription drug legislation, voting rights legislation, and the 2020 federal spending. the short-term measure expires on december 20. the house will be back and we will be live on c-span. we are asking you now what policy issue is washington not addressing that they should. for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. on social media and by text, you can text us at (202) 748-8003. facebook and twitter. here is a tweet from fred who says this on the usmca, a trade deal is sitting on nancy pelosi's desk for a year with

them doing nothing about it. do nothing democrats. jason from spring hill, florida, texas about lowering -- texts talks about lowering the price prescription drugs. bill says there are multiple issues that needs to be addressed, man-made climate change, police brutality, immigration, to mystic terror, things trump will not -- domestic terror, things trump not touch. on the independent line, ray, from north carolina. good morning. caller: anyone talking about climate change, every piece of tod is for sale, we need [indiscernible] undocumented immigrants are a big issue, but what about people that overstayed visas. they are illegals also.

nobody's talking about that. citizenship is going to be a big issue for americans. there just in the beginning. [indiscernible] if you are not legal, you don't deserve -- [indiscernible] talked about development. there's an interesting graphic in the wall street journal as the holiday season gets underway. o christmas tree, how far you spread your branches. americans cut down 15,094,678 christmas trees in 2017. this is according to the most recent year data. requireshose trees 19.7 square miles of land. here's how the land use for christmas trees looks mapped over the new york city area.

the entire area, all of new jersey. that's the land use for christmas tree growth, the christmas down, 15 .1 trees felt in 2017 took about 19.7 square miles to grow, or 86% of manhattan. to north carolina, this is cecil on the democrats line. good morning. caller: i have a very serious problem, a dysfunction of the government and the law that actually lost work for me if i did not have a toolbox in the back of my car because i had a on monday.o spend i was held up on the issue of religious. the state of pennsylvania bynpike on to be addressed an independent thinking person and wonder why a restaurant

chain was taken off the entire turnpike. people were not allowed to travel on sunday they broke down because of the lack of maintenance. sunday is a day of rest. and we are in a big mess because of the effects on the environment, all due to mismanagement of our entire system, infrastructure, and people are being disrupted in their home. shootings, andol any number of things. i'm using up too much time. host: not at all, we appreciate it. to lisa, in georgia, on the republican line. caller: hello, thank you for listening. we have 70 issue, people were displaced, fox and cnn are running this propaganda

campaign that it's all people who were on drugs, or are mentally ill. i'm sure there are some of that but that's not the bulk of what's going on. the u.n. is actually on their website saying they are doing replacement migration. we are aware that there are so many migrants coming in. shortage, anding congress should be prohibiting ausing to be treated as commodity. economics has proven that it will drive the price out of control, which is what is going on. you have people living in motel rooms for what you should be able to get a house for. the prices are so out of control , and the people who make money off of this, a lot of them are in office getting rich and they are not doing anything.

and that's the same thing with obamacare. that had nothing to do with giving everyone some kind of health care treatment, that's all about making sure everyone is purchasing or has purchased on their behalf at taxpayer expense, health insurance. the whole thing is an insurance .cam the mortality rate has actually gone up substantially ever since the inception of obamacare. and the whole argument about whether or not we should give illegals treatment, that's a done deal. that's been going on for decades . they show up at the er, they are going to get treated, if we don't treat them, then the hospital would get sued. the aclu would come in. if you are an american, you are on your own. you are stuck. you are being shafted. you have to pay other people's bills first. and if you are lucky, maybe you

can get treated yourself. we have more people that end up having to go into early retirement, becoming disabled because we don't have the health care treatment that we used to have. host: we will let you go and go to somerville, massachusetts, mike, on the independent line. .aller: i have a confession i'm officially a bumper sticker person, i have the c-span bumper sticker and a t-shirt. i love you guys. comment, i think all of callers have valid points. , what's i look at overarching, is the effective of money in politics. we need to control that. if we do not it will affect a lot of things down the line. ie second largest issue,

watch c-span just about every day. i'm watching this impeachment hearing issue. as to howhit home uneducated, or willfully andrant a lot of america is where they stand with politics. i think the second largest issue, people could be objective and put their partisan politics aside, and understand that we are all in this together. i think that would help a lot. i am in an intellectual level in .oston c-span has really opened my eyes to what other people are going through in this country. i want to say those two things. my own politics, and being objective. host: similar sentiments from

gerard baker in the wall street journal, tis the season for finding common ground. the photo included here. this is the famous christmas truce of 1914, during world war that writes in this piece i would still like to think that perhaps this time of year might supply an opportunity for a brief turn towards harmony. a moment to put aside the endless angry howling to reach ofoss the no man's land modern political contacts and realize there is common ground in our humanity, but in the identity and spirit of america. he says like i suspected of many immigrants to this country, i love thanksgiving. it's a uniquely american holiday. sorry canada, i know you do it as well but it will always be associated in the popular mind with the u.s.. he says it seems to match the american spirit of generosity and magnanimity that those of us who were not born here grew up and minoring. it's worth remembering that the

holiday we just celebrated was inaugurated by president lincoln in the middle of the civil war, when the country was tearing itself apart. he also includes this, lincoln wanted the nation to acknowledge then that the gratitude americans have for their many blessings exceeded any resentment or grievances they harbor towards each other or outsiders. what public policy issues do you think washington is not addressing that they should be? for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. we played do the comments of how speaker pelosi and what -- of how speaker pelosi and what she has in store, here are comments from kevin mccarthy. >> the biggest losers in all of this are americans. we havethemselves, lost, because we were lied to. we were told they would be different. that they would work together.

in the moments and times that we had those opportunities in committee, the speaker changed. drug prices could be lower today. our economy could be stronger with the united states mexico canada agreement, almost a year ago that was agreed to. not only would our economy be stronger, we would be stronger as a nation when we negotiate with china who has become the number three trader with mexico and canada as number one and number two. but we are weaker in that negotiation because the speaker will not bring this up because she's too busy with impeachment. today we are waiting on the senate to pass another continuing resolution. the funding of government themselves. we have not gotten that down. but we have more hearings on impeachment. we have a deficit. the number one thing a majority should do is pass a budget. but they did not get that done. we are on a one year anniversary, namely one problem

-- name of me one problem the democrat majority has soft? they have created a few more but not solved anything. host: policy issues that washington is not addressing, also on twitter and by text at (202) 748-8003. from lee, in tennessee, all school children especially those in rural areas should have a free home internet access as an essential part of learning. leland says bring back trade skills and financial education to high school students. less parallelograms and more real-life skills. innocents that 20,000 people sit in prison or on death row for crimes they did not commit. it's better to have 10 guilty persons go free than one be punished for a crime they did not commit. commute the sentence is a hundred thousand prisoners. what's not being addressed as the cold war victory medal not being issued to our heroes. moore died during the cold war's than those in the gulf wars, the

heroes are fewer and fewer every day and we need to honor them. from alan, the national debt is going up and it's going to destroy our standard of living and standard as a world power in a few years. it's as though they had given up on it. research show that it will take spending cuts, progrowth policies and taxing to get it under control. but especially, republicans, keep doing irresponsible things like tax cuts when the economy is doing fine. randy is on the democrats line in eugene, oregon. good morning. i'm a registered nurse. i like to talk about the number three cause of death in america, medical error. it's important to understand that there's a monopoly, a serial monopolist at the center .f health care there are hospital bed manufacturers, a series of

recalls that are unnecessarily injuring and killing patients. and hospitals are ignoring the that told the hospital bed manufacturer that they cannot advertise the way they used to. hospitals are increasing a bad bet on technology by lengthening ships -- shifts. it's an essential thing. ,ealth care touches all of us we are all one step away from a hospital visit. i'm really hoping that washington will address health monopoliste serial at the center. host: how long have you been a nurse? caller: i have been a nurse for 14 years. i have seen hospitals and health care increase the beds, they and lengthened shifts

reduced staff, all built on this effective technology that's impacting patients and staff. host: you can hear the frustration in your voice, when did you start to see this trend and your 14 year career? die.r: i had a patient ofy falsely accuse my cna abandoning the patient who had just come out of the shower. and i discovered that the hospital bed was defective. we tested, i saved this cna's career. they had a safety meeting where they tricked me into signing a nondisclosure agreement. and then they admitted that the hospital beds are defective. and since you signed the agreement you cannot talk about it. dothe incidence continued, i

them, whistle blew, they ignored me. when it happened again and another patient was hurt the same way and they went after my whistleblew about this and they fired me on the spot. as i investigated i found this was not only happening at the hospital i worked at, but all over the country and internationally. this serial monopolist, this company pumps out these defective hospital beds which fail hundred different ways. host: we appreciate you bringing up the issue, to union, washington, on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning bill, thank you for c-span. a comment to what i think washington is not addressing but also two quick comments, to the caller who called about the medical insurance problem.

democrats passed a fascist bill where insurance companies wrote the bill. that's how we had to pass it before we could find out what's in it. the second comment i wanted to make before i wanted to make my main comment, god blessed c-span but when susan swaim took over everything went farther left. i had been watching since clinton's first term every single morning. it went left. c-span ask that when you call, what are you going to say? if they ask what is your name and where you calling from, they can verify that you speak english and everything is fine. so why do they ask what you're going to say? for four timesn and that is censorship that they hang out. host: we appreciate your feedback, what is your comment? caller: i wish you show the congressional's report on the disparity between private sector and public sector wages and salaries.

you can go to that page and see that there are five columns on the graph based on educational level. only the last column in that section does the private sector prevail over the public sector, and only by a small margin. the rest are, all 32% or 34% more wage than the private sector. please put that chart and should the people that love government and ask them to justify what people working for the government should retire at an average age of 56 years old at $62,000 a year with medical benefits on top. most people don't even earn $62,000 per year in their entire life. host: thank you for that, our topic is asking you the issues that washington is not addressing that they should be. ,or democrats (202) 748-8000 for republicans (202) 748-8001, for all others it's for independents -- for all others

it's (202) 748-8002. president trump is back from his visit to afghanistan over thanksgiving, here's the headline in the new york times, talking about the president's call for a cease-fire. the president marks -- remarks about talent and stirring confusion after abruptly axing peace talks. president trump puts the negotiations back on the front burner, in a similarly jolting fashion by demanding a cease-fire that his negotiators concluded was overly ambitious. despite a sense of relief at the prospect of resuming talks to end the 18 year complex, diplomats and taliban leaders were scrambling to figure out whether mr. trump had suddenly moved the goalpost for negotiations. on the independent line, in louisiana, randy. caller: thank you for taking my call. these collars that just called in, they have nailed it on the lers,-- these cal

they have nailed it on the head. we've been screwed since the civil war, they are giving our countrieshese foreign and these illegal aliens. .ight now i'm in the hospital the man who was talking about the hospital beds, he's nailed everything. i have a sister that's in the medical industry and about half my family is. talk because of all this. but you have criminals all the way from louisiana out house to the white house. the region -- the reason they're trying to get rid of trump is because he has asked dozed -- exposed the democrats and republicans to what people should get an cannot get and you have these people that they are trying to get rid of.

he's doing the right thing. i was surprised they have not tried to assassinate him. i think god is on his side. i pray for him every day. he's not the most perfect person, but you have so many criminals in the louisiana loan, it's bad. you have so many criminals in politics. it's not good. to open theirs eyes to this and get away from it. becausebeen messed up of the democrats and the republicans. it's really a one party system. host: thank you. in germantown, maryland, sherry, on the democrat line. go ahead. terry. this is host: from germantown? i would like to

say that republicans keep accusing democrats of not doing their job and getting the work done. they when this president is involved in so many illegal activities? it's not the democrats, it's the president himself. that's my reason for calling and all i have to say. host: frank is next on the republican line. caller: good morning. thank you. the bornt is regarding alive survivors of abortion protection act, which is in a subcommittee. these little babies who do

survive abortion, they are u.s. citizens. this bill would protect them and require medical care. recently in a trial in san francisco, planned parenthood witnesses testified that in order to get body parts of these babies for research, they have to be born alive. their hearts have to be pumping and the organ has to be extracted, that's murder, because as u.s. citizens, we process process -- due under the 14th amendment. it needs to be passed. host: we have a couple of comments on text and twitter. immigration, they took half as

much action on preparing, debating, and voting, they do about campaigning, we would be better off. sam says overturning citizens united. that the top issue, getting the money out of politics, corporations are not people and money is not speech. this is where the corruption and self-serving greed starts and controls the other issues. and from jay are on twitter, the house, under paul ryan, sent him a 400 bills to the senate. pelosi is approximately 275 bills stalled in the senate. this is what the majority leader side before they broke for the recess. [video clip] >> the thing i want to emphasize today, i saw a senator talk about what's not getting done. there are things that we have to that we are not making any progress on because of the

impeachment of session in the house-- of session in the -- obsession in the house. we have to reach a deal on defense appropriations. we thought we had an agreement over summer. report isconference apparently -- the nda conference report is apparently snagged. and the houses is trying to undo a decades-old policy related to the aunf. do.e are things we must there are plenty of optional things that are not being done because we cannot philosophically agree on. but government spending, the defense bill that we have passed every year since 1961. the trade agreement with mexico .nd canada sitting there this is outrageous in these to come to a stop. i heard a number democrats in

the house say they can walk into grown -- walk and chew gum at the same time. now is the time to prove it. host: a little under 10 minutes on the topic of what washington is not addressing that you think they should be. but first an update on the terrace and i thing attack on why was he free? he was free to kill despite a judge who jailed him saying he should never be let out. they writes that the london terrorist was free to kill an innocent man and woman despite the judge who jailed him ruling that he should not be let out. he was released from prison in december last year after being convicted of terrorism offenses before going onto stabbed two people to death while wearing a fake suicide jacket yesterday. you can go to their website for the full article. hamel, minnesota, next up, we hear from james on the independent line. caller: my name is james.

host: you are on the air. are partyese addresses, the most important thing is the national debt, we are spiraling out of control and if a politician's nose would grow every time they told a lie we would be able to see the depth of it. thank you. in california, on the democrats line. caller: thank you for taking my call. regardingught up minorities -- minority leader kevin mccarthy. out, thee else pointed democrats have passed 275 bills. the republicans refuse, in the senate, to look at them. please note that i used to be

republican. the republican party has given up on the rule of law, financial responsibility, and national security. there is an organization called republicans for the rule of law, and instead of making a contribution to a republican who i donated to into thousand 16 2016 whounning -- in is running for president, i sent the money to them. saidituation is that trump he would lower -- get rid of the national debt in eight years. after three years it has gone up a trillion -- i'm sorry it's gone up a trillion dollars in the last year. trump said that he would not spend time golfing, i saw

something that said that he golfing atmillion trump resorts. disappointed in that the president is so obviously frequently abusing law. and people from his own party refused to stand up to him. host: let's go to sean, in connecticut, on the republican line. i would like to see the theral legislature address national reciprocity act for concealed carry. 39ave stitched together states where i can legally conceal carry my handgun except these 11 states that i will not visit or spend money in.

that's what i would like to see addressed. it was starting to be addressed in the house a couple of years ago, then we had this horrible shooting and it got tabled because of that. have been talking about a lot of the other issues that you think washington should be addressing that they are not, but back to impeachment which will pick up again next week with the public hearing next wednesday. here's a headline from the wall street journal, nadler set the december 6 deadline for white house participation in the impeachment probe. president trump has until friday to decide if his legal team will participate in the impeachment proceedings, marking democrats lawmakers latest efforts to solicit white house involvement in an inquiry in which the administration has declined to cooperate. our live coverage on wednesday 10:00 c-span network at eastern for the judiciary's first hearing.

laura is next in ohio. good morning. question isiggest to our government but mainly to the people. everyone of those politicians, every police officer, every military member takes an oath to the constitution and to the united states. at to a democrat, not to republican, not to donald trump, not to nancy pelosi, to the united states of america. what's in our pledge of allegiance? the united states of america. not the republicans, not democrats, not an individual. we as a people need to take that oath seriously, and demand that our politicians stay faithful to the oath. not to a group, not to a person. if we would do that, a lot in this country would be resolved.

but we can't as long as we are allowing anyone, and the people allow it all the time, to get away with crimes that the common man can't. if the common man was given a subpoena, they would show up in court be arrested. chris, on the democrat line in new hampshire. chris, i wante is to back what she just said. my topic, that i think that they it wouldddress is this be wise for the government to pass a federal law that only allows corporations like walmart , and so on and so forth, the , to doindustry

background checks that go back three to five years. a lot of people were struggling right now. three to five is doable, but by setting it at 10 years is almost, like, and possible for a lot of people. am struggling, but my black counterpart, it is always assumed that he has, like, family and stuff like that to support him. maybe he can do it. but, like, if not, there's no chance. host: a quick question for you, chris, has this issue, the criminal background check issue, been an issue for you? caller: oh, yes.

me, and not just in general me, like, everyone, this is what i am saying, like, so, like, if walmart can hire a felon, but they can't hire someone who has that is not make sense. host: ok, chris in new hampshire here on the "washington journal ." in the next segment, we'll talk about government surveillance and odyssey with elizabeth goitein and jamil jaffer. look at thetake a recent anniversary of the jonestown massacre and a new podcast and investigative report with mark stricherz of roll call here on "washington journal." ♪ >> watch american history tv all week on c-span3 and features

this weekend. eastern,5:00 p.m. catherine hoban kathleen stafford, held captive during the iran hostage crisis, talk about their experiences years later. >> and one of the marines said you not say why did you were in solitary. alone." saying "i was my mind did not work like it was my mind confinement, was like my god, i have been given the incredible gift of time, no meetings, no plans. what can i do with it? "oral history," andary rodham clinton richard weld.

it does fall to you in the house to examine abuses aspower by the president, be circumspect and careful as john doerr was. restrain yourself from grandstanding and holding news conferences and play into your base, this goes way beyond whose side you are on or who is on your side. onexplore our nation's past american history tv, every weekend on c-span3. here are some featured programs on c-span this weekend. today at 10:00 eastern, a house ways and means committee hearing on the difficulties in caring for aging americans, including the lack of reasonably-priced long-term care for senior citizens and their caregivers. then at 8:00 eastern, after an

environmental activist ted danson testifies on pollution at a house natural resources subcommittee hearing. sunday night a night :00 p.m. eastern, for campaign 2020, c-span speaks with presidential candidates deval patrick and michael bennet. former governor of deval patrick talks about his background, his friendship with barack obama, his aspirations if elected presidents, and his crowded field. then in 9:30, senator michael bennet on why he decided to run for president, his leadership style, and his stance on various policy issues. watch c-span this weekend. "washington journal" continues. tot: next up, we are going talk about government surveillance and privacy. areing us this morning elizabeth goitein, here in washington, the brennan center for justice, and jamil jaffer,

joining us this morning from los angeles. he is from george mason university law school, the founder of the national security both for area thanks being here this morning. jamil jaffer, we will start with you. theave a conversation about usa freedom act and what congress has to get to and reauthorized. tell us first what the usa freedom act is and why it was passed in the first place. caller: sure, well, bill, you aspiringe are three provisions in the usa freedom act that would be rubberized by the legislation if it were renewed by december 15. reauthorized by the legislation if it were renewed by december 15. somewhere he added years later your specifically, the provisions expiring now are one that allows the government to identify and surveil

terrorists who do not have a proven connection to a foreign power, and the second is called the wiretap authority, that gives ability to follow suspects when they switched their cell phones or emailed address rapidly to avoid surveillance. and the third is the business records provision. that allows the collection of information, like a grand jury subpoena, business records, hotel records, call records, and the like. there are serious provisions recordshe data provision or the cdr provision, specific to the usa freedom act asked in the aftermath of the snowden efforts, the metadata certain and that allows information about phone calls, not the content of calls put the golf numbers the person you're calling, the are some that you theed, the date and time of phone call. providing with a specific

identifier and getting the number as well as one or two from that. host: as jamil jaffer lays out the provisions, your view is you are opposed to a number of these provisions. tell us why. guest: some of these provisions needed reforms if they are going to be reauthorized. ,et's be clear, the patriot act passed in the wake of 9/11, the usa freedom act was passed in in sometry to reign of these powers, section 215, used by the national security agency to collect all of americans phone records in bulk, even if there is no suspicion of wrongdoing. of course there was not suspicion of wrongdoing for the best majority of these records, so the usa freedom act was intended to prohibit this kind of bulk collection under section 215 and under other authorities in host: aside from the sort of obvious partisan views on this,

why do you think congress , eachles with this issue time realtors asian, this legislation in particular, but similar legislation comes up? guest: a long history of the executive branch coming to congress and saying "we need this for national security congress is not want to be saddled with that responsibility, so it tends to react by giving what it wants, but i think what happens with the snowden disclosures is a kind of blew a hole in the routine that had been going on for a while, because it had been clear that bulk collection of american phone records was not necessary for national security. in fact, it proves to have little to no value and counterterrorism efforts. i think that is why the usa freedom act in 2015 actually you some steps back, but still see the dynamics playing out, even almost 20 years after

9/11, that when the executive branch comes in is as national security, congress gets very nervous, and it still gives the government whatever it asks for. host: jamil jaffer's, the administration, the executive branch, this of administration wants to make these provisions permanent, correct? guest: that is exactly right, and although the usa patriot act provisions are about 17 that are set to expire right after the patriot act was enacted, of those, three remained to be renewed on a regular basis, the lone wolf, wiretap, and business record authority. there is very little controversy, i know elizabeth and i disagree about this, there is little controversy about the bulk of these provisions. they should be formally reauthorized. on the cdr provision, there is some debate, the nsa recently stopped using that capability, and the administration seeking permanent reauthorization, at least in the cdr program a mother son good

argument for that to go forward for some period of time, and maybe a little flex ability for the government to use new methods, use that program for new technologies, as well as some of the records again, ecause part of the problems is because o the changes made by the usa freedom for which has made it hard the government to get the kind of data it needs to identify new and unknown terror threats. host: discuss the change in technologies. it appears is mostly covers phone records, correct? or does it go further than that? program was the cdr for bulk collection, it was supposed to be a somewhat less bulky version of it that still allows the government to get the phone records of suspected terrorists and anyone they were in contact with. now, it turns out that even though this was supposed to be an alternative simple collection bulkell bulk -- to

collection, there are more than one billion call records, and in 2018, it emerged that the nsa had been collecting records that it was not authorized to collect. host: even after the snowden revelation? guest: even after the snowden revelation, that it was not authorized to collect, supposedly by accident, and i have no reason to doubt that, but it was a massive problem that the nsa had to delete all of the records it had collected for three years. the fa said we solve the problem, it is fine. four months later, it happened again. incapableout it was of offering in compliance with the rules of the program, and at the same time, it does not appear there were too much national security benefits to it. the "new york times" recommended to the white house not to renew the program simply because it was not worth it. is therejamil jaffer, a disconnect with the nsa's

recommendation, and yet the nsa proceeding with wanted to make permanent some of these changes? guest: i don't think so, bill. i think there are a number of things to talk about here. number one, this idea that somehow the nsa was responsible for the over collection of information the last couple of years is totally false. why theythe reason over collect this information and the problems that they had was because the phone companies that were made responsible for giving them the data, in the usa freedom act itself, are the ones who may be errors. they are the ones who over provided the information. in fact, it is a copy mistakes, self-reported it, and took voluntary action to limit the collection of data. is responsiblesa or made errors is totally false. in fact summative usa freedom act responsible for these. we are talking about intelligence collection. there is never going to be a single silver bullet when you're collecting intelligence that has we identify this terrorist

fought in this one piece of metadata. the idea that phone records will give that information is just not the way intelligence collection works. if you look at what the nsa said public i with the entire u.s. government has said publicly, they have permanent reauthorization authorities, the nfa has testified before the house and the senate, and they reauthorization, so the idea that there is a disconnect between the white house and the executive branch generally, the nsa, is also -- host: a chance to response. guest: sure. we do not care about when they do not show themselves to be valuable, we care about this is intelligence, so we do not know what is valuable, not valuable. you never know. if there is proven value to this program, we need to keep doing it. i don't know. if this were not a program that was collecting a billion records, including records in 19 million american phone numbers,

you do not have 19 million americans terrorists in this country. these are innocent people whose data is being brought up by this program, so, who knows, it might come in useful is not good enough. the: elizabeth goitein is director for the justice, liberty, and national security jamilm, and to millvill jaffer is of the george washington university. talking about the issues congress is facing in regard to the usa freedom act. (202) 748-8000 is the line for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. all others, (202) 748-8002. we will get to your calls and toments momentarily, but up some of the debate that has happened before the senate judiciary committee on the reauthorization, let our guests listen and our viewers as well. here is dianne feinstein on the committee. [video clip] sen. feinstein: in june of 2018,

and if they publicly announced that due to technical irregularities, the cdr program it had received data -- had received data that it was not legally authorized to receive. moreover, the agency could no longer distinguish between records that were obtained lawfully and those that were obtained unlawfully. as a result, mfa announced that it would delete all call detail records acquired over the last three years. in august, the director of national intelligence, dan nsa hadonfirmed that ithat suspended the cdr program indefinitely due to its lack of intelligence value as well as its cost and compliance issues. despite this, the administration is asking congress to permanently authorize this program.

now, it is really not clear to me why a program with limited intelligence value and clear compliance problems should be reauthorized, and unless there is good reason to believe that it should, i do not believe we should reauthorize it. host: jamil jaffer, let me ask you, she talked about the collection of records that they could not determine if they were lawful or unlawfully collected. at they resolve that issue? has the nsa resolved that issue? testified tohe nsa come and in fact, both life and i testified at the hearing you showed the clip from, they said we have not figured out how to solve the problem, we are working on it, and we may want to come back to you, because we may want to restart the program. what they said was we want to the reason we want you to the the authority alive is

, it is a program that has a problem, what's we can get it to give us the right w may want to restart the program, so please keep the authorities available. if we need it when the time comes, they actually asked to have the authorities renewed. remember thatt to way are in a heightened terrorist threat. just the events of yesterday alone demonstrates the threat of terrorism. isis may have lost territorial basis in the lands of iraq and syria. it will continue to rebuild that. al qaeda remains extremely active, committed to committing attacks in the united states and in europe and our allies. so the idea that the threats have gone down is only because we have been so effective about collecting intelligence in fighting terrorists overseas. effortsto continue our

here and overseas. host: what we do know, what is the record of the nsa and the data call program? guest: i want to correct one thing. the usa freedom act did not require the telephone company is to hold these. they hold them anyway. host: you're talking about metadata that they hold from customers. guest: yes, and they keep these records in the ordinary course of business, and the nfa gets to take those records. it is true that the companies were given data that they were not supposed to give, but it took the nfa three years to figure that out, during the course of which, hundreds of millions of records at that point, and those records were available to be searched and used against americans in legal proceedings and investigations. so what you have to do in these instances is weigh the privacy effect against the benefits. there is a very serious privacy

officehere, and even the of the director of national intelligence said this was a major civil liberties and privacy problem, what had happened. at that center hearing you played the clip from, members of the community asked over and over again for the government witnesses to tell them whether value, nom had any specific, the particular cases, yes or no, haven't ever contributed to stopping a terrorist attack at any time? none of them would say. host: did the telephone company says the fire that hearing? guest: yes. host: jamil jaffer, real quick like him on the privacy issue, we have got several calls waiting, but your thoughts on privacy and how the nsa has done protecting that. guest: sure. it, the government said would give examples only in a classified setting, because it could not reveal any an open setting, so the idea of their own are examples that illustrate value, they simply could not talk about them in public. that is number one. never to come on the privacy of fact, we are talking about

records of phone calls, the number dialed, the number dialed from, the number dialed to, the date, time, duration of the call. we're not talking about any content whatsoever. we are talking only vocals made from a terrorist-identified -- potentially terrorist-identified and in that is all, context of the billions of records we're talking about, hundreds of billions of phone calls annually in the united states. the idea that it is a huge number, it is a tiny number of relative to the overall collection potentially available and needed to identify potential threats, so this idea somehow we are talking about a huge amount, it is tiny compared to the volume of calls that take place in the united states today. host: on calls, let's get to them here. we have questions and calls waiting perio in michigan, ken, you are on with our guest. caller: yes, i was watching a in 1999 orport back

2000, where a head guy quit because of us, canada, australia, and england was turned on a system back in 1998 key words, and he quit because and 84-year-old woman was tagged just talking current events over the phone, you know, so, that goes on to, all the way to the patriot act. that was thrown into the patriot, where they can do that. the phone carriers were getting worried about getting sued, right to privacy, and so, anyway, take care. jaffer,u said, jamil that this was just data, there was no picking up on keyword information and things like that. guest: that is exactly right. the program we are talking about today, the call data records , metadatas just data

or what the caller is talking about is important. states, and if there is an american anywhere in the world, they are required to go to work and get an and an individualized report. are differente authorities allowed, and just last year, we'd reauthorize that authority for collections against foreigners over seeks, called the section 702 program, and that does collect content, targetinghen you are people overseas, the when you're targeting a foreign power. guest: it does not have to have a connection to foreign power. under 702, any foreigner overseas, their conversation with americans can be intercepted without a word as long as the government's purpose is to pinpoint intelligence, which is broadly enough to include any information relevant to u.s. foreign affairs, but i would like to get back to the idea of the program we are talking about here under the because it is not --

is only phone numbers, the notion that metadata is somehow completely different from content and that it has no sensitivity to it, i think that it has been thoroughly to punk. -- debunked. sophisticated computer find out from the data who your associations are, and they can go so far as to figure out your political associations, your religion, some of that information. i will give you an example of where metadata is much more revealing than content. suppose someone called the suicide hotline several times in a row and every time hangs up the phone. there is no content whatsoever, but the fact of those calls is extremely revealing an extremely sensitive, so metadata in the catelli government a whole lot about a person's personal life. host: we will hear next from dallas in millville, new jersey, democrat line. caller: good morning. i am just curious, number one, the first question is -- why would it take three years for -- authorization?

i don't quite understand that, with the way the country has been as far as domestically here, with the threats of going againstple their own people, whether it be morals. that information to me seems mighty, mighty important. it can prevent a lot of problems that we have appeared one last thing, if president trump is so interested in his own security, why did he give the executive order to make the telephone companies give that information? that to me does not make any sense. thank you, and good morning. guest: it is an authority that allows the government to get an court,from the five the and that order goes to cell phone companies, and they have to give the data identified in the order, so that exists. there has been 03-year delay could i think there is some confusion there. the three years i was talking about is how long it to the nsa

to talk about it was collecting a lot of data it was not authorized to collect. the usa freedom act, it is the three provisions of the patriot act that were last reauthorized and 20 15th year they are not scheduled to expire until -- it was the end of this year, are lasting.y host: these are was the administration would like to make permanent, not just extend them thbeyond. guest: exactly, and as jamil said, it was passed as an emergency measure, meant to be temporary, which is why it has a time on it. and like so many measures, it has become a part of our legal system. host: jamil jaffer, talk about a regular court, a fisa court, and tapping. guest: the judges on the five a quarter regular federal district or judges run the country,

appointed by the chief justice, since sitting on the court for a number of years, and th take surveillance requests from the government. it takes place in a classified setting, behind closed doors, but there is no differen between that and a normal warrant procedure, as far take in camera, behind closed doors, and a private proceeding. it is not unusual for regular attorneys to go for that surveillance authority, and they do the same thing here. with respect to these provisions, these are larger they go toprograms, the five a court, they ask for an order, then they go to the telephone company and serve that order, and all of that take race in secret. you cannot tell the parents you are surveilling them, otherwise that would not serve the purpose. ofn it comes to this kind surveillance of the fact that it takes place in a classified setting and may or may not ever

come out in a criminal proceeding because it is an intelligence receiving, although if there is a criminal prosecution, you can use that information. that was one of the important changes we made that we learned after 9/11, breaking down the barrier between intelligence collection and criminal intelligence. guest: there's actually a huge difference between them. that is the difference that that reference, which is five the court proceedings very rarely culminating in criminal proceedings, so there is no opportunity for the person whose records were captured or collected to every challenge that in court. there is never any adversarial proceedings, which is very different from in the criminal setting. another primary difference, as jamil referred to, is that the five the court actually signs off an entire program, not just inividual warrants, totally secret. that is not something that is regular. host: all right, to new york,

independent line. caller: good morning. i would like to say that i think all of this surveillance of the most unpatriotic thing i have seen in my life. our country has lost its way. here is an example, locally, i live in binghamton, new york. are 20ghamton, there license plate readers of any time you drive in or out of the city, everyone who is in law-enforcement is exactly where you are. how american is that, and how free are we? the only other point i want to his is mr. jaffer there, profession is listed as a former something, i would like to know who pays him now. host: jamil, we will let you start there. guest: i work for a cybersecurity company now, and i work for the george mason university, the taxpayers of the state of virginia pay me, and my job is as a law professor. an importantses

point, where we live in a society where there are a lot of surveillance cameras, not as many today as there are in europe. in europe, there is surveillance of you could in london, they are very quickly to identify attackers, not just in the recent incident but incidents going back years, and subway bombings, they are able to identify that much quicker because they have these cameras, but americans, we do not want to live that way, and that makes sense. it is worth noting that when you're out in public, anyone can see what you are doing. think yourdo not activities in public, whether your license plates or the lights are protected from the government or from, friendly, anybody who sees it, but the caller is right to be concerned that with all of the capabilities that the government has, that that could be used for bad. to say ok, are these things bad, as it turns out, when the privacy and civil liberties board, which is what we are talking about, they identified not as angle government failure of

compliance, not a single failure by the government efforts to evade the law. were there mistakes made? sure. did they make corrections? yes. there was never intentional over collections or violations of people' privacy and civil liberties, errorss to be sure, but that is the nature of any program you might run, so both the oversight board found value in this program, and it ought to be reauthorized. host: we will go to walter, next, independent line, bridgeton, new jersey. caller: how are you doing? it is sad that this privacy issue has became -- become a left-right situation. you know, i wish the fisa court was made up bipartisan leave. know, where the political affiliation of the judges did not matter.

rand paul seems to be the only one on the right that is speaking up for civil liberties. [laughs] host: we don't know the makeup of the -- guest: we do in the sense that we know who the judges are -- host: but not their political affiliation? guest: we know which presidents appointed them. in there was a revelation which people realized all of the judges on the fisa court, maybe except one, has been appointed by republican presidents. the chief justice of the supreme court is responsible for appointing them to the fisa court. the chief justice, who had been appointed by a republican president, had appointed nearly all republicans to the court. that has changed. it is much more balanced now on the court. but a quick correction of something jamil just that some the civil liberties oversight board has not reviewed the details. there is a report, but it has come as made public yet

an a knows what they think of that program and whether there have been any. host: our guests are jamil jaffer, joining us today, the founder of the national sturdy institute and a professor at george mason university. ,e also have elizabeth goitein of the brennan center for justice. we welcome raul on the republican line. caller: good morning. i want to follow up on the comment that the caller made the cameras weto have all over. and coral cables florida, my community, we have these cameras all over the place, and it is not just a question of the cameras, it is how long they are saving this information for, so by our city's own account, they have collected close to 40 million license eight images in a day. and id for my records,

was given a stack of 80 pages over a six-month period of time showing my movements in my city every single day, 24 hours a day. it is outrageous. host: raul, how did you get that information? did you file freedom of information, or did you fill out a form of the city of miami? toler: i actually had to go my city police department and request information, so my deal registration number, that it was in fact my vehicle, and i got 80 pages. but a judge here in imd has now allowed my lawsuit to go forward. we are starting the discovery case, and if i get it we are not entitled to privacy once we leave our homes as being very quickly turned around by the supreme court of the united states. there is a case called carpenter vs. the united states where the supreme court says you do in fact have privacy outside of your home. the government cannot follow you around. the government cannot monitor your phone calls. the government cannot track every movement you make simply becaus they can.

there has to be a legitimate law enforcement reason for it, and i agree with the lady on the phone, on the program, that there has to be a balance here. you cannot cast this enormous dragnet and collect tens of millions or billions of records simply because you think you may catch one terrorist or one bad guy. aul, well right, rout appreciate that. asking about the telephone companies, really telecom companies are obviously control, provide internet service for many people, provide satellite service for folks. there are privacy laws that prohibit the companies from disclosing that information under most circumstances, but these court orders from the fisa court are an exception for that. raul, good for you for following up and getting information and seeing what is happening, and righte absolutely that a supreme court case called carpenter and 2018 held a very important decision, really

ground breaking decision, that the government needed to get a warrant before it went to a phone company i collected 127 days' worth of geolocation information from the phone companies, who had that data because the cell phones ping ce ll towers, and the companies know where you have been, and they have that information. basically the court recognized that because this information is so sensitive in terms of what algorithm can feed out of that information, that the government really has to get a warrant, even though that information is held by a third party, the companies. up until then, there was a belief among many that something called the third-party -- that meant that theory, the entire basis for now being5, which is authorized and the reason why the government does not have to get a word for that, vistaprint is now basically said that is

not true. you might, in some cases, still have a privacy interest, and in fact the government might need to get a warrant to get a third company's business records. that is one of the reasons why, despite what jamal says, is veryization of 215 controversial because many of the records government is getting, medical records, gun health records, gun sale records come under section 215, that is very seriou sensitive information that is being collected. jamil jaffer. guest: the concern is that the government is getting too much information, misused against average americans, and this comes from the right place, because we as a country have always been concerned about an over leaning government. in fact, it is the reason we broke away from the british government, because the over leaning powers of the monarch, right? we do not want to re-create that here in the united states. but this idea that that is

what is going on with these programs is simply not accurate. iza made a very careful point about the call data records has not been reviewed by the board, at least not in a public report just yet, but it underlines and thereviewed extensively by oversight board, by inspector general's, by the congress, over and over and again, and not a single, not one demonstrated example of abuse or intentional misuse by the government. this idea somehow that there is rampant abuse or rampant misuse is just not accurate. in fact, these programs have been successful at protecting this country against another mass terrorist attack. we have not had a major terrorist attacks as 9/11. that is usually important for country. as a result, if we are going to continue to give a safe, we have

to take certain measures. we have got to be very cautious and very careful, and i will say the kind of oversight taking place with this program and the kind of oversight the courts are doing is quickly important. it is also important to remember what the supreme court said in carpenter. they were talking about geolocation information. that is not at issue in this program, so for liza to suggest that is at play here is not accurate. simply in play here is phone calls, the company, the court in carpenter did not address that issue, and in fact, keptourt in carpenter alive the doctrine, which lies and other organizations actually advocated to get rid of, and the court chos not to do that. it very narrow, specific ruling on this issue of geolocation of data in that context with the number of records in a specific particular type of investigation that play their.

there is strong reason to believe it is important in investigations and in investigations where you do not have geo-locational data, that ruled is not likely apply. jaffer at a slight disadvantage, i can see elizabeth goitein scribbling notes. guest: the cdr program, the government can only get call records, not feel locational, under 215, which is also the main provision that is being reauthorized, they can. they can get any tangible thing under section 215, so it is very much at issue in this reauthorization and i will also note that while it did not find deliberate abuse of the bulk collection program, it found that the program should be shut down, that it bordered on unconstitutional and should not be allowed to continue, and there has been extensive evidence of negligent mishandling of the information and improper use of the information. whether or not that abuse was deliberate, it was still abuse, and it was still a major privacy

intrusion. host: our guests joining us this morning to talk about government surveillance. in particular, we are the usa freedom act, enacted in 2015. it renewed or restored parts of the original usa patriot act through 2019 and in parts of an extended through the 2020. the expiring provisions that congress has to renew included the ability of investigators via court orders to collect business records relevant to a national security investigation. can you talk about this, allowing the wiretap of a lone wolf terrorist without links to a foreign power, and the ability to keep wiretapping someone suspected of being a spy or a terrorist to switch his phone lines in an effort to evade surveillance. we will hear next from decatur, illinois, and rinaldo is next. caller: hi. thanks for taking my call to my question is mainly to miss going goitein, this renewal

of the patriot act, this opens the door to abuse, so i am wondering, has there been any reports of any specific abuse of gathering this private information? and on the invasion of privacy of innocent law-abiding citizens. thet: thank you for question. it is an excellent one. as i was mentioning before, there's extensive evidence of misuse of the information of there is different kinds under the programs we are talking about right here, and that would include the collection of hundreds of millions of records authorizeda was not to collected yes, this is accidental, but an accidental privacy violation is still very much a privacy violation. there have been several opinions of the fisa court in addition showing other ways in which the nsa and other government agencies, including the fbi, who

had access to this information, had improperly accessed it. in fact, in a recent opinion, that relates to a different authority, to be sure, but it is also another surveillance authority operated by the national security agency, the fisa court noted deliberate abuse of the data that had been collected by fbi agents who were searching through the data to find information about colleagues and relatives. so there has been of use. host: jamil jaffer, give us an idea of the criteria the government has to meet in order to look at that data to serve else someone. guest: sure. to thing, bill, i want correct the record to be clear, it was not using the word "abuse," it is another thing to use the word "accidental." when you accidentally do something, if the phone companies provide data or your system unintentionally collects data, that is not an abuse. let's be very clear. abuse involves you doing something intentional.

let's not combine the words of use and accidental with one another. there has been no evidence of any intentional abuse by the government with respect to what we are talking about. liza mentioned this other program, this other issue of the use by agents to look for their relatives or their spouse or wife, a handful of times, and in each of those cases, they were disciplined and has security crews. this idea that it is somehow rampant also totally inaccurate. so now, back to your question, bill, on the question of how you can look at this metadata, again, not content information, not information that is in the phone calls or the emails, but numbers, you have to have a reasonable, articulable suspicion of the phone number you are identifying is associated with a terrorist. only if you have an information can you go in and ask to be given the records, and then you have the record, and that is how

you get this information. you have to go to a court and show that information, and then you can go get these things. host: back to your calls, but first a comment on text. . texting is from florida "all of this surveillance is unconstitutional. hopefully someone will file a class action. those who trade freedom for security will have neither." from new hampshire on the independent line. caller: yes, thank you for taking my call. first, i want to say and invasion of privacy is an act of aggression. it is an aggressive act to spy on somebody. if i went and snoop around in all the records of all the congressman and all the calls cia makes, that would be considered an aggressive act, so it is an aggressive act for the government to do that to its citizens. secondly, i do a lot of research on this and i work with united is aent, which was

crowd sourced constitutional limit, and this is one of the core things we are doing and that amendment. with regards to the number of calls, jamil said it is only people that the government has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that they are a terrorist. the constitution does not say that. those words are not in the constitution. the constitution says that it has to be "probable cause," which means it must be more likely than not that the person you want to spy on is a terrorist. 2018, they asked, during a hearing, "how many suspects were there" that they spied under this to 15 provision , and it was 11 suspects, only 11 suspects, and they went from 11 suspects, they got to 400 million calls. the reason why that happens is because of telemarketers. the telemarketers call millions and millions of people, so if a telemarketer calls a terrorist

suspect, then every single one of those millions and millions of people that that telemarketer called can have their phones spied on because of this two-hop rule. host: ok, ron, a couple of data points. we will give jamaa jamil jaff in chester respond. rguest: of course when the identify the taliban are, they will not look at all that data. why are you looking at the data if you look at terrorist information? it actually has noise to the system and makes it harder for the government to identify what it is trying to do. that thatler is right is exactly why the numbers are so high. the one billion number is not an accurate representation of what the government needs to look at and is looking at, because they will destroy a tremendous amount of information, because it is not helpful. the caller is exactly right to be concerned about these things and to be concerned about the over leaning government

surveillance, but we have evidence, these programs have now run for the better part of all of two decades. we have been relatively safe from terrorist attacks as a result. it is important to look -- have there been intentional misuse or intentional abuse? the only things live a can point to are a handful of examples of people looking for the relatives or their spouses or the like. those people have been identified. actions have been taken against them. and in these programs, there has been no evidence of that. it is important to keep that in mind that if we are concerned about government misuse and government of use, that is not what is happening here. what is happening here is to show where there are errors, mistakes, yes, the government identifies those, yes, do they correct them? absolutely come of self-report them and work with the fisa court to correct them. this is a story of the government following the law, trying to stay with him a lot,

where they make errors, correcting them, and not engaging in any kind of intentional violations or types of abuse subtle. host: to our caller's point that it is not in the cause of vision, what area, what amendment of the constitution would generally be covering this? guest: the fourth amended said that the government intrudes on a reasonable excavation of privacy, if it engages inserts an in searches and that it has generally has to have a warrant, and so is there an is -- reasonable excavation of privacy , and is this something that we are still, in terms of third-party records, held by banks and telephone companies and other things, we are still in the process of passing out in the court what requires a warrant and what does not. i want to make a couple of -- that jamilha

raised, the nsa discards this information. the nsa does not discard anything. the civilind, and liberties board has taken a look at this and says that is meaningless, that the nsa pretty much holds onto all of it "just it becomes useful someday i should also mention there is a different standard for collection under section 215 than the cdr program, and i know there are a lot of programs, and it gets complicated, but under section 215, the government does not need reasonable suspicion of anything, it just needs to show that the records it is seeking or do any tangible thing it is seeking is in some way relevant to an authorized investigation, and "relevant standard" is pretty much the broadest standard under law, the standard under which the fisa court, the same court looking at these found that it,

was all right to collect the phone records of all americans. so there is extraordinarily little protection in the legal standards under 215 for the government to obtain any tangible things. host: liza goitein graduated former aideool, and jamil jaffer clerked for justice nielson gorsuch -- justice neil gorsuch. we go to kentucky, republican line. welcome. caller: good morning. host: good morning. isn't in the difference between the fisa court and the regular court that the fisa court is much more important, because it is classified? and i feel like the lawyers before the fisa court judge or not prosecutors, they are asking for permission to obtain information. and didn't wait, through our

representatives, give up a lot of privacy, because the government is interested in national defense, not in prosecuting for somebody that they overhear, that they ran down a stop sign or something. they are not going to call their local police in turn me in. they only care about national defense. host: jamil jaffer, i will let you answer that. i also had a question on twitter. shannon asks, "how do these rules d apply t domestic terrorism, ways of domestic terrorism, anything from white nationalism?" guest: that is a great question, both great questions and both great points. that goes back to the earlier caller, asking about the role of the fourth amended in this type of surveillance. as a general matter, since the 1960's, the supreme court has suggested -- and every appellate court in every district or since then has determined that there is in fact a exception to the war requirement for foreign

intelligence surveillance. at the margins, there has been some debate about what that means. proceedings from only one court, the supreme court just recently in 2018, has suggested that for the information, you might need a warrant for certain kinds of information, and that was specifically focused, as we talked about earlier, on geo-locational information collected over a long period, over 100 days, with very detailed information. so this idea that metadata, the kind that we are talking about, where third-party records are somehow controversial that the war requirement or that the probable cause might apply, it has not been controversial for decades, it is not controversial today, and carpenter, which was given the opportunity, it was the opportunity for the supreme court to get rid of the third arty doctrine, to say a warrant was required for noncontent information, the court was very clear in saying that, in fact, it reaffirmed the third-party doctrine.

correctly caller points out come in the case of national sturdy surveillance, we have always understood that as a general matter, warrants are not required. for domestic terrorism, that the person on twitter asked about, a warrant is required, and that is important. we think about what we are talking about, criminal acts in the united states, focused on tsericans, and there, warran make a lot of sense. when you are collecting national security from asia, foreign from overseas -- security information, foreign from overseas, iteris overseas, it would be entirely different to the country. guest: i just want to add to that. jamil is right that we have different legal systems set up for domestic terrorism versus international terrorism offenses. but i just want to point out that the definition of foreign intelligence is in fact very,

very broad. the statutory definition of foreign intelligence, and in fact some of the authorities we about, section 215, cdr, certain other for intelligence authorities, the rosy wiretap authority, these are against americans, these are americans' phone records we are talking about, these are americans' tangible things, whatever they are, we still do not know everything the government has collecting under the section 215 tangible things authority, so these are american we are talking about, and the fact that the foreign intelligence investigation, if you read the statutory definition of foreign intelligence, it does not mean as much as you think. host: in idaho, independent line. caller: hello, steve and the spent. my question was for mr. joffre. i have a two-part question, really. is the constitutionality of having 17 security agencies operating in america? the second part of the question

is the specific passage of the constitution allows for mass surveillance of americans. thank you very much. guest: so, a couple of things, one, there is no constitutional prohibition on intelligence agencies. in fact, we have had intelligence agencies or intelligence agents since the beginning of our republic. famously,hington there is a recent book out about george washington's spying capabilities. we have an important constitution to protect the privacy and civil liberties of americans, things like our right be free speech, our right to the free from unreasonable searches and seizures. it is not right to be free from searches and seizures generally, it is to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. you have a judge who will grant a warrant based on probable cause.

that only applies in certain circumstances. so we have a set of doctrines that are in the constitution that have grown up since then. now the question that your caller ask about, the mass surveillance of americans, of course there is no warrant with mass surveillance of americans when it comes to the content of communications. it is not permissible in the constitutio. it has not happened. that is not an issue here. what we are talking about is the collection of this metadata, and as i mentioned earlier, metadata has never been thought to be protected by the fourth amendment. it is noncontent information, therefore not covered by the warrant requirement. also third-party record, also not covered by the warrant requirement. the only limitation on that is what just happened in 2018, the carpenter case, and again, the supreme court was very careful to limit that to just to geolocation of data and only a large amount of time, so that also, as a general matter, the

court is very careful to say that does not apply to the cases we are talking about here, and in a criminal investigation, here we are talking about national. so a lot of difference between what we are talking about what the court did in carpenter. and again, that was innovation over existing laws that had been consistent until that point in the long. host: let's get a call fromdale on the democrats line, illinois, go ahead. caller: yes, i had something that happens to me that really bothered me. my daughter's skating coach's daughter requested me to store her car. she lives in a neighboring suburb. i had to move the car to the other side of the street because they were doing some construction work. while i was doing that, i was stopped by the police. i assume they read the license plate, and they let me go, but they said the owner of the car, who is an obviously woman's dui, has a suspended

license for dui. i never told anyone about that, but i was disturbed by it. ast: i appreciate that, dale, little bit off-topic, but we also touched on camera surveillance, too, and those sorts of things. let's hear from ray next in syracuse, new york, republican line. caller: i would like to challenge jamil, who makes many good points, as your other guest you areo, but misdirecting us a little bit here, talking about the handful and not necessarily significant compared to the number of calls in the country. i am going to point out one corruptiontance of in our federal government, where the people that run this program and the people over them put spies into the incoming trunk

trumpgn, using -- campaign, using five the warrants. at least one of those war and paperwork that had been altered. this has all been in the news. it will be in the news much more. so i would like to hear you how -- is there one american anywhere that would not be affected by that one instance? host: all right, ray. jamil jaffer do you want to respond to tht? guest: your caller raises a very important point. what we have is in order granted by the five the court -- the fisa court against one of the trump campaign officials, carter page, a probable cause to believe that carter page was either a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power, and that allowed them to full content from mr. page. as far as spies, i have not

heard any evidence is it just that, but there was certainly surveillance conducted of mr. page, and the caller is right about the inspector general's report, including claim that there may have what it might co. includingrumors reports and evidence with it. that is something we need to address and solve the problem. that does not suggest that the entire process is infected or those orders where appropriate. we have access to that order and the underlying documents. he had a lot of interactions with russian government officials and bragged about his connections in the communications that he was having. it was part of his business operations. it is the classic behavior that you might see from an agent of a foreign power. no charges have been brought against him. it is unfortunate his name has been brought out, that is why his name has been -- this has

been conducted in secret. that is why unless they are an agent, you do not want to drag their name through the mud. should important, we solve those problems, but that does not suggest that orders granted by a federal judge sitting as their role as an independent magistrate should not be able to grant orders. it makes sense in a national security context. if there is an untruth being told, exposed -- fix that problem and fix the process, not condemn it as a result of things like that. it is something we should condemn. that wet is interesting mentioned the first amendment. the first amendment is tied up in surveillance. one people have the perception that anything they say or do you may be subject to being captured by the government, they change their behavior and do not express themselves or associate

as for easily -- as freely. there is a major impact on first amendment freedoms when there is a surveillance government. there was a fascinating study about how ordinary people changed the search terms that they use on google to avoid search terms that might get them in trouble even searching words like cia or surveillance. there is an effect on people's ability to participate freely in democracy. that is very much what is at stake. host: she is the codirector for the brennan center of justice liberty and national security program. the founders jamil, of the national security institute at george mason university law school. thank you for being here with us. next up, we will turn our attention to the 41st

anniversary of the 1978 jonestown massacre, and new information regarding the death of more than 900 people in guyana. us andricherz is with the co-author of an investigative report on that. he will join us momentarily. &a" sat down to talk about her book and her experience. >> i stayed in a cabin with a group of members, young women. they were very modest cabins, tin roofs and it was raining all night long. i am just listening to the rain on the roof. what tomorrow is going to bring and i could not sleep. and, i just wanted the morning to dawn so that we could get on with taking those who wanted to leave. at that point there were only two people. i wanted to be able to safely

get out of there. on, more andre more people wanted to leave, and that became problematic because we did not have enough planes. congressman ryan was going to stay behind with a group of 40 people that wanted to be taken out. and, i was going to take the first group out. we got onto this dump truck with the first group of defectors and the concerned relatives who had been with us, and members of the press. we were about to leave and the dump truck got stuck because of the mud from the rain that had occurred overnight, and because it got stuck, we were still there when there was a knifing attempt on congressman ryan and there was this huge uproar in the pavilion. we are in a dump truck and all of a sudden out walks congressman ryan. he has blood stains on his shirt. he gets into the cab of the

plane so i did not have an opportunity to talk with him. truck,n the bed of the and we took off. >> cab of the truck. you said plane. >> how far was it from the people's temple area and the airport? >> it is hard for me to judge, i think it is three miles, but it is on jungle road, if you want to call them. it is just dirt road, so it takes a wild, 35 or 35 minutes. one plane has arrived and we are waiting for the larger plane. congressman ryan does an interview with the members of the press about what had happened in the pavilion. and then larry layton, one of the hierarchy and the people's temple is saying he is a defector, but he had been one of the most public about his support of the people's temple.

no way i -- there was wanted him on the same plane. i said to congressman ryan, i do not want him on the same plane. he said, put him on the smaller plane. i asked one of the reporters if he would frisk him. did not him, and he identify that he had a gun. so, i am loading passengers onto the large plane at this point, the first plane has been loaded. us, anbeknownst to tractor-trailer had followed behind us some distance and had arrived on the airstrip. as i was trying to coax a small guy and his child out of the plane who had scampered onto it, the gun shots -- the gunshots rang out. at first i did not know was -- what was happening because my back was to the tractor-trailer. they started jumping off and started shooting. people scattered.

and, i started to run. congressman ryan was hit, and fell. hided under the plane and by one of the wheels. >> when were you shot? >> towards the end in terms of my recollection. i was playing dead and lying on my side with my head down so my whole right side of my body was the gunmen.ible for they came at point-blank range and shot us. >> how close is point-blank, can you remember? >> my head is down. >> did they shoot you when your head was down? >> yes. before you was it got to a hospital? the airstrips on for almost 22 hours. [end video clip] host: joining us next we are

with mark stricherz, the co-author of an investigative report into jonestown, " jonestown government in action haunts 41 years since grisly death." thend his co-author on piece, and related podcast. we shot jackie speier, and she was not clear, and why was she down there? guest: she was a legislative aide to congressman leo ryan, whose constituents, their family members were in jonestown. andcongresswoman speier with congressman ryan -- went with congressman ryan to inspect jonestown and, if possible, rescue people. they ended up saving 25 people's lives from jim jones. host: the story of the massacre

and the number of peoples killed is pretty well-known and covered. later ande 41 years your focus is on what led up to that and the signs that were missed. what new information came out that led you to unveil the story and get this story reported? guest: the short answer is that the state department had many red signs that they did not disclose publicly, and -- such from a newocuments expose came out, the ambassador to guyana read the document and not do much anything about it. it actually got so bad that one woman walked into the u.s. and toldn may 12, 1978 the embassy staff that jim jones

plans to lead all of his followers in a mass suicide and planned to murder resistors. thee are just two of warning signs that the state department missed. disappearances, tactics by people's temple members. this went on 16 months after the mass exodus and july, 1977, until the disaster. us,: mark stricherz is with the co-author of an invesco to peace. 202-748-0000 for those of you in the eastern and eat -- central time zones. at you can send us a text 202-748-8003, we will get to your comments and calls momentarily. hows of this is a podcast,

me episodes will that be? guest: five and run through mid december. host: the opening episode starts with the actual incident of november 18, 1970 eight, the weekend that it happened. you begin with the story of jim jones and how he got to san francisco, and his political influence. i wanted to play a call about that of a conversation between jim jones, and you cannot hear her well, and this is rosalynn carter. [video clip] 1976, justall of before the presidential election, it is mr. carter -- misses carter on the phone with jim jones. am, cannot say how moved i i usually do not like being a preacher, i do not lack for words. i am deeply touched. is there anything we can do for you? >> the recording made by the

people's temple is faked, but rosalynn carter is calling to stroke the ego of jim jones saying that jimmy carter had asked him to call. as jones knew, misses carlo -- carter was calling because jim jones had thousands of votes. at us remember california was heavily contested state between republicans and democrats, and in the 1976 presidential election, jimmy carter lost california but carried san francisco. [end video clip] host: that is the voice of your co-author. a phone call with rosalynn carter emphasizing the political clout that jim jones rose to in a very short period of time. how did that happen? have votesas able to , because in the mid-70's, jim

jones as a reverend was traveling around california so he had a ministry in los angeles, for example. and the allegation was that in the 1975 mayoral election was that jim jones brought supporters from all parts of the state to help elect the mayor, who won by 4000 votes. between the mayor and a conservative republican. so, politicians took notice. head of jones was the the san francisco's public housing authority from january to july, 1977, which controlled the public housing authority. host: he rose so fast, but fell so quickly to the point where he had to flee from california. what happened? guest: two things.

abusivehat jones' tactics on his followers backfired. he had a couple of whistleblowers. the mills went to reporters and who -- the the mayor man who lost the mayoral race. and once they started talking, people learned about it. the most notable were a reporter with the "san francisco chronicle," who talk to them in 1977, and also talked with a special prosecutor for san francisco's da office. and he was elected on a platform of getting tough on the cops and police corruption. some of his investigators, most notably david ruben talked with the mills. jones was completely tuned into

what was going on in san francisco, so he knew about the expose coming out in july, 1977, but also legal -- but also had grand jury indictments. so jim jones got out ahead of the posse and fled to guyana, which the church had established in 1974. host: you and your colleague pointed out that it was owned by rupert murdoch. guest: it gave the support and authority to go ahead. behind the 100% expose by all accounts. host: you are reporting because of the new information that has come out from the state department, about the state department's action. the right, 40 years after congress reported its conclusions, the investigative record provides a trove of fresh insights that cast the state department's actions in a harsher light. after the deaths, u.s. diplomats

to plan ash defendant how they would handle questions saying that they had tried to respect privacy laws protecting americans abroad and avoid interfering in issues. a mass suicide threats seemed extraordinarily far-fetched -- the mass suicide threats seemed extraordinarily far-fetched. what should have been the reaction? guest: a forceful intervention. they should have found out that americans were being held overseas. the state department had six months to oversee jonestown. that is a long time, a few months shy of the american -- of the united states' involvement in world war i. embassy officials heard numerous examples of strange doings in jonestown. mysterious disappearances from family members, firsthand embassy officials saw bullying

tactics by people's temple numbers when they would meet with embassy officials -- members when they would meet with embassy officials. oft was in the early part 1978. embassy officials heard two temples from people's members that the group would commit mass suicide if this boy, john victor steon was removed from jonestown. walked into the u.s. consulate and said that i had to leave. i am a former jonestown resident -- resident. jim jones plans to kill everyone and will mass suicide and those who resist will be murdered. even after that there were 14 member -- 14 letters written from family members of people's temple residence saying please investigate jim jones.

there is a mysterious disappearance. host: give us a quick reference. the country of guyana, south america. georgetown is the capital, where was jonestown in relation? guest: 140 miles away. d.c. to philadelphia. georgetown is a small town. capital of guyana, and a small country of 800,000 -- 800 people. it was probably a town of 20,000 to 50,000 people. you inou mentioned that addition to reporting to cq roll call have a personal connection. what is that? guest: my cousin was a public school teacher. in the 1970's some of her stones were in the people's temple. 2014, i was eve with my family visiting her in san francisco, and over tea and

cookies she brought out a brochure of the people's temple. inside were pictures of the reverend jim jones with mayor , endorsements of the organization from "the washington post" and "san francisco chronicle." it also had a scripture reading from matthew 25. i am a catholic, that resonated with me. i thought to myself, who was able to see through the fraud? i was able to talk with a friend from santa clara who teaches at san francisco state and we realized that the state department's failure to oversee jonestown was a story that we needed to look into. with years ago i talked max mcgee, a researcher at the

alternative conservation of of anown, best thought of intellectual repository of all things people's temple. and mac told me that there is a huge archive down the street from you in downtown d.c. at the national archives. investigationess' of the massacre. you might want to take a look at that. i live a few blocks away. this is something i've been looking for. i talked with the legislative director there, and she said, yes. maybe been you have the only person to look at this. and here we are. host: let us go to calls. first from bill. caller: good morning. i have not read anything about this in the last 40 years. but, my comment is this.

as i remember it, representative ryan went there as a member of congress. cannot believe that howdy really comments about -- the way that ryan went there precipitated this event. not the a catastrophe, 40 people that got out, but the 900 people that died. of the reminds me a lot branch davidian compound. and you have to think about the psychological impact of what you are doing, and these people just sort of

went down there under the color of the united states government and precipitated this. if this had happened in a different way, perhaps, through the government of guiana -- guyana, it could have been handled better. host: we will get a response from mark. guest: thank you from the question. that is the conventional view of congressman ryan that what he did was somehow triggering the massacre. really, his involvement in the case would be more similar to inaham lincoln's election 1860 when president lincoln was elected, seven southern states succeed -- seceded from the union. it had nothing to do with what congressman ryan did. in fact jim jones's lawyers

praised ryan for being tactful and negotiating diplomatically with jim jones and jonestown. by thehave gotten so bad time that congressman ryan -- congressman ryan did everything right, but he got some blame in quarters for precipitating the massacre. it was not as if jim jones said congressman ryan, if you come to jonestown i will kill everybody here. then ryand done that, would deserve blame for precipitating the massacre. that did not happen. congressman ryan worked with jim jones' lawyers and jim jones allowed congressman ryan into jonestown. ryan gets blamed for the massacre when he should be seen by my way of thinking as nothing

less then a saint for the abused and whistleblowers. how many elected officials, how many church officials do we have that go to the matt for abuse victims. host: was congressman ryan frustrated by the state department? guest: very. the stateat department had primary oversight talked andn, and he went to the state department a couple of times and found out that some of these people may be held against their will. the state department did not go to take all the links that it could -- lenghts that they could. -- lengths that they could. host: he went because family members were asking. had a he went because he family friend whose granddaughters were spirited away without their grandparentss' knowledge.

and he had a grandparent whose son was taken away under mysterious circumstances. ryan did have a personal to cults. toc ul -- in the mid-70's one of his cousins was in the church of scientology. when it appeared and congressman ryan went looking to him -- looking for him. it was personal and a political issue. host: charlotte, north carolina. levi. good morning. ?aller: how are you doing and good morning to your guest. but you know your name, are hitting the nail on the head about jim jones. went because the

government caught on him and he was taking well felt -- welfare checks and such. they were getting close to him. folksascal got all of the out of there and got them over to guyana. heroyan, i call him a because my mother, just give me a minute. jones,er lived with jim noti told that man is anything but a cult. host: did your mom give money to jim jones? guest: we did -- caller: we did not have money back in those days. we had a tv and she would watch him on tv. host: he mentions welfare checks. how did jim jones amass great wealth to be able to do what he did and build a colony in guyana? caller: his -- guest: his wealth is hard to

disentangle how he got donations from the church and how much he got from the federal government. one of the more disturbing elements of the saga is the extent to which the federal government subsidized jim jone'' machinations. social security checks were ts andinto his residen many did not get their hands on the checks. it was more the people temple leadership got their hands on the checks. we talked to a man about how jones just took wards of the state from california and just took them and his jungle preserve abscond it with these kids. and what does he end up doing with everybody? report, to hisal

credit, did document this. jones was effective. he had a way of playing the government off of itself. he kept accusing the state department and the embassy of trying to undermine him of a conspiracy against him. he said the cia and fbi were out to get him. he was playing both sides of the fence saying the government is out to get me and yet the government was subsidizing his f -- his efforts. host: thomas in orlando, florida. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am meeting with everyone -- i'm greeting everyone with the spirit of thanksgiving. i am in between a heart procedure, so yesterday and monday, so i am not trying to infer anything if i am making strange sounds or something. the concern i have is this. it says that since the jones situation, and you want to

address my question later. this has really impact did the high spiritual -- impacted the high spiritual atmosphere and america. over and over again it is sayous that they can anything. but when it comes to things such, itistianity and is almost like there is a psychological concern for andher jim jones issue, that is a fraction of the things that go on in america concerning christianity and such. my question primarily to you just for the sake of time, although i have a lot i could say because i am an independent now, because when the democratic party decided on the floor to denounce god, and they all agreed to it on the floor, when

they kicked him out, they kicked me out. that made me independent because i believe in the values of the republican party, i believe in the platform. i believe in the platform. i thought it was the constitution of the united states, the platform, then the individual. that america,l --ce the jim jones situation i guess, acceptance of things like religion. guest: a difficult question to answer. one-off, is seen as a for hisman who hijacked

own purposes. wife was a methodist and in 1962 she took her husband jim jones to a church. the church had endorsed a series of social justice initiatives, including integration. he thought having been a -- he became a minister of a church in indianapolis.

for being a humanitarian minister in the 1970's. is hard to impact say. >> the investigative report, you can't tell the story of jonestown without the photographs of jonestown. how many people were killed? >> 918. there is another four in georgetown. >> jim jones died how?

>> him and one of his lovers were found dead. >> the co-author of this toestigative piece, we go jared, newport news virginia. i think we lost him. we will go to richard in springfield, missouri. >> i saw jim baker and all members of that. i was wondering if you would make a comment on that. >> my understanding is the baptist, i could be

wrong about that. we will go next to mark and lost angeles.rk in los >> i was there when this stuff happened. didn't --eople i was born in diana, and i was there when the church happened. a lot of people didn't know about georgetown. -- about jonestown. i came to america in 1981, and i think it happened in 1979.

everyone there was so surprised. about jim jones. we heard there was a lot of stuff going on, but the government did nothing about it because the people that left jonestown came to georgetown, which is the capital. the government didn't really do anything. >> thanks for sharing that with us. protect jimnt did they weren extent seen as general supporters of jim jones, despite a court order

to return this six-year-old boy to his rightful mother. i found a document that the 1978. wrote in march evidence he is needs leadership support -- needed leadership support, 27,000 acres. there was a symbiotic relationship there. no one knew that jim jones would actually carry out the plan of mass suicide and mass murder.

that was considered beyond the realm of possibility. >> you said in addition to the hearings.gress held which committee held these? >> there was one major hearing on may 1979 about the findings of this staff investigative report that came out. jackie spear appeared in some of those. down.erally was tamped >> did those staff reports have the benefit of having all the state department information? i found the report had more than 900 cables from the beginning of jonestown in

1974 through the tragedy and 1978.re of november staff investigators had access to all the files. letters from ordinary family members. >> communications was a big issue. this is pre-internet, pre-cell phone. issue, but it was oversold by the congressional report. it is true some documents were not seen. a customs report, gun in jonestown. 19 77 thatn february saw that department nothing was found and he filed it away.

sayingort had comments yes saying we could easily be held against our will. that was not reported on to american officials and two other state department officials. when a u.s. shows up asking if the consulate in georgetown is accused of killing everyone, that doesn't raise the hackles of state department and officials, then something is wrong. >> mike, hello there. >> when i was a kid i was involved in a cold called holy ground.

i wouldn't say i was involved, i was a child. my mother, my grandmother, i uncle, my grandfather was involved. it didn't end up with people killing themselves, but there was a large amount of abuse. the men ran everything, of course. i wonder if there ever had been on the kidsnything of colts back in the 70's and 80's. it really has affected my life. the colts tended to be -- colts

cults tended to be -- >> people definitely like the structure and they are always busy, always working. others didn't like the abusive tactics. i'm not aware of one. in the 70's you look back and read documents of the time. they seem generally benign, slightly annoying. some controversy about whether people are being held against their will. have auld actually malign influence on people's lives.

from june -- from jonestown we have the phrase don't drink the kool-aid. mark stricker's is a reporter on the investigative piece by roll call, it's also available as a six series podcast. thanks for being with us here this morning. revisit our top of the morning conversation, asking what are the policy issues washington is not addressing that you think it should be. what is your issue? we will see you in a minute. the impeachment inquiry hearings continue next week when house judiciary chairman jerrold

nadler holds the first impeachment inquiry hearing into president trump, focusing on the constitution and history of impeachment. watch our live coverage wednesday, december 4 at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span three. chairman nadler extended an invitation for the president and his counsel to appear before the committee. website and follow the impeachment inquiry live on c-span3 online at c-span.org or listen live on the free c-span radio app. >> i want to tell you i hang my head in shame. say is very impersonal lives, the reporting of these fellows. know thatu ought to

opinion because you are going to be disappointed in me down the road if i didn't tell you that. think your industry is wrecking all of us. >> that is pretty heavy-handed. sure he is not going to call on the journalist the next day that offended him in the press conference. today.hearing that is not the enemy of the american people. q&a, the viewt on -- the museum's vice president of content and civic development talks about the press. sunday night at 8 p.m. eastern. washington journal continues area >> i would like to know what public policy issues

washington is not addressing you the prescription drug pending in congress, immigration prescription drug pricing. .nd any other issues republicans, -- we will get to your calls momentarily. congress comes back on tuesday, the president heading to london for the nato meetings, nato nations boost defense spending ahead of the summit showdown. 29 members now meeting guidelines. week,of a summit next president trump is expected to hammer leaders yet again to increase military expenditures. the spending club expanded --

the top two spending club expanded by one country. union countries have collectively boosted their defense spending ever since 2015, motivated by russia's conflict with ukraine. your thoughts? jacqueline in ohio. democrats line. good morning. bank --k -- caller >> independent line, hello andrew. see mandatorye to spending cut, social security, medicaid, medicare.

i have never seen any politician address this issue and we are going to run trillion dollar deficits. >> the issue you think congress should be addressing that they are not. >> i agree with the last caller, we need to figure out how to get rid of the debt sit. all we do is go into debt. we are joined by the executive director of the gun control advocacy program. gun-controlto pass laws. gabby gifford was shot and injured in a constituent meeting in 2011. here's what we heard from peter. >> it is the senate and the president sitting on their hands

, cashing nra checks while blocking life-saving gun safety measures. i don't think this is a question of the impeachment inquiry tracking legislators from their duties to keep constituents safe. this is simply a question of priorities. majority ran saying they were going to pass legislation to keep communities safe. senate and the president have failed to follow suit. we are going to keep the pressure on. each and every day we have hundreds of volunteers and supporters across the country their senators to take action. i want to be clear, i'm not hopeless at all.

should this is a bit of a marathon. along way since we launched gifford. i think we are in a scenario where for voters continued elevate gun safety issues, to elevate people that block progress, we could have gavi gifford step -- gabby gifford standing in the rose garden with the next president of the united states passing significant gun safety reforms into law. >> that newsmakers conversation tomorrow on c-span and c-span radio. measures, theing short-term measure runs out december 20. congress will have to get that resolved. bypass spending talks as lawmakers negotiate the

fiscal 2020 funding bills. one official is notably missing from the talks. houseulvaney, former member had flown under the radar during recent trading spending talks, a shift from budget and debt ceiling negotiations where he emerged. jackson on the republican line, go ahead. legalizedates have cannabis or have medical marijuana programs available. review -- should be reflected by representatives at the federal level, and they are not doing this. from mostlystance the republican party.

little to no safety problems with highway traffic. problem isn't being resolved at a level that protect the people. representatives are controlling what gets done, not by going by the people. we had the act that passed the house yet our representatives voted against it. even though we have a medical marijuana bill and the most restrictive. she has to have a card, the only isng that would have failed some big drug thing. protect theg to people from the federal government being overcontrolling.

our representatives are not acting in representing the people. >> thank you washington journal, c-span. i appreciate the opportunity to get to speak to you. addressress ought to the electoral college disparity. a congressional district that is the size of the state gets reelected or over vote, whereas a district in california, you get about one electoral vote. that is really not fair. cottagee line from grove oregon. >> i have two issues, one is funding for entitlement spending.

for social security, medicare, not just wages that are earned but income that is derived from dividends, interest and capital gains. income should be adjusted based on inflation, otherwise taxed the same as other income. issue is the guarding of the health care industry. the industry has gotten so immense and in our particular area they are more -- they are large monopolies, which they are allowed to do in other industries. thehat is the case than government should treat them like utility and limit what they can charge for procedures. kind of health care has no idea what they are going to be

charged. part of the problem, people don't do anything to try to take care of themselves, they overeat and don't exercise. at the same time the health care industry has gotten so out of that insurance companies can't deal with them. i do think they need government to step in and regulate what they can charge. thank you. >> we have a couple more minutes. >> my biggest concern is they the totally neglected

dental side. the allowances they have made under the dental program make it unaffordable for the people who still have care. 3000 dollars is not uncommon. like to see that addressed. maybe they have some kind of trade-off for people who are using other services that they can take some kind of allowance toward dental care. the other issue i have is so much noncompliance with ada. i was never aware of it until my

daughter became injured. struggle for people who are handicapped to i don't other places know what the fix is to that. the dental, instead of giving free eyeglasses and free this and free that the people who don't need it, let us take that allowance and use it to dental. , i don't know if there is an organization for that. >> nancy on the democrats line. >> i'm calling because of the closure of our hospital here in dayton, good samaritan hospital. it was a predominantly african-american hospital.

we are fighting it. it is being demolished and we are fighting the whole corporate set up with premier health partners who have basically doctors and the nurses and equipment and moved them to newer hospitals in affluent areas. it turns back to this issue of how they basically had to because federal money is and the private and public relationship that is going on. see this medicare for all that bernie sanders is calling for and elizabeth warren is calling for.

and it's fundamental for health care to survive, especially in urban and rural areas. servef the hospitals medicare and medicaid patients. steve next,l go to independent line. caller: good morning. i want everybody to ask their doctor what food do you need to eat to get off the prescription drugs you are on. the food has 70 steroids, preservatives, growth hormones -- has so many steroids, growth hormones, preservatives. we are wondering why we are sick and our health care costs are so high. if you want to get a seat at a table with the pharmaceutical company, you legalize the right to grow for everybody in the

country, especially cancer patients like me. you will have a big negotiating pricesat can bring the down because there are 8800 strains of cannabis, and there is one that has got the cure for you. >> one more on the issues you believe washington should be addressing. >> minus this illegal immigration and the sanctuary , i go on the united states illegal alien and crime rate report. i look every day. this problem is horrible. here in the past month in oregon .e got a sheriff

people can read it for themselves. then it happened again in colorado with this guy who was and he goescolorado out and tries to kill somebody. you never know when something is going to happen to you. immigrants, i am married to one. she is a really nice person, she had to have a lot of money to come here. i don't have a problem with anybody. youi never get a thank about being here if somebody is here illegally. i don't get it.