forward and really talks about his jedged. not necessarily in great specificity because you don't have the time for that. >> presidential inaugural addresses. sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. you're watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government. it was created by america's cable television companies in 19 9. today's they provide c-span to viewers at a public service. >> form early f.b.i. director --

director james comey spoke. he also discusses what to expect from the incoming biden administration. this is 30 minutes. host: good afternoon and welcome to ""washington post" live." i'm carol, a national investigative reporter here at the "washington post" and i'm privileged to have with me today former f.b.i. director jim comey. welcome, jim. wi going to talk about your book, skth "saving justice: truths, transparency and trust" but i'm really glad you could join us. mr. comey: thank you, i appreciates you having me. host: i think we have to go over the astonishing few days we just experienced. let's go to some questions about

the siege on the capitol. first off, what were you thinking when you saw this unfolding on january 6? mr. comey: i had two different reactions. one is one they hope every american had, that i was sickened to see this armed assault. and the second reaction was from my career in law enforcements and that was growing anger that it was happening actually. -- at all. i was mystified that the hill wasn't better prepared against a threat that seemed obvious. host: and from your vast experience dealing with similar events, what do you think were the failures? we have the capitol police chief admitsing he failed but other people famed him. we had the f.b.i. saying they had a warning the day before but they didn't really put it in

people's faces. what's your thought about that failure? mr. comey: it's harleds to answer from this vantage point without a comprehensive investigation but it seems it's not a failure of imagine nation, which is what was crilingsed after 9/11, that we hadn't envision lts the way in which the attack nights come because in threats was so obvious and so transparent to the world that it wasn't a failure of imagination, it was just a failure but the why points behinds that. why the capitol didn't have the parameters and officers and troops its needed really has to be figured outs from an investigation. i cadgets tell from here who did what whether or made those decisions baseds on the investigation but we need to finds the answers because in threat is not going away. host: you view many of the things that you're struggling with, the failure on the hill, as you notesed the threats, with

the disturbing instigation of the president with this group. do you feel that there is a large group of people in law enforcement, in the f.b.i. and the police forces that protects us that didn't view this as a serious threat because these were white, conservative, pro-blue line followers and friends? mr. comey: i don't know. i sure hope that's not the case but it's a question that has to be skts. whether it's something about the way these people looked, that they're not people of color that causeds law enforcement to think about them differently. i don't know. i hope not but you have to ask and that's goles to be parts of the examination that we have to do. >> and there have been some discussions about the insider threat, lawmakers potentially aiding or encouraging donald trump jr., rudy giuliani and the

president himself encouraging this march, this storm. if you were in charge, would you be looking at whether or not they could be charged with a federal crime of incitesing a riot? mr. comey: yes, be and i assume that the f.b.i. and attorney general's office in d.c. are doing just that. who attacked the law enforcement officer, who killed a law enforcement officer, who was involved in that assaults but who was part of it, maybe not physically but in organizing it, fubbedsing it and inciting it. you have to take all of that seriously, not just about what happened on that him. host: if you were the f.b.i. director today's are there other steps you feel would be important and are there things you feel we should be prepareds for as a public in the coming days and months? mr. comey: you'd wants to do two

things, looking backwards at the attack and try to lock up everybody who participated. understand who equipped it, fundsed id -- it, conspired that but also looking forwards as the threats is ongoing to what do we know about threats, not just at the inauguration but to other parse of the country to people notes vailted by the sense they need to bring violence no to our democracy. i would imagine the got is looking for evidence to unwind what went on before. host: i want to move now, before we gets rights to your book, to in characters, who is serbling to your first book and is a key characters in your seconds book, "saving justice," and that's donald trump. how much do you puts this at his

feet, the undermining of faith in an institution up revere and honestly that i revere. i have covered this department and the ausa's that work in the trenches. how much of this do you put solely at donald trump's feats or do you think there's something else bigger than that? mr. comey: i think donald trump both reflects and further a trends in this country. he didn't starts it but he's become the from time to time mumpe in the last four years, future years in trying to destroy enormous and trying to destroy the truth. but he is the flame thrower. he has lots of act lilets around him who echoed the lies so they've been hernandez thousands of times by american citizen you -- sigses but donald trump is the one who has tried to burn down the justice department.

again, with the threats of people like bill barr. but he saw it as a threat, for the same reason he's tried to paints the media as an enemy of the people. host: moments when the presidents did not face consequences, moments when leadsers who could have made a difference didn't step into the frafe. what is our open for returning to normalcy in the next presidency or the presidency after that if justice is so easily yurbleds meanwhiled? if the independent object activity has so many forces working against it? if donald trump, who wasn't exactly the most organizeds tactician would -- cowleds accomplish this, what hope do we have going forwards? mr. comey: well, we have hope because we've done it in the past. never more clearly than aver

watergate, which i write about in it book when the department of justice had become a tool of nixon's partisan attack on many parts of our democracy so we're reliving that history in a way against a different degogic leadser but it's similar. we need the rights leadership in the department of justice and i think the president has selectsed as his attorney general nominee, the perfect sort of person for that role. that's going to be easier to return the department internally. the hard parts is going to be winning back the trust of those who have been surrounded by lies over the last new years and that's harder to change because you cadgets get people out of a fog by yelling at them or telling hem that they're moronings or their fax are wrong. you have to do its slowly by showing them when honest

leadership looks like and i'm." the new presidents will do that as well as the others he's selectsing. but that's a longer struggle. host: i really like that conversation and we are going to get to that, the future of, as you call its, the long climb up and back but let me is and you a few more things about donald trump. you you said you don't think he should be impeopled in the new presidency. again, i go to cons againles. why do you view that unimportant? why do you do that issue a consequence of donald trump, something he's never face , as secondsry? mr. comey: first, i think you misspoke. i definitely thoughts he should be impeachmented, convicted by the senate and ideally before he leaves office but at a minimum so he's been aeds from fuferts office. i also any the local

investigatesors in new york who are investigatesing him for the fraudster he was before the presidency showleds continue their work. what's a harder question for me and i wrote about its when i finished the book in the fall. i said it was a hards question then and it's even harder now, is, is it in the national interests to give donald trump centers stage in our national life in washington, d.c. through the drama of united states vs. donald trump? a prosecution thaleds take years to completes and that would pull the spotlight away from the comp penalty -- comp tents, honest leadership of new president donald and put it right where we don't want it to be. in the spotlights that doonled trump craves. and that's a harleds call. but here i actually think it's close but the better call is likely to be don't give him that platform. let him go to mar-a-lago and yell at cars in his baths robe

but turn off the lights, holds him accountable through local prosecution but lets joe biden go about the work of healing, literally, our sick and spiritually sick country. host: thank you for clarifying and also adds that it's pretty unusual for someone in your history and your position, the positions you've held to let what you view to be a crling person at the centers of a multiyear conspiracy, to let that person go. let's me and you about self-parledsening. the president, as we have reported, has been considering this. there have been aides around him telling him not to do its, that it would be croigs. do you think it would stands up in courts? mr. comey: i don't know, it's not been setsed. i think the better of the arguments is that a self-pardon would not be effective but the only way to figure out whether

that's true or not would be for the department of justice to charge him after he attempts to pardonsen himself and have a courts decides that. i know our mountain is not a genius but even he should be able to figure outs that if he pardonsens himself, he'll provoke the department of justice almost to the points of being required to prosecute him. i just want to be clear, i think donald trump belongs in jame. the hard question for me is, is there a national interest that's better served by not pursuing that incarceration at the federal level in stpwharbleds i could easily be wrong about that but i'm trying to think about what are the best things for the country despite my feelings for this corrupt president. host: understood. the president has pardoned a host in recent days of white-

collar crlings, primarily. operators in the -- murder of several children, women. he's pard pardonened the largest medicaid fraudster in u.s. history. tell me how that hits the dodge and workforce who clearly spent some time on those kays and it may have been decades of work. mr. comey: it sickens them and confirming for them that we're led by a criminal chief executive without any regard not just for their work but for how the rule of law is perceived and how it has lived in the united states of america. it's disgusting but they also feel powerless to do anything about it given the nature of the pardon power. host: you've talked a little bit about the wrong and steep road back whambings donald trump

reflects and incites in our country about distrust in fact, distrust in honorable public servants trying to do their job. tell me about your thoughts on merrick garland. obviously an honorable guy. he was cheered by republicans and democrats when he was dominated to the federal bench. he is viewed by people of different parties as a noble person but he's been away from. justice departments for a long time. is he the person that's going to be able to show his work and win back the trust of this group in the american public that is so distrusting? mr. comey: i think so. i think so. i wrote in the book that its we needed a new attorney general in the model of the one that the united states president chose the last time that the department of justice needed saving and that was rights after watergate. so after watergate in 18974, president ford chose the

president of the universities of chicago, a guy named edward levi. people couldn't figure out his politics. he'd never been involved in politics and that was the reason he was the perfect person. he was paurts from the political warfare in the united states and he hadn't been in the department of justice in decades. very similar situation with judge garland, who i don't know personally but the reputation is that kind of person who's outside of politics. he knows the department in the way that matters. he knows its valuings. he'll get up to speed quickly on modern challenges and techniques but he knows that the department must be seen as an other in american life. it has to have a blindfold on the statue of ladies liberties and not a maga hat. it must make decisions that people can trust and not with regard to race or creeds or color or parties affiliation and

i think he's the person to do that. it's an inspired pick. host: and you worked with sally yates, who was a contender as well. you both ended up getting removed there your positions with the trump administration. if she had been named a.g., do you think she also would have had a roads forward? mr. comey: i think sally would have been a strong attorney general. maybe still will be at some point. a person of integrity who knows the work of the departments really well. i suspect the challenge at this point was that she spoke at the democratic national convention so it would be hardser the say this was a pickout outside of politics but sherkeds have a bright future in our justice department. host: in my reportsing, sources have told me that a series of federal prosecutors has their resignation papers ready if

donald trump had been re-elected. how broken is our system if fraling prosecutors who do view themselves as objectsive mr. comey: it just underscores the damage that this president and his attorney general did to this institution, that it could drain the morale of people who are trying to do good through the institutions of justice. it shows you how this was for our country and the institutions. now i hope the reverse is going to happen. a lot of good people did not come into government. >> you right with a lot of passion about chris wray, the man who replaced you.

how worried should we be in the american public that chris wray was constrained from speaking the truth as the fbi director and that his only mission was to cower and try to protect his people? try to protect the mission they were pursuing and not speak up to the president, speak truth to power. mr. comey: chris wray is a person of integrity and great inner strength. i think we should all worry about the circumstances in which he found himself. needing to protect an institution and the rule of law in the face of a lawless, dishonest president. i don't doubt that he had to make tactical judgments about when to press against the president. that is not his doing. i think he was doing wise things

and being careful about how he approached it. that speaks to why it was such an enormous mistake to have this corrupt chief. that is not chris wray's fall. host: let me talk a little bit about the beginning of your book. i want to hear some of these examples. you talk about key moments where you have to grow as a baby prosecutor. talk a little bit about your choice in prosecuting mr. sleep. -- sleet. mr. comey: there were two defendants in this drug case. one of them was deeply involved in this cocaine drug disparity. the other one, a guy named henry was a tangential figure in this case. all he did was introduce an

informant to the source. it was a situation where he was technically guilty because he knew the dea source was looking to buy drugs. he was looking to introduce this to a fellow colombian that he knew was a drug dealer and that was it for him. when i got the case, i saw that he was guilty but i felt deeply uncomfortable with it as a moral matter. it did not seem right. this guy was going to go to jail for a long stretch of time. he was so low on the totem pole that he had nobody he could cooperate against. it just did not feel right to me. i was new so i went to my supervisor and i explained that i just feel wrong about this. they asked if he technically meets the requirement of the statute. i said yes. and they said it is your job to prosecute it. they ordered me to prosecute it. i did not have the courage or

wisdom to say i am not going to do that. i became part of the department of justice. instead, i went and tried the case against these two guys. the jury convicted the clearly guilty guy. i don't know what they read in me but i did my job as ordered. they were a voice of american justice. they were wiser and maybe a little stronger than i could be. i learned a searing lesson from that. part of my oath was to never make an argument i did not believe in, never to take a position i was not comfortable with and to advocate for justice because my client was not the dea agent on the case. the client was not rudy giuliani. there is no way they were going to want to dismiss drug cases in the bronx. my client was this idea of justice. i could never forget that.

it was a painful lesson for me. i do -- host: i do enjoy a lot of the parts of your book where you take us behind the scene where i was either tracking or writing about myself as a reporter and it did not know everything you were experiencing in real-time. tell me what the quandaries were for you in the case after 9/11 of the jordanian suspect that a judge was saying you did not handle properly and should probably be relieved. you decided you would argue this case before the supreme court, argued the appeal. tell us why you chose to do that. why did you decide to do it? mr. comey: i became u.s. attorney in the southern district of new york, manhattan by complete accident that ever applying, without ever taking about being part of that job. they called me out of book --

out of the blue. i knew that new york had a fierce independence where it was of the department of justice but never entirely. it saw itself as something apart. i thought that was in the interest of not just the district but the country. it was a tradition that went back to 1906 when a guy named henry stinson became roosevelt's picked to be u.s. attorney and a changed the culture of the office to be fiercely independent. i found out through being an assistant u.s. attorney there and going in as a surprise pick that part of the way in which u.s. attorneys had maintained independence was that they all had throw weight of a certain sort. they were rudy giuliani with all sorts of connections or others had been no superstars in the legal community. they could stand up to the district in a way that this imposter coming from a career usa job could not.

i was worried about protecting the independence from the headquarters of justice. one of the ways i chose to do that was that i would insert myself into the breach, when main justice tried to take our cases. a terrorism case that the department of justice said they were going to send one of their lawyers into argue and appeal the case and to stop that from happening and to show that justice did not take over. i said i'm going to personally argue this appeal so i did. i was not doing it because i wanted to argue appeals, i did plenty of those. i thought it was import that i step in. the same reason for me, not to run for office but so that i could manufacture throw weight. i wasn't famous, i was not rich, i did not have a famous family of lineage, nobody with any

connections. i could sort of build my own juice to protect the district in that way. i tried to do that. host: do you think this is the beginning of when you start to realize the press is part of your throw weight? host: people in my business are salivating for the inside details and scoop. you have been accused of using the media to their benefit no doubt and to yours to rail against this president. your role and the information that got out about how you are pressed for this, do you think that going to the media about the jordanian suspect is when you started to realize that in press coverage, you could really pull people in your direction? even if it was for the right purposes? even if it was for justice? mr. comey: it was earlier than

that that i realized it. i figured out when i was first a prosecutor that it was important to understand who your client was. bedrock principles. it was not until i went to virginia that i was in charge of the u.s. attorney's office, that i realized that that wasn't enough. that to earn the trust of the american people was everything for the department of justice because you could not be effective without their trust and confidence in you. and then to facilitate that trust, you had to do the right thing at all times. you also have to show them your work and tell them what you're doing and why you are doing it. the way to do that is through the media. i came to realize as a fairly low level supervisor of the richmond office that we had to have an engagement with the media because they were the people through whom we spoke to the american people. i did not see it as trying to use the media or using the media for personal gain.

i came to believe that if you're going to work in the justice system at a leadership level, you must communicate with the american people through the media or you will never earn their trust. as i say in the book with the subtitle, trust comes from the truth plus transparency. you have to have both. host: your point about showing your work -- i think the undermining of the press is also causing us to reassess. we need to show our work more and more. one of the specific things in a justice department case that you never would have talked about before and i'm not talking about hillary clinton's emails here. one thing that ag merrick garland will have to talk about and u.s. attorneys around the country are going to have to talk about, to show their work and build trust. mr. comey: most important, in

connection with what the new administration and justice department decides to do about the crimes of the tribe administration. take a look at rudy giuliani. they have to be transparent with the american people about that to earn their trust. i think that judge garland and the u.s. attorneys are going to have to redouble their efforts to lead into the transparency piece. i know there are people that will tell the truth. but i will not get -- you will not get to trust without giving transparency to the american people. gerald ford did an asteroid everything. he went by himself to the house of representatives, the president of the united states and sat alone at a witness table and explained to the american people why. i don't know how they will approach these prosecutions, how

they will approach the question of donald trump but whatever they decide to do, they have to share the y with the american people to generate that trust. host: it is a really interesting challenge. it is a very daunting one. i want to thank you for the time you have given us. i want to ask you one last question. what is next for jim comey? mr. comey: not this. i love you but i am excited about the not being part of public life any longer. i am looking forward to january 21 which went to dental he is my first day teaching at columbia university. that is what i will do next. host: fair enough, thank you for the time. i think you entered some really interesting questions. i appreciate it and i want to thank all of our audience at washington post live. thank you for your interest, thank you for being here, we will look forward to next time.

>> house speaker nancy pelosi held a briefing friday, two days after the house of representatives voted to impeach president trump for inciting an attack on the u.s. capitol. watch live, beginning at 11:30 eastern, online at c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. >> on tuesday, a day before the inauguration, watch confirmation hearings for two incoming biden administration nominees. at 10:00 eastern, the senate finance hearing for janet yellen to be secretary of the treasury. janet yellen previously served as chair of the federal reserve. and the senate armed services committee for lloyd austin to be defense secretary. if confirmed, general austin will be the first african-american secretary of defense. watch live coverage of the confirmation hearings on c-span,

on demand on c-span.org or listen on the c-span radio app. >> the congressional black caucus held a hearing on the u.s. capitol attack. members of the counterterrorism -- they spoke about their concerns related to racism and white supremacy connected to the january 6 attack. they discuss president trump's role in the event and how they should responded to the incident. this is about 1.5 hours. >> we begin today's hearing by given special -- giving special announcement to rev. al sharpton for our like-mindednwaaa -- like-mindedness in needing to call this