it has not been tested in the courts to my best knowledge. i regard this as a disputed question. it is certain that it would be disputed if the issue arises. if the democrats vote articles of impeachment, which now appears probable although it is not inevitable, the senate majority leader, or soon to be minority leader mitch mcconnell, circulated a memo last week laying out the steps the senate would have to go through to take up the articles of impeachment reaching the conclusion that it would be technically impossible to get the job done before the inauguration of the new president. strictlyhat is speaking true, i do not know. suggests even if

the articles of impeachment very,ow that it would be very difficult to get the job done in the remaining eight days. host: in that memo mitch mcconnell circulated he did not take a position on whether he would support or oppose such an impeachment. he was just laying out the mechanics of that. we are working through the mechanics this morning of some of the different options to remove president trump from office that are being discussed on capitol hill today. william galston is our guest of the brookings institution. we want you to join the conversation. democrats can call in at (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. as folks are culling and i would point them to your article -- calling in i would point them to

your article. what are the other legal channels? the president could simply choose to resign. suggestedlicans have that he should do just that. chatters even been some that he might choose to do so, having reached an agreement with vice president pence who would become president, if mr. trump resigns to issue a comprehensive pardon. be anot sure that would terrific way to go, but it is possible and it would not necessarily be inconsistent with the president's own interests. obviously he would have to be the judge of that.

the other process for involuntary removal of the president goes through the 25th amendment, which has been much discussed over the past week or so. most people are familiar with namely that you would need the vice president lust a majority of the president's cabinet -- plus a majority of the president's cabinet. if the president denies that he is unable to discharge the duties of his office, there would then have to be a vote in congress. i willry serves, and consult the text of the 25th amendment, which i happen to have with me, it would require vote in-a two thirds toh the house and senate

sustain the vice president into the cabinet over the president's objections. that is wrinkle number one. here is wrinkle number two, which has not been much noted except by congressman raskin. congressman raskin taught constitutional law before joining congress. section four of the 25th amendment reads, and i quote, orenever the vice president other such bodies as congress may by law provide --" what does that mean? that means congress could pass a law designating a body other than the cabinet that would have to agree with the vice president

by a majority vote in order to initiate the removal process under the 25th amendment, and i believe that congressman raskin has introduced a resolution that would in fact create such an alternative body. approvedesolution were by both the house and senate, vice president pence would then have the option of stating that he favored the temporary removal of the president, which is technically speaking what it and his stepping in as acting president. of that newly created body would then have to agree. has one or more forks in it, which makes the analysis of the options in this situation

even more complicated than it would otherwise be. host: as you write it at the end of your column we are referencing, the final option is to do nothing, to stay vigilant and hope president trump does nothing more to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. bill galston our guest this morning. we have plenty of colors waiting to talk to you. gregory is out of many -- caller s waiting to talk to you. --gory is out of minnesota minneapolis. caller: all of this is overwhelming. i do believe the wealth of andld trump and pence everyone in between has nothing to do with politics or money. it is all about power.

black people do not have power in this country. white people are drunk on power. donald trump is drunk on power. to dows money has nothing with it. host: what do you think happens in the next nine days here? caller: a lot of job jacking more than anything else. jacking more than anything else. donald trump will walk away and we will be more frustrated than ever. guest: the caller may well be right. donald trump may well just walk but here is a cautionary if president trump is not impeached and convicted or removed via some version of he 25th amendment obstacle,

will still face potential legal liability after he leaves office. some legal scholars believe that the president in the course of rallying his troops to march on numberitol did break a of established and well understood laws and there is no guarantee other than a complete pardon from somebody that the president could escape legal scrutiny after he is -- he leaves office, which leads to one more question. would it be constitutional for the president to pardon himself before he leaves office? he says yes, some legal scholars agree, i would say the majority disagree. that is just one more wrinkle to look out for. jim, oneuestion from

of our viewers on twitter who about the option of the 25th amendment " do acting secretaries have the authority to vote on removal, noting we have several acting cabinet members at this moment. guest: the answer is yes they do. host: when it comes to the body -- you were talking about jamie raskin proposing and creating, this would be a body that would be built on by the house, passed by the house, passed by the thete, and signed by president unless the president vetoed it than the house in the senate would have to override that veto for this body to be created, correct? guest: i'm not sure about that. the's a good question, but 25th amendment says a body that

congress creates. language suggests, although it does improve, that this could be in the nature of a joint resolution that does not require the president's signature. it would be a little bit odd if the president was allowed to prevent the congress from putting the 25th amendment into operation. good, but iof many think uncertain questions that would be tested in court. ost: more of the what if -- plenty of those being discussed. republican,rk, good morning. caller: how are you gentlemen doing today? host: i'm well. that was jason in new york.

an independent. caller: i was wondering on the question of whether trump should not, a quick don'ton, yes or no -- you think the american public would be better served if congress just goes back to work and started passing the laws we need or the changes we need to have made that we know about and have been struggling with for a long time? and just said these distractions aside? that would show some real responsibility. pete -- do you at the brookings institute agree with that? favor ofam strongly in

a congress that is once again functional and going about the business of selling the people's problems. i am a member of a number -- solving the people's problems. i am a member of a number of organizations. i agree with the underlying the rest of your point, which is in the absence of a functional congress, the rest of the constitution doesn't work well because the president and judiciary are tempted to employ powers that the constitution probably does not give them, but politics like nature abhors a vacuum. if congress is not doing its job, other parts of government will face an irresistible temptation to step in and do it themselves. congress should get back to work. host: when was the last time you

think we had a functional congress? lifetime and my i'm going to be 75 next week. the one or two things congress can do to get on track and move towards that. ? face: president biden will a very full plate -- more like a smorgasbord -- and he will have to deal with the two obvious national emergencies, we face a very dark winter with rising unemployment as the number of new cases into deaths from covid-19 sores into the into theere -- soars

stratosphere. the economy cannot reopen until we have that under control. of -- we areons going to have millions of billions of new unemployment claims, we will have businesses down-- inof shutting danger of shutting down. ere. have to start th i suggest they tried to demonstrate to the american people that they legislate. that may mean focusing on parts of the problem rather than the whole problem. i am convinced whatever the possibilities are for comprehensive immigration simply if they built

status ofng the those eligible for the daca program, i think that would pass with substantial majorities in both houses. is another examplei do- not know whether republicans will be able to back a large-infrastructure bill -- another example, i do not know whether republicans will be able to back a large infrastructure if -- it would pass with overwhelming majorities in the house and senate. i don't know whether a major expansion of the affordable care act can pass the house and stronglyut i suspect

that if meaningful legislation on prescription drug prices were put on the table in the house and senate, that too would be passed with strong majorities. in my view, it is important that congress send a clear signal over the next 12 months that it is capable of legislating in the public interest to solve problems that people have identified as important. if they can do that, we may begin to reverse this vicious mistrustspiral of generating gridlock, increasing mistrust cycle we have been locked in for much too long. host: you mentioned you work with several good governance groups. if people want to check them out, where would you point them to? guest: the one i think is doing the most important work is called no labels. it is a national citizens organization made up of

, republicans, and independents. doris thet asked proposition that the -- not asked to put their party affiliations aside, but they are required to endorse the that cannotthat -- happen without agreement across party lines. nolabels.org. that thefind out organization created a few years ago what is the largest independent bipartisan caucus in the house of representatives called the problem solvers caucus, which has recently been joined by senators of both political parties. this was the group, this

alliance across party lines that broke the gridlock over the covid-19 relief bill that finally passed in the waning days of december of last year. that i think is the most betterng hope for a future for congress and the country. host: 20 minutes left with bill galston of the brookings institution. you can check out his weekly column with the wall street journal. in 20 minutes we will take viewers on c-span live to d.c. city hall expecting a press conference with d.c. mayor muriel bowser, which we will take you to and watch live. stick with us until then with bill galston. huntington, pennsylvania,

republican, tina. .aller: hi, mr. galston i would like to ask a question. is division in this country sickening. how in the world can we have a congress that has such a verbal hate for the president try to 25th amendment for enticement when the very people asking for this stood in the streets and the vice president-elect took to the streets and told the people to stay in the streets and push us and the silence us riots, the burning of the cities , how are we going to get past, if i am a republican, it is ok for them to attack me. when is this going to stop?

the only way for this to stop is for nancy pelosi put americans first. was held up. the majority of that money didn't come back to american families. we are paying for gender identity overseas. to investngress going in the very people who make this nation what it is? , i think i have some agreement and some disagreement. the covid bill that was just of good things for millions of people. 37% of people who are now unemployed have been unemployed long-term. without that bill that was

passed in december they would have nowhere to turn. know, caller made hundreds of thousands of small businesses are still in business because of the ppp program passed last year, but that program had expired into those small businesses would have nowhere else to turn without that covid bill passed in late december. every compromise bill that goes through congress is going to include items at the people who vote for the bill do not like -- that the people who vote for the bill do not like, that americans do not like, but that is what compromise means. we can have a robust argument

about appropriations to art institutions like the kennedy center, but i would defend the proposition that the majority of the money, the overwhelming majority of the money in that bill went to americans who need it and would suffer unnecessarily without it. as to the broader point, i think the caller is correct that we need to lower the temperature on side.des, not just one that means each side will have andwallow its objections resentments otherwise we will keep going down the same path. what i said is difficult because when you resent something it is because you believe it is unjust and unfair and sometimes that

beliefill be correct -- be correct so you may have to accept and injustice -- an injustice to stop this escalating spiral. host: next caller. do not agree on the 25th amendment being invoked was pressured by the republican senators into pardoning trump. what he did should not be pardoned. to expedite all of this, can he be [inaudible] the moderatorsk to repeat that question because the connection was a little fuzzy. host: i didn't catch the end.

inwill hear from michael adam rouge, louisiana -- baton rouge, louisiana. caller: as you can tell from my voice i am african-american. years, all the personal in my viewpoint has been propagated by our press. i think president trump has had a bad deal. the point about the impeachment is all lakefront. front. like -- all a i would like for c-span to get an attorney. wood?ou heard of lynn

ood on their possibly. -- on theren theire possibly. a lot of the trusts -- truth has not been told. guest: with the exception of media isrust in the low. it is regrettable. it is not inevitable. i remember a time when we did not have this kind of contest over the media. the absence of trust is creating a situation in which different groups of americans are either finding or making up their own facts real or alleged.

i am not the first commentator and i am not the last that notes political discussion becomes different without an agreement on a common basis of facts. play wheree is people move from their own facts to their own conclusions. conversation between the parallel players started? i would say, just to add a wrinkle to the conversation, that there is a reason why when we are sworn in in a court of law, we swear not only to tell the truth, but also the whole truth and also nothing but the

truth. that aertainly possible particular story can tell some of the truth, but not the whole truth, and by telling only some of the truth, it may distort the bigger picture. i do think media organizations need to be very careful, to reach out perhaps beyond their ensureomfort zones to that the broadest basis of facts and evidence is going into the stories that are then transmitted to the american people. host: coming back to the previous colors question, the question that -- caller's couldon, the question is

president trump be acre act -- a florida law that allows the family to provide temporary detention for people who are impaired because of a mental illness and are unable to determine their needs for treatment. baker act require the are likely to inflict harm on themselves or others. i do not know how much of an expert you are on the baker act in florida. say it obviously does not apply legally outside the boundaries of florida. ever sinceo say that psychiatrists talked as a group about barry goldwater in 1964,

there has been some thing approaching a professional taboo against long distance psychiatric analyses of public figures. obviously there are some members of donald trump's family, including his niece very trump who is trained in the field who believes that the president might qualify under laws such as the baker act, but previously they -- as i said previously they have no force of law outside of the states where they have been written and enacted. just a few moments before we take viewers to washington dc with muriel bowser. robert is on the line for republicans. caller: hi, mr. bill.

regardingn for you trump's final days in office, my first question is if in the next few days donald trump shot somebody on main street and heldd them, could he be responsible because he committed that act while president of the united states when he said no one is above the law? after hisquestion is final days in office, because i have a family and grandchildren, what is the likelihood we will reactionil war type of going forward? two good questions. there is a legal

dispute as to whether a president could be tried for a crime such as murder while in office. in oral argument before the supreme court on a case within the past 12 months, the effectnt's lawyers in said he could not be end they relied on a justice department memorandum that is -- and they relied on a justice department memorandum that is decades old. if theg is clear -- president were to shoot someone on fifth avenue right in front of trump tower, whatever may be office,, while still in

murder charges could be brought against him as soon as he left office. with only eight days to go, it is almost a distinction without a difference. by the time the indictment word hen up -- were drawn up, would no longer be president of the united states. but i havelawyer, spoken to people who are -- the president will face a wide range of legal jeopardy once he leaves office. alreadythose cases have begun, particularly in new york state. that was the first question. as to the second question, nobody could rule out domestic of the endn the wake

of donald trump's presidency and the inauguration of joe biden. the chances of that are hard to assess but they are more than zero. i have been told that president trump's supporters are organizing marches not only on washington but on all 50 state capitals on january 17. amounted andw what takeover of the michigan state house earlier this year plus plans -- thankfully -- to kidnap and perhaps harm the governor of michigan. high during the period leading up to the end of the trump presidency end of the beginning of the biden

presidency. and the beginning of the haydn presidency. biden they -- the residency. presidency.n the barrier around the u.s. capitol is expected to remain for 30 days. biden's inauguration has been --en a threat rating that the secret service is leading the response. that story about the various threats that are being made online. indiana, this is kathy, a democrat. caller: good morning.

kathy.o ahead, world -- w in the [indiscernible] what has been happening over the years with the police, they just put it in the police. how can you compare the people protesting and what happened on the sixth? haveer thing, why do you people on this showed that are supposed to be asking questions but then they don't know anything? they don't know what the roles and the laws -- rules and the laws is? host: keep watching. perhaps there will be someone

who you do agree with. expert from the brookings institution. the distinction between the -- the most obvious difference is that what happened attack onsday was an the citadel of american capitol building, which houses the american congress, people sent there by the american people to represent the country and do the countries susiness -- country'd

business. you do not have to defend violence and destruction of property, which i do not, in order to see that what happened on wednesday was both symbolically and in reality a far greater danger to the country. public trust cannot be restored unless people on both sides of to apply are willing without fear or favor. there has been a disturbing tendency in recent years to apply laws and criticisms selectively to those who oppose your efforts. whom youo those with

are in agreement. is whole point of a rule that it is supposed to say what is permissible and what is not permissible in the pursuit of your ends, whatever they may be. you may want to drive quickly from one side of the city to the memberecause there is a of your family you desperately want to talk to, but that does not justify violating traffic laws to get to that family member. even if you think that getting there as fast as possible is completely justified, the rules are there for a reason. they should apply to our auctions -- actions regardless of the purposes we are pursuing. host: just a few minutes left as we await that press conference

by the d.c. mayor. i want to keep viewers updated on a couple tweets from some members of congress this morning. in michigan, a press conference in flint to discuss the attacks the next steps he will take to hold the president accountable for the riots that killed five people, including a u.s. police officer. a second officer has died. howard liebengood is his name, the washington post saying that liebengood died by suicide after being at the scene of the capitol violence. this is congressman troy balderson, republican from ohio, saying, i was saddened to learn about the loss of another u.s. capitol police officer. i joined the nation in mourning the passing of howard liebengood and brian sicknick, both of whom served honorably, especially during last week's attacks.

senator martin heinrich saying, i could not count the number and directions ahead with officer of interactions i had with officer liebengood. that was officer liebengood's post on the senate side of the capital. time for one or two more phone calls. this is rodney out of connecticut, an independent. caller: i wondered what is going and thethe voter fraud defense contractor installing software on the computer that changed thousands and thousands of votes from trump to biden. i do not understand. why don't we hear anymore about that? that,let's focus on concerns about voter fraud in 2020. more than 60 court cases

were brought alleging fraud. the court sustained none of those complaints. about the voting machines has been investigated. is a total falsehood, complete, propagated to millions of people by people who know better or should know better. i hope that we can put this kind of lie behind us. out of houston, texas, republican. aller: i wanted to comment on couple things. i have been taken back on the state of events this year, not , trump taking office, but throughout the entire presidency, witnessing a congress that appears to be

doing nothing except trying to .et this man out of office we listened to this for years. we listened to impeachment trials. we went through the accusations of russian collusion. they were relit loosely pursuing this individual to no end and it has not stopped. he has less than 10 days to remain in office and they have already certified the votes for notn and yet they still do let up on this man. i do not understand how a man with the codes to the nuclear missiles cannot be trusted to have a twitter account. new parler that showed up is being taken down by big corporations because they are wanting to silence everybody's voice. host: let you respond in the

time we have left. say the caller has articulated a point of view that i am sure tens of millions of americans agree with. and it is a sign of the work we have to do as a country to try, to quote abraham lincoln, to bind up the nation's wounds. we have a lot of healing to do. -- there is anger on both sides, fears on both sides, some of them justified, some not. if there was ever a time to put the country first and set aside our anger and resentment as best we can, that time is now. words will do nothing, but i would hope that people who are listening to this

broadcast and many others would oflize the consequences continuing to focus only on our own grievances and own point of view. i have strong convictions about many of these matters, but i haven't even stronger conviction that if we insist even on -- only on our own point of view our country will suffer. our democratic experiment could come to an untimely end. galston,l colston -- appreciate your time. a senior fellow washington journal. every day, we are taking your calls on the air. coming up on tuesday morning, a

discussion about the divided senate and incoming bided administration. then, we will talk about the history of the 20 for the amendment -- the 25th amendment. be sure to join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook comments, text messages, and tweets. >> the votes for president of the united states are as follows. joseph r biden junior of the receiveddelaware has

306 votes. donald j. trump of the state of florida -- >> on january 20, president-elect joe biden and vice received president-elect ka harris take office. watch live streaming or on-demand at c-span.org, or listen with the free c-span radio app. >> house democrats are moving forward this week with plans to have president trump removed from office for his role in last week's riot at the u.s. capitol that left five people dead. earlier today, majority leader steny hoyer son unanimous consent for approving a resolution that socked to have vice -- resolution to have vice president pence remove trump from office with the 20 for the memo. that was blocked by republican representative mooney.