the perks and benefits for former president's. next, backs stier with the president -- max stier with the presidential transition team. ♪ host: good morning, and welcome to "washington journal." the senate has agreed to wait two weeks before beginning the impeachment trial of former president donald trump. this agreement brokered by house and senate leaders, will allow president joe biden to move ahead with his agenda, including getting his cabinet in place before senators begin debating a possible conviction for the former president. our question to you this morning -- what do you think about the senate agreeing to take up former president donald trump's impeachment in two weeks?

we will open up our regular lines to you. democrats, your line is (202) 748-8000. republicans, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8001. independents, you can call (202) 748-8002. keep in mind, you can always text us your opinion at (202) 748-8003. we are always reading on social media on twitter at c-span wj and on facebook at facebook.com/c-span. once again, we had an agreement brokered by house and senate leaders on friday, to wait two weeks before beginning the impeachment trial of former president donald trump. "the new york times" has a story -- senate leaders struck a deal on friday to delay former president donald j. trump's impeachment trial two weeks,

giving president biden time to install his cabinet and begin moving a legislative agenda because -- before they begin a historic seating. the plan guarantees that the trial, which promises to dredge up the ugly events of mr. trump's final days in office and resurfaced deep divisions over his conduct, will loom large over mr. biden's first days at the white house, but it will also allow the president to put crucial members of his team in place, and push forward on a coronavirus aid package he has said is his top priority. senate majority leader chuck schumer came out yesterday and spoke about what the impending senate impeachment trial for president trump would look like. [video clip] >> the senate will also conduct a second impeachment trial for donald trump. i've been speaking to the republican leader about the timing and duration of the trial, but make no mistake, the

trial will be held in the united states senate and there will be a vote on whether to convict the president. i've spoken to speaker pelosi, who informed me that the articles will be delivered to the senate on monday. now, i've heard some of my republican colleagues argue that this trial would be unconstitutional because donald trump is no longer in office. an argument that has been roundly repudiated, debunked, by hundreds of constitutional scholars left, right, and center, and defines common sense. it makes no sense whatsoever that a president or any official could commit a heinous crime against our country, and then be permitted to resign so as to avoid accountability and a vote to disbar them from future office. makes no sense. regardless. the purveyors of this unusual argument are trying to delay the inevitable. the fact is, the house will

deliver the article of impeachment to the senate. the senate will conduct a trial of the impeachment of donald trump. it will be a full trial. it will be a fair trial, but make no mistake, there will be a trial and when that trial ends, senators will have to decide if they believe donald john trump incited the insurrection against the united states. host: now, senate republican leader mitch mcconnell also came out to the senate floor to talk about what he saw is going to happen for the senate impeachment trial of former president donald trump. here's what senate republican leader mitch mcconnell had to say. [video clip] >> yesterday i shared a proposal for the pretrial in the impeachment that appears to be headed our way on monday. senate rules if the article

arrives, we have to start a trial right then. this impeachment began when unprecedentedly fast and minimum process in the house. the sequel cannot be an insufficient senate process that denies former trump his due process, or damages the senate or the presidency itself. senate republicans strongly believe we need a full and fair process where the former president can mount a defense and the senate can properly consider the factual, legal, and constitutional questions at stake. for that reason, we suggest the house transmit this article next thursday, but that is apparently going to be next monday. that former president trump's answer and brief i suggested be due on february 4, and the former president's pretrial brief be due i suggested on fiber 11th.

that timeline would have touched february 11. that would -- february 11. that would per var -- provide more time before we step into the unknown of a trial, which would've been a benefit to the incoming administration, and allowed them to get more of their cabinet confirmed, which we are cooperating as best we can to expedite. host: so we are going to go to our phone lines and see what you think about the senate agreeing to take up the trump impeachment trial in two weeks. deandre is calling from miami, florida, on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to say first off, thank you to c-span. i think it is a complete sham. i think the american people are being completely disrespected and spit in our face with this show, second impeachment. come on, it is a joke.

it is a bunch of hypocrisy. it is a bipartisan system that don't care about the people. we need a party for the people and by the people. all of this is a circus show and i don't know why they are wasting their time. that is all i got to say. god bless everybody. host: mary is calling for montclair, new jersey, on the democrat line. caller: good morning, love your show. as a lifelong democrat and lifelong c-span watcher, thank you. i think donald trump is -- has committed treason. i think he incited the riots. the biden administration would hope this goes away and i'm concerned this will overshadow the first 100 days of the administration, a lot of important things to get done on immigration reform, getting covid under control, so i'm concerned about this overshadowing biden and his

great accomplishments hopefully to come. i don't know how to make this go away. i am sure the biden administration would hope there to be some, i don't know, making this go away come some sense sure. -- censure. he has committed treason and i believe you should be impeached, but i hope they can wrap this up quickly. host: joe is calling from san antonio, texas on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning, and thanks for everything you do at c-span. in terms of the impeachment process, i'm 100% for it. i think donald trump left a stain on this democracy in terms of his presidency, and i honestly think we need to hold him accountable for everything that he did inciting the riots. what reason would people not have to listen to your commander-in-chief that would tell you to march the street and marched to the capital?

i do not blame the rioters, per se. you are following your president. i hope impeachment trial is very bipartisan. there is a perfect opportunity for republicans and democrats to ask and focus on the right questions, and this is a good chance to give sort of a show of good faith on the republican side, since the past four years have been disastrous, to at least show they have dutch are willing to take this seriously and go forward with the investigation. host: house speaker nancy pelosi put out a statement yesterday about what the house is doing, and on the article of impeachment. i wanted you to see what house speaker nancy pelosi said yesterday. "we are respectful of the senate's constitutional power over the trial, and always attentive to the fairness of the process, noting that the former president will have had the same amount of time to prepare for trial as our managers.

our managers are ready to begin to make their case to 100 senate jurors are the trial process. exactly one week after the attack on the capital, to undermine the democracy, bipartisan vote of the house of representatives passed the article of impeachment, which is our solemn duty to deliver to the senate." that is from house speaker nancy pelosi talking about the article of impeachment, which once again, the senate will begin its impeachment trial of former president donald trump in two weeks. once again, we want to know what you think about this. our lines are open, so let's talk to cj calling from minneapolis, minnesota on the independent line. good morning. caller: thank you very much. good morning, c-span. morning, america. i want to say that the senate let this guy get away with things for a long time during the course of this

administration, and now they got a chance to prove that they are honorable, or whatever they might be, to hopefully -- i'm glad that they did move the trial back so they can give the new administration a chance to formulate their people, which is great, don't want to interfere in that. we will just have to see how it goes and pray that the right thing comes out of it. host: let's go to james calling from lawrence, massachusetts on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am against this altogether. i think it is a bunch of baloney. i don't think trump did anything any other politician would've done. i think this is maybe an unintended consequence, but i don't believe in it. i think there should be more emphasis put on what happened yesterday and on your show yesterday, when tony fauci -- i

call him phony fauci when he got up and lied about the covid stuff. he went to senate hearings and swore under oath at least three or four times that donald trump did everything he told him to do. if there is any blood on anybody's hands, it is on tony fauci's hands. when he stood up yesterday and said he was under pressure and all this other stuff, he never said it before. if he was under so much pressure, why didn't he quit, the man of ethics? i think this is a whole bunch of lies going on, and the rollout plan, there was a general, on tv, for 45 minutes about three months ago, laid out the whole plan, tying in cvs, ups, fedex,

all the things and everything else. now they are trying to say they invented it, what joe biden has did. the draft dodger is plagiarizing again. host: jim is calling from middleton, new york, on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i am laying here and i have covid-19. i am a 9/11 first responder, very proud american and all this backbiting and vague to give -- vindictive stuff to prove somebody's point or ego really needs to stop, because it is not about any of them. it is about the american people.

we had 25,000 troops in washington, d.c., sleeping on a cement floor. the rally the other day, that was an unfortunate thing, but let me just say perspective, back in 1993, a radical group tried to blow up the world trade center to make a statement. fast-forward to 9/11. two planes hit the south and north towers. two planes were headed for the white house and capitol building. thank god they were not successful. however, now, we have such an unrest, such a divide come such a political agenda written -- agenda ridden movement that we are going two steps forward and two steps backward. this is not about donald trump. it is about nancy pelosi and

chuck schumer want to flex some muscle. i just wish america the best. god bless. host: let's talk to dj calling from still vail, missouri, on the independent line. -- still ville, missouri, on the independent line. caller: good morning. hello question mark host: we can hear you, go ahead. caller: i believe joe biden broke the law in georgia when he offered the $2000 checks, taxpayers money, for votes, clearly broke the law. in the capital, nancy pelosi is in charge of the security, so she is directly responsible for everything that happened at the capital. host: so let's be clear that the house speaker and the senate majority leader are in charge of

security, not just the house speaker. caller: they are both responsible. host: go ahead, keep going. caller: now the senate trial, the democrats are going to look really bad, especially joe biden, if voter fraud comes out in the trial. so everybody in the world is going to know that voter fraud, so it ain't going to help joe biden at all. it is not going to hurt donald trump it all. joe biden is going to look really bad. that's all i got to say. host: let's talk to charlene calling from rocky mount, north carolina, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: hello, hello. i would like to say -- you can write -- you can hear me, right? host: yes. caller: i am restful with

president biden and vice president harris. i can be restful. i have been watching c-span, cable in every room now. i would like to say, president biden and vp harris can handle it all. they are doing what they need to do for the corona issue, doing what they need to do. they have people with the food crisis and the economy, and helping people financially. and they are able to also, the senate, have the trial to decide whether our past president trump is guilty of inciting the riot, because any person that incited a situation like that would go to jail. i don't think you should be exempt. he should have to answer for his

participation and his -- the rioters to go to the capital. some of those people are very upset because he told them he would be with them but he was not. he left and went to florida, and now these people find themselves that rioted the capitol going to jail and being charged. those are his actions, but he incited that. the senate trial should be held because trump needs to be held accountable. host: yesterday, president biden was asked about the senate impeachment trial and the potential timing of it. here is what president biden had to say. [video clip] >> do you have a timeline for the february trial? president biden: i haven't heard the details but i think having some time to get our administration up and running, i

want to thank the senate for passing our secretary of defense , secretary of treasury and state are in place. the more time we have to get up and running to meet these crises, the better. host: let's go to our social media followers and see what they think about the senate agreeing to take up an impeachment trial of former president trump in two weeks. one post from facebook says -- this impeachment just shows you how afraid of trump the left is. we now have a new president. it is time to move on. here is a text that came in that says -- don't know whether there should have been an impeachment and whether there should be a subsequent trial. if nothing was done because trump only had a couple weeks left, it might signal that presidents can do anything without serious repercussions toward the end of their tenure. however, there won't be enough votes by republicans to find him guilty.

i don't think the constitution and visioned someone as despicable as trump being president. another text says -- the gop tribalism is on full display. they are looking for any soundbite or reason not to commit -- convict, and a no vote to commit will equal a no vote to elect any voting against impeachment. -- waiting two weeks for the second historic impeachment trial of donner j trump -- donald j. trump gives the new senate majority leader time to find out if you will have to blow up the filibuster to get the 1.9 trillion dollar relief package past. passing the relief bill is as important as holding the president and others accountable for instigating an insurrection. one more text -- treason is a trying. in the usa we convict criminals when evidence can prove it true. it is the only choice i have. he forced them into it. one last text -- president trump

needs the time and president trump do the time. once again, we are talking about the senate decision to take up an impeachment trial of president trump in two weeks. before we move on, there is head counting already going on in the senate where they need a two thirds vote to impeach, to convict president trump of his impeachment. "the hill" newspaper has a story with gop senators doing counts on their side, and i want to read what it says -- republicans say the chances that former president trump will be convicted in an impeachment trial are plummeting. spite lingering anger among some republicans over his actions. only five or six republican senators at the most seem likely to vote for impeachment, far fewer than the number needed, gop sources say. a two thirds majority vote would be necessary for a conviction,

something that would require at least 17 gop votes, if every democrat votes to can drake -- convict trump. senators say a few things have moved in trump's favor. one significant development is that trump decided not to pardon any of the individuals charged with taking part in the capitol riot, which would have lost him more republican support. this is coming out of "the hill" where republicans believe only a few republican senators will vote to convict president trump. what do you think? let's go back to our phone lines and start with alice calling from old fork, north carolina on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i just want to say that i've been watching four years that donald trump has been our president. i have watched him do everything that he could to help the

american people. it's my opinion he's been one of the best presidents we've ever had. i believe he is honest. i don't believe he is guilty of what they are accusing him of, just like he wasn't guilty when they tried to impeach him the first time. whatever really happened there in washington that caused all that rioting, i don't think that donald trump is responsible for that. but the democrat party, they can't see the forest for the trees. sooner or later, a lot of this stuff about hunter biden and joe biden and the whole bunch will come out. host: let's go to case calling from holcomb, mississippi, on the democratic line. good morning. are you there? case, one more time, are you

there? let's go to warren calling from brandon, florida, on the republican line. good morning. caller: i can't believe what i'm hearing. i can't believe what i'm hearing. donald trump needs to be impeached. donald trump once said, i can shoot somebody on main street, something to that effect, and none of my supporters will convict me. well, you just shot somebody, president trump, because at least four people lost their lives in that insurrection. i can't believe what i'm hearing. we elected these people to chew gum and walk at the same time. so all this stuff about, there is other things to do, i tell you what, for my money, my tax dollars, they are going to do that and they are going to have this impeachment trial. everybody is accountable. everybody is accountable.

some -- from a private in the army or an airman in the air force to the president of the united states, everybody is accountable. host: ryan calling from las vegas -- brian calling from las vegas, nevada on the independent line. caller: good morning. trump can't -- i don't understand why people are calling in these glowing comments about trump. he has shown over and over again that his supporters are being deceived. he should not get away with these crimes that he's done. and by the way, why is rudolph giuliani, why is he not being charged? donald trump's son was in pennsylvania saying we should go to war about this election. it is crazy?

why are people so deceived? i don't understand. host: keith is calling from alabama. go ahead. caller: i think you all should go ahead with the impeachment of donald trump because it is not fair for no other president. yes. host: go ahead. do us a favor and turn your television down because you are getting an echo. all right, go ahead. caller: it is not fair for no other president to come in and do something he did. i have never seen nothing like this in my whole life. my 32 years, no other president ever did this. host: let's go to carol calling

from dixon, tennessee on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. there is no way that donald trump should ever be impeached. i've just been sick. i watch all the channels in all the media and listen to all of it and touch things from one channel to the next. to all of it, donald trump tried to stop -- the first of the year , with the coronavirus, tried to stop all the illegal immigrants from coming in areas and flying in from china. biden and all that group had protesters, fights going on at the airport, everywhere, and saying he was horrible for doing that. just look at all the people that might not have died. also, all the people that call in yelling for trump to be impeached, i honestly believe most of them are paid by the

democratic party to do that, to get onto the people line. instead, it is like the communist usa line when they are trying to take a president down. we all love him. thank you. host: a caller earlier mentioned the president's former lawyer rudy giuliani. they are putting together a separate team for this impeachment trial and he has chosen a lawyer from south carolina to lead that team. i want to read to you a little bit about the lawyer he has chosen. this comes from reuters. former president donald trump has hired south carolina based lawyer budget bowers to represent him -- butch bowers to represent him in the senate impeachment trial that he incited in insurrection. bowers did not respond to requests for comment. while relatively unknown on the national state, bowers has represented former republican

governors in south carolina and served on the justice department under former president george w. bush, according to the website. republican senator lindsey graham of south carolina recommended him. nikki haley experienced allegations that she engaged in illegal lawley -- lobbying wall she was a state representative. she was cleared of wrongdoing. that's former president trump choosing south carolina lawyer bush bowers -- butch bowers to represent him in a senate impeachment trial coming up in two weeks in washington, d.c.. former president trump has already been impeached, the senate is now deciding on conviction. let's go back to our phone lines and talk to louise, in north carolina, on the democratic line.

good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i just wanted to say, trump should be impeached. what he did to this country was terrible. if you look at the constitution, you cannot going to overthrow the government. this is a serious thing. also those republicans that are talking, they are getting their news from newsmax. everybody heard what he had said. and for rudy giuliani, he can't represent him. it's just terrible what's going on in our country. this man has lied, and lied, and lied. i hate to say that about a former but people should realize, he said he was going to go down with them.

that was another lie he told. please, we don't want another president to come in and do the same thing if they don't hold them accountable. thank you. host: let's go to ray, in pleasant view, tennessee, on the republican line. good morning. caller: i have a comment on this impeaching donald trump. that will backfire on democrats. they will go down and smoke. the bottom line of this is donald trump exposed to the swamp that people in government that are cheating the normal workingman. when he did, they went crazy. and he's coming back. maybe not as president, but his

leadership will bring the republican party back. they are scared to death that he's going to come back. those people that voted for joe biden, they did not vote for joe biden, they voted against donald trump because they could not stand the heat. when you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. he was bringing it out and showing the people where the cracks were going on and they could not stand it. and he's coming back with his power. host: let's go to jay, in washington d.c. on the democratic line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have an observation that occurred to me, watching the events of january 6. the evidence is right there on tv, when the african-american refuses to -- when african-americans refuse to cooperate with police they often get shot, if not in the back.

but the white male privilege, the so-called law and order white male for the most part americans, maybe cooperating with police, they were allowed to go about their business. what trump is getting away with is intolerable. if barack obama had refused to show -- she would have been removed from office. thank you. -- his taxes, he would have been removed from office. host: business insider has an article looking at the republican senators to watch during the impeachment trial in the senate over donald trump. we are looking at that list of the business insider article. one of the senators will of course be republican leader mitch mcconnell of kentucky. who is by far the most powerful republican in the country.

according to business insiders who voted to convict trump, it would be a seismic development that could open the door for other republicans to vote in the same way. lisa murkowski, the senator from alaska, senator murkowski has already called on trump to resign and side of the gop cannot separate itself from them she may leave the party. also senator mitt romney of utah, the soul republican who voted to convict trump for abuse of power following his first impeachment trial. those are not the only ones, you also have senator susan collins of maine, who business insiders described as a bit of a wildcard in the impeachment debate. and she has been silent on her position. senator ben sasse nebraska, who has already said he will seriously consider any articles of impeachment against the former president in the wake of the violence.

and finally senator pat toomey of pennsylvania who said in an interview with fox news i do think the president committed impeachable offenses. i'm not sure if it's desirable to attempt to force him out a day or two prior to when he's going to be benched anyways i'm not clear that the best path forward. those are sick senators that business insiders say should be watched during the senate impeachment trial. let's go back to our phone lines with floyd, from louisiana, on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm an 86-year-old man, i spent 22 years in the air force, and i have been around the world and i seen a lot of stuff. and i've heard a lot of stuff. but this is really, really sad to hear some of these people

call-in defending --. they are talking about how he will go down as one of the greatest presidents, he is accused other people stealing votes. they have put together a team, they should count his votes and see how many of those were illegal. because he came across 74 million votes now? that's ridiculous. that's ridiculous. look at how he and his family are --, before he went to washington they were stealing in new york. it is sad to see these people come in. what to tell your children about this president? host: let's talk to larry, in

houston, texas, on the republican line. good morning. caller: yes. i think trump is innocent of all of this stuff. i think when it all comes out, and their publicans get the house and senate back they will start impeaching obama and biden for what they did to try to overthrow the government and start a new presidency? it'll backfire on them. along with all the other democrats who do that stuff. he did not inside that riot. he was speaking when it started. bombs were planted and everything. that's all i gotta say. host: speaking of people filing

impeachment charges, here's a story from the hill newspaper with a republican already filing impeachment charges against president joe biden. senator marjorie greene, republican from george -- presented marjorie greene has filed articles of impeachment against president biden a day after he was sworn into office. the text specifying any impeachable offenses that were not immediately available, but she indicated that the articles accused biden of abusing his power as serving as vice president by allowing his son to serve on the board of a ukrainian energy company. saying president joe biden is unfit to hold office, his pattern of abuse in power and -- as vice president is disturbing. president biden has demonstrated that he will do whatever it takes to bailout his son and line his family's pockets with

cash from corrupt foreign energy companies. so a republican house member has already filed articles of impeachment against president biden, that can one day after president biden was sworn into office. we will have to wait and see where that article of impeachment goes. liska back to the phone lines and talk to carmen, and los lunas, new mexico. caller: good morning. thank you for letting me speak my name is carmine. i actually heard the caller before me, biden has been there for 40 some years and they didn't do anything.

harris at one of her speaking events said she was kind of embarrassed and not too proud to be african-american. it's funny how she is black when it's beneficial to her. kind of like obama. obama never said anything about his color before he even got to be president. but anyway what i would like to say, we all need to come together. forget about white, black, green, yellow, forget about republican and democrat. we need to cut it out, get our country back in line, and stop blaming and pointing fingers and all of this stuff. in my opinion, trump did more in his four years than 90% of our presidents. host: let's go to may, in kansas city, missouri, on the democratic line.

caller: i would like to believe that everyone that has called in that has said that trump has been one of the best presidents are literally out of their mind. he's been the worst president we have ever had. yes, you should be impeached. he should not be allowed to incite a riot in the capitol and then be able to walk free. he is guilty and everybody in this country knows he's guilty. and those republicans, those millions that follow behind trump coming you know if we get term limits, that would really get rid of a lot of this corruption. if the president can only serve two terms, everyone in washington only gets two terms to serve. all of these forty-year careers

up in washington, that needs to be eradicated. it only producing corruption and the little minions that are following behind these corrupt presidents. host: on thursday house speaker nancy pelosi was asked by reporters if the impeachment trial that's going to happen in the senate in two weeks would be against president joe biden's message of unity in america. what -- what speaker pelosi had to say. [video clip] speaker pelosi: now, i'm not worried about is that about that. the fact is the president of the united states committed the act of incitement of insurrection. i don't think it's unifying to say let's just forget it and move on. that's not how you unify. joe biden said tonight we must remember -- to unite, we

muster member. and it's our responsibility, to uphold the integrity of the congress of the united states. to protect and defend the constitution of the united states. that's what we will do. he's now gone, thank god, you don't say to a president do whatever you want in the last month of your administration and he will get a jail -- get out of jail card free because people think we should make nice nice and forget that people died here on january 6. that there was an attempt to undermine our election, our democracy, to dishonor our constitution, i don't see that at all. i think it would be harmful to unity. host: let's see what some of our

followers on social media are saying about the senate agreeing to take up an impeachment trial of former president trump in two weeks. here's a post from twitter, the tweet says trump needs to be impeached, but the problem in this country and with the government are so much bigger and deeper than what he has done a not done. we cannot lose sight of that. a text says there's plenty of time for both impeachment and biden's agenda. just think what the front-line workers have been doing in the last year. another text says if the gop does not vote to impeach, i will never vote for them again. another says you cannot remove a president that's gone. charge him in court. another says i have been listening to the calls and i'm surprised by those defending president trump.

there was an attack on our capital inspired by president donald j. trump and others for this was an act of treason. does nobody remember what played out in technicolor? the viciousness, treasonous act of insurrection. and once as whole trump account goal in criminal court with criminal consequences, not impeach with just political consequences. congress, focus on virus. liska back to the phone lines, and see what you think about the senate agreeing to take up the trump impeachment trial in two weeks. let's start with jean, in st. joseph, missouri, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i think sheet i -- i think he should be impeached. i think he should not get to receive millions of dollars in free service once he's gone. i think he was guilty the first

time. i listened to every bit of the first trial and there was no doubt that he had done exactly what they said he did. except no one in the senate was so afraid of being primared they did not uphold that impeachment. but i think he should be impeached. i think it was insurrection. i think he really wanted the military to take over and declare martial law. and he thought by that way he could stay in office. i lived in new york and new jersey when he was there. i lived in el paso, texas. i think what he's done with taking the children away from their parents has put a stain on the united states which is as bad as all of the indians we murdered and the blacks we kept in slavery. it's terrible. he should be in jail. host: let's go to breezy, calling from arizona on the

republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. first i like to set pledge allegiance to the united states, i have been playing little league baseball, football, basketball, and these people working in these public safety offices cannot play a game of cards or chess or any other games that basketball involves public dependency. we were established in 1939 and we have a constitutional state right with state laws. these people came from 1875 from the sheriff of coolidge and -- i practice the bible every day in my life, i write the bible and read the bible.

host: let's stop that they are in go to john -- don, calling in from raleigh, north carolina, on the independent line. caller: i am a true independent because i do vote -- i voted a split ticket. i voted for joe biden, but at least one republican in the election. we need a strong republican party because i like balance. the way the republican party is going now there is no balance because there's that tear leaning out that will believe anything donald trump says and i think you should be impeached. one because he climbs to political prominence by pushing ally on barack obama the first and only black president we have ever had.

he tries to cheat him out of his birthright prepares a latin word for that called ad hominem, it means to build yourself up by tearing someone else down. when he pushed that lie, knowing that it would fly with 40% of the electorate whose white supremacist leaning voters, that's what he did. for those people who would be pushing for trump to stay in power, because he was willing to do anything to stay in power and apparently five people died as the result of him inciting a crowd to go establish an insurrection. but as lady macbeth said, for those who follow shakespeare, some spots just don't wash off. host: let's call diane, in jacksonville, florida, on the republican line. caller: good morning. this is diane. i most certainly feel that he should be convicted.

he has already been impeached. he should be convicted because he committed a crime. i'm very disappointed in donald trump. if they don't vote to convict, i will be leaving the republican party. that's all i have to say. host: house speaker nancy pelosi has appointed nine house managers for the upcoming trial for former president drum. i will put those names on screen, they will be led by representative jamie raskin, a democrat from the state of maryland. there is actually article about the nine house impeachment managers, i'm going to read a couple of paragraphs from that article as you look at the names on screen of the nine house impeachment managers.

the democrats, all of whom are lawyers and many have deep experience investigating the president say that the task of convincing skeptical senate republicans to convict trump. a single article of impeachment for incitement of insurrection was approved by the house on wednesday, one week after a violent mob of trump supporters invaded the capital. at the time, lawmakers were counting votes that cemented the election defeat. as members of the house were in the capital when it was attacked, several hiding under seats as riders beat on the doors of the chamber, the democrats are also witnesses to what they charge is a crime. so are the senate jurors. this is the case where the jurors were also victims and so weather was those who voted in the house last night or those in the senate who will have to weigh in on this, you don't have to tell anyone who was in the building twice what it was like to be terrorized. eric swalwell is one of the

managers. as we wrap up, let's see who's next online. john, from liverpool, new york, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: how are you doing? i think you definitely should be impeached. let me go on and say this impeachment thing has gotten out of control. to me goes back to richard nixon , he should been disciplined but he should not have been impeached. that's the way i feel about richard nixon. clinton should definitely have never been impeached. the first donald trump impeachment for abuse of power should not have happened, it's a joke. abuse of power, what a joke. host: let me stop you there. what crime do you think the president can commit that would deserve impeachment? caller: this one.

here. this is the only one that warrants impeachment. nothing even comes close to people storming the capital. what did richard nixon do that came close to this? what did clinton do that came close to this? and now this woman with hunter biden? give me a break. this willy-nilly use of impeachment has got to stop. the only thing that should never be impeachment worthy is something like trump did with inciting this riot. it has to go to that degree to be impeachment. this abuse of power stuff, discipline him and some other way, don't do impeachment, that should be saved for something that's really egregious, like this. host: let's go to our caller from capital heights, maryland,

on the independent line. caller: one thing people need to know is that anytime you have a protest rally or any kind of rally in most places, it will be infiltrated by the government. people are so naive when it comes to understanding how the government functions. it's going to be infiltrated, especially if it's progressive. that's how they get their intelligence. if you listen to the news carefully, they use mind control technology to brainwash you, these people are socially engineered. host: whenever we talk about 9 -- mind control it's time to go to the next person. let's go to charlie, in maine, on the democratic line. caller: i think you should be

impeached -- i think he should be impeached and they should take as much time as possible. everything should come out in front of the public. i want all of these republican senators, if you cannot get into office on who you are, get out of there. when i had to look at my government, and my country that i put my life on the line for voluntarily, if these people cannot get into office on their own merits and they have to ride on this guys coattails, here's your chance, you can get rid of him by telling the truth. we've all seen it. thank you. host: let's go to kenny, in wilson, north carolina, on the independent line. caller: good morning 31 thing i

want to say, i heard a lot of callers were talking about the guard troops staying in the parking garage. the reason for that is -- these were not regular troops, they are guard troops, weekend troops. a lot of those people, qanon, white supremacist, those people can -- those people were inside of the white house. what trump did was -- he told people to go out and march. if you marched with them this would not have happened. it would have stopped. that did not happen. and this is important, he

installed all of the people in the white house to make this coup happen. michael flynn, the russian treasonous guy that he pardoned. he put him in charge of the white house. that's why they need those guard troops there. host: jean is calling from orange, texas, on the republican line. caller: good morning. the only coup going on in this country is the coup by the democratic party. if you look, they called trump nazi all along. all he have to do is look at the nazi playbook. they are taking over the media, they are stomping the constitution, they are trying to get rid of anybody that disagrees with them. they want the 14th amendment called on so they can remove duly elected republican

representatives from the house of representatives. i want the republicans -- the republican senators to remember one thing. they were elected. and remember the 75,000 -- the 75 million people who voted to put them in office. you might forget us when it comes time for this sharad -- charade and fake impeachment. but we won't forget you. host: let's go to eric, calling in from compton, california, on the democratic line. caller: thank you america. trump should be impeached, i would like to ask the people on the capital -- capitol, why did you come to congress to complain about state district

run elections? the congress did not manage elections. trump supporters, why would you go into congress, attack congress which cannot change a state election? the president lied to you. there was nothing that could come out of that other than araya it. -- other than araya it -- a riot. if you have a problem with elections you go to the state. congress could not fix nothing. that's what vice president pence told president trump. host: we would like to thank all of our callers and viewers on social media for being with us for that first segment. coming up, professor alan lichtman will join us to discuss the perks and benefits being offered to former u.s.

presidents. and later the center for presidential transition guest will be here to discuss the challenges facing the biden administration as it seeks to fill cabinet and other key positions. we will be right back. ♪ >> book tv on c-span two has top nonfiction books and authors every weekend. today at 4:00, the fbi assistant director for counterintelligence on standards and how this operates. at 5:15, an epidemiologist talks about her book, viral bs, medical myths and why we fall for them. and on sunday at 9:00 at -- on afterwards, a discussion on the book three wise men.

watch book tv this weekend on c-span two. >> american history tv on c-span three, exploring the people and events that told the american story. coming up at 2:00, the history makers with the conversation with giuliana richardson and juan williams. sunday at 2:00 eastern, the history maker series continues with two college presidents on the history of african-americans in education and the importance of hbcus. and on real america, in light of the recent attacks on the u.s. capitol several films on the united states government offering civic lessons on how

the government works. on 6:30, author nathaniel filbert talks about the heart of the sea, the tragedy of the 1820 sinking of a ship following his firm while attack. -- a firm while -- sperm whale attack. exploring the american story, watch american history tv this weekend on c-span three. washington journal continues. host: we are back with american university history professor, alan lichtman, who is here to talk about the benefits and perks that presidents get once they leave office. professor, good morning. guest: it's great to be with you. host: many of us know professor lichtman from the election

season where he correctly predicted the outcome of all of the u.s. presidential elections since 1984. but he's not here to talk about how you get into the white house, he's talking to us about what happens to presidents and the perks and benefits they get once they leave. so let's get into it. what type of benefits are presidents entitled to once they leave office? guest: until the former presidents act of 1958, the answer was nothing. there were no perks and benefits afforded once a president left the white house. andrew carter at one point offered to endow a pension fund for former president's but that never got off the ground. in 1958 there were a couple of former president to live like herbert hoover, who was a successful is this man did not need help, but harry truman was struggling, financially.

that was one motivation for the passage of the former president act, which was also amended during the obama administration. and a former president gets a lot of benefits. lifetime secret service protection for himself and herself as the spouse. a pension, which now amounts to about to $221,000 a year, no small amount of money for us ordinary folks. maybe a drop in the bucket for someone like donald trump. you get office space, assistance and reimbursement for certain kinds of travel. not personal travel, not travel for pleasure, but travel that

has to do with your semi official role as a former president of the united states. you can also decline secret service protection, it's a little tricky. you get a million dollars for security and travel year and $500,000 for one's spouse. young children up to 16 also get secret service protection. but donald trump did something extraordinary. as you would expect donald trump , he did not follow the letter of the law but ordered for six months before exiting the door, secret service protection for his four adult children. which will be extremely expensive because they have expensive travel. it could be there traveling to

trump properties, in which case, once again, taxpayer dollars are going into trump's pocket. he also did something which i think is never been done before, at least to my knowledge. i hate to state a negative, he ordered secret service protection for that time for three of his former aides. that is something we have not seen before, steven mnuchin, his former treasury secretary mark meadows, robert o'brien, his former national security advisor. so even out the door, trump a spending government money in an unprecedented way. just as he did going to his properties hundreds of times during his actual term in office. host: how did we get to having a former president act. what was the idea behind it?

we think of former president's being relatively well-off, why did congress think that they needed a former president act? guest: because of harry truman. he did not start rich, he was a former have a -- or. a man of extremely modest means but not destitute. he left no white house and moved into the old family home. he did eventually get a book deal which got him a fairly significant amount of money, but this was somebody who could really benefit from post presidential perks because unlike many presidents, he did not have the means to finance in any significant way his own post presidential life. so donald trump can thank democrat harry truman for the

perks he might or might not get as a former president. host: let remind our viewers that they can join in on the conversation. we are opening up our regular lines,47 -- for democrats (202) 748-8000. for republicans (202) 748-8001. for independents (202) 748-8002. keep in mind you can text at (202) 748-8003. we are always reading on social media on twitter and facebook. professor lichtman, exactly how do you calculate the pension of the u.s. president? president trump did not take a salary during his time in the white house, how will they calculate his pension? and pensions before this last administration? guest: it makes no difference whether or not he took or did

not take a salary. john f. kennedy did not take a salary either. that has nothing to do the calculation of the pension. it's based on the fraction of the present salary, whether the president takes that salary or not, trump i assume could decline the pension. i doubt he will because he's facing some real financial challenges as opposed presidents, including problems with his business, his brand, hundreds of millions of dollars in debt coming due. and the pension i believe now is about $220,000. that's a substantial pension for former president. host: doesn't matter how the president leaves office? when they get those perks? for example president nixon resigned, did he get the same

perks as the other presidents? or do you have to leave the presidency having not decided to run for reelection or being defeated or serving two terms? guest: under the strict letter of the law, you get the pension after leaving the white house except in the singular circumstance of having been removed under impeachment. which raises the extremely interesting question for donald trump. apparently, according to recent news reports, he's going to be tried in the senate on the houses is a singular article of impeachment, incitement and insurrection getting on february 9. now, if he's acquitted, there's no issue that he gets all of the perks of his post-presidency.

but there's an interesting legal question, i'm not a lawyer, so take it for what it's worth, but there's an interesting legal question as to what happens if he gets convicted? does he lose his post presidential perks? technically, according to the law, probably not, because the law says removed by impeachment. donald trump, even if he's convicted in february, would not have been removed by impeachment, because the trial took place after he already left office. but my understanding of the law is that it might violate the intent of the law. it's too technical, the intent of the law will certainly to say if you are a disgraced president found guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, you certainly do not deserve a pension and all

the other perks. but that might have to be hashed out in the courts in the unlikely event that trump convicted by the senate. which is a long shot. presuming all senators vote it would take 17 republicans to reach the two thirds majority necessary for conviction. at least at the moment that seems unlikely. host: doesn't matter how much money former presidents can make after they leave office? we know that a lot of the former, at least in my area get these big book deals and speaking tours and can make millions on their own without needing presidential perks. does that go into the calculation at all? when it comes to defining their pension and perks? guest: not on my reading of the law. a former president can make as

much money as they can through lectures, book deals, or in trump's case, the operation of his is an as is. remember, he did not invest himself from 500 businesses. not all of them active, under the trump organization. he still owes those businesses -- owns those businesses, he can still operate them and make money from those businesses. as i read the law, in no way is that affecting his post presidential perks. host: let's let some viewers join in on this conversation. let's start with cletus, from genoa, west virginia on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i believe he should be impeached and not have any benefits. i'd like to see one other thing,

-- host: oh turn your tv down. but please keep going. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead. caller: he ought to be impeached, and not get any benefits at all, he should be prosecuted for everything done in every state, and i feel sorry for a lot of people who believed his lies and are now facing prison terms. guest: cletus raises an interesting point about post-presidency. whether or not a president can be indicted for prime during his or her term is an unsettled question. there is guidance in the u.s. department of justice which says a president cannot be indicted for crime or prosecuted or tried while in office. that's a guideline.

there was no definitive supreme court pronouncement on that because no president has ever been indicted while serving. but it is certainly my understanding that once a president has left office, a president certainly could be indicted for crimes committed while in office and before he entered office provided the statute of limitations has not run. a president could be indicted for federal crime and state crime. we know that's a possibility for former president trump, who apparently is being investigated by federal prosecutors and for sure by prosecutors in the state of new york. host: we have a question from one of our social media followers. we have touched on the little bit but i want you to go back to

it. the person wants to know, doesn't impeached president still receive the perks and benefits. so we know president trump was impeached, but never convicted. so let's take it both ways. as an impeached president, does he get the benefits? but if the future president is impeached and convicted, what happens to the benefits? guest: impeachment is like a charge in a regular criminal case. it's not a conviction. a president like clinton who was impeached, but not convicted under the law is still entitled to all of the perks because the law says as a former president you are entitled to the perks except when you are removed by impeachment. you are only removed if you are

convicted in a senate trial and there is a separate vote on removal once you are convicted. that requires only -- excuse me, there would be a separate vote on if you could serve again and if you could ever be in a federal office again. that's another perk you would lose if you were convicted and removed and the vote came to say you could not hold a federal office again. that element of the constitution has never been put in play for a president because no president has been convicted. it has been put in play for judges who were federal officials who are also subject to impeachment. but as i explained, there is an ambiguous situation with respect to a possible conviction, which is unlikely for former president trump. the law does not contemplate

what would happen if you are tried and convicted for high crimes and misdemeanors after you have left office because the letter of the law says you don't get your perks if you are removed from the presidency. but technically, even if trump was convicted. that conviction would not remove him because he's already left the presidency at the expiration of his term, a few days ago on january 20. but there is at least an argument that the intent of congress was that a president who was convicted of high crimes and misdemeanors should not be entitled to the perks of the post-presidency. but the framers did not seem to have contemplated a situation which is obviously never occurred before, and that's a

president to his tried after leaving office. host: let me get some clarification let's assume that the senate does convict former president trump of impeachment. does that automatically ban him from running for office again for a federal position? or do they have to take another step to keep him from running for office? or is it automatic? guest: if not automatic, they would have to take a second vote to bar him from ever holding federal office, which obviously needs he could not run again for president. and unlike the vote for conviction, which requires a two thirds vote, that second vote only requires a majority of the senate.

it is highly likely that were donald trump to be convicted of the high crimes and misdemeanors of incitement and insurrection that the senate would also go ahead and bar him for life from holding federal office. as i mentioned, that is obviously never been applied to a presidential trial because no president has been convicted. but it has applied to judges convicted in a senate trial. judges are subject to the same constitutional impeachment and trial process as presidents with a few exceptions, such as uniquely in a presidential trial, the chief justice presides. it's a question as to whether or not in this case, because trump is no longer in office, whether or not chief justice john roberts will preside, and if not, who will? host: let's talk to mike,

calling from beaverton, oregon, on the republican line. caller: good morning. my question is, it seems to me that things seem to have shifted lately from american justice to english? we seem to be running a parliamentary system here. if the house is the majority of the opposition, than the opposition can get the person outcome is that the new policy now? guest: no no, the house cannot get the president out. all the house can do is charge the president with a high crime and misdemeanor who votes on

articles of impeachment. that is not the president out. you then after impeachment have a trial in the senate and it requires a two thirds vote of those senators voting to get the president out. so we don't have a parliamentary system read it's a very high bar that has never been reached to actually out a president. host: you brought a couple of seconds ago and i like to delve into. the entire impeachment system seems to have been set up for active presidents holding office . we are dealing with an impeachment process with a former president, does that mean that all of the constitutional safeguards in the system are still in place? like the chief justice is supposed to oversee the trial, you have these two votes, one to

convict and want to prevent from holding office, or all of those parts of the impeachment system still in play now that we are dealing with a former president being on trial instead of the current president? guest: there is precedent for former officials being tried for impeachment, ulysses s grant had a secretary of war in the 1870's who was caught up in a scandal in the grant administration. even though he had resigned, he was still impeached and tried by the senate when he was no longer in office. all of the same procedures and safeguards and impeachment trial took place in the case of the former secretary of war was acquitted, so there was no issue and so there was no issue of whether he should be barred from

ever again holding federal office. if trump has tried all of the usual safeguards of impeachment trial, this would be in place. and the only issue that might -- and we don't know the resolution of this would be who might preside over the trial. host: if chief justice job -- if the chief justice decides he does not want to be in charge, who does that fall to? guest: the senate would have to decide, and who is the president of the senate? kamala harris. i don't get would be appropriate for her to preside, but it would present a thorny legal and constitutional question. i certainly hope the chief justice job -- roberts decides to preside or we might be facing a big mess. host: let's go back to the phone

lines, in kentucky on the independent line, brat, good morning. caller: good morning to you -- brad, good morning. caller: good morning to you. i think this is being used to overall hurt american democracy. it's pretty ridiculous to impeach trump now that he's gone . we go back and look at clinton, we know more about him and his relationship with epstein. and bush and the torture used under his administration. barack obama used drones to kill an american citizen extra judicially. if we look at nancy pelosi, the last week she tried to use the 25th amendment to upset the order of power. she tried to talk to millie to get the nuclear codes out of

trump's hands, that's the sitting president. she told 60 minutes that she had no idea what russia had on the president two years after the mueller report which said that there was nothing that russia had. and we just learned last night that john roberts said that she wanted the machine guns mounted during the inauguration. so i would like the professor to speak to if he so believes, that this is being used -- this is the first time we have ever had it go back -- this would turn us into the banana republic where we prosecute former administrations and persecute -- if you like to speak to this. i think it's a bad step in this is what they are trying to do to us. guest: i'm not a comment -- you called -- called on the

independent line but gave us a bunch of republican talking winds which i will not comment on. but i will say this, democrats in the house did not choose the timing on this impeachment. i will repeat, the democrats in the house did not choose the timing of this impeachment. it was donald trump who triggered the timing of the impeachment with his own actions. donald trump likes to deflect and distract and doesn't take responsibility for anything, but even mitch mcconnell, the most loyal republican i have observed in my many years of observing politics agreed that trump had committed impeachable offense in inciting a riot. the timing of the result of trump's actions, not the result of the decisions of anyone else. host: you talked about this

earlier in our conversations, you watched the post story reported that president trump had extended post presidential secret service protection to his four adult children and two spouses and three key officials leaving government service. none of whom would have been entitled to secret service text and. can the secret service protected children and such have -- have this protections rescinded? if so, how? guest: that's an interesting question. we are in uncharted territory and i am not a lawyer so i cannot give you a legal opinion. i don't think congress is going to pass a resolution to rescind that. and i don't think president biden is going to try to rescind it by executive order.

trump did it by executive order so conceivably president biden could undo it by executive order but i don't think that's can it be the case. but reach into your pocket because you are paying for this. and the secret service for trump's children to travel a lot is going to be incredibly expensive. even in the six-month period it will amount to millions of dollars. host: let's talk to steve, in ohio, on the republican line on -- on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. to move the conversation to the perk side, when the professor mentioned harry truman and that was the initiation of the presidential perk, the president is a powerful position and all.

and it might be nice that they were thinking of harry and his need to get some additional benefits based on need for him. presidents who are obviously rich and do not need to be given even the salary, maybe if the perks could be based on need rather than a formulaic thing up with the president earns -- and if they do not take the money, why should they have a pension? but the one thing rather than this impeachment stuff i want to go back to that also gets to the egregious behavior over the years is, well, if you want the perks, give us your tax returns. we want to know what you earned to run for president.

trump was the one that did not ever disclose his tax returns. i would think they should require that presidential candidates disclose their tax returns and if they do so, you know what they need in terms of support beyond the security support and the pension could be calculated based on need. host: go ahead and respond, professor lichtman. guest: there is obviously some justice in what steve said. having taxpayer go to former presidents, as rich as both bush and donald trump, but that gets into very murky and complicated territory. it would be a bit demeaning, you know, to try to assess the need of a former president. it is just too much and too

complicated. we have this multitrillion dollar budget and we are talking a couple hundred thousand dollars. it is never going to happen. as far as the other point, i am a big exponent of transparency in government and i absolutely agree. maybe we shouldn't tie it to pensions or perks, but i think it would be great to have a law requiring, to be on the ballot, you have to release your tax returns. host: here is a question i have not run across yet and i want to bring it to you because i'm also interested. professor lichtman, who pays for presidential libraries? from design and construction to keeping the doors open. is there any benefit to the living president or heirs. is that a presidential perk or something completely different? guest: that is not in the former presidents act.

some raise private money for the building, maintenance of their presidential libraries. donald trump, of course, always talks about this in grandiose terms and talked about raising $2 billion in florida alone for his presidential library. we will wait and see whether that comes into play. presidential libraries are relatively recent to my recollection. the first was the herbert hoover library. a rather modest one in iowa. i did some research there and it was quite a trip but it is a terrific library. host: one of the perks they do get is office space and funding. can you discuss for us the office expenses that former presidents get? what is the point of getting ex-pence for an -- getting

expense for an office? guest: they should be provided office space and staff assistance to carry out functions. they are not fully private persons. they are semiprivate, semi-official after leaving office. some presidents have been tasked with official duties voluntarily. herbert hoover for example under truman, even though he was republican and truman was a democrat, ran the hoover commission on the organization of the federal government. that was before office space was granted. although hoover was plenty rich

enough to take care of himself. by the way the president's adult children, eric, ivanka, and don junior are rich enough to provide their own security. host: if you are curious to know what the presidents are spending on office space, roll call found this information from congress.gov. we are paying $542,000 for obama's office, $513,000 for bill clinton's office, $500,00's dallas office. guest: they can have offices anywhere they want. host: former presidents can choose to put them anywhere, i

assume, in the united states they want? guest: that is correct. president trump could have his office in florida presuming he gets the benefits. which i think is likely. host: let's go back to the phone lines and go to steve calling from wake forest, north carolina on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. donald trump should not be removed from office. he is already out of office. he should not be impeached. john roberts probably will not even show up especially from that cnn not see you have -- n azi you have -- host: we are going to cut that off right there. next up we have nancy.

caller: i'm glad you cut that guy off. the guy from kentucky talked about president clinton. the president not being able to be indicted, you said it was a guideline? i heard it was a memo. is that the same thing? guest: same thing. caller: another quick thing is president carter, does he have office space? but my main point is everyone says trump did not take a salary. i think the salary is $40,000 per year? guest: about that. caller: i saw $151 million of taxpayer money was spent to send him to the golf course. if you take the $400,000 -- $151

million and divided by $400,000, he is a con man. he has ripped the taxpayers off for millions. as far as his children, ivanka and jared, in one year they made $82 million sitting down the hall. i am a retired federal worker and i worked really hard, 21.5 years, and when i was eligible for social security at 62 somehow congress -- and i do not know when it happened -- but they decided because i was getting social security, my pension went from $80,000 to $10,000 -- $18,000 to $10,000.

host: go ahead and respond before we run out of time. guest: the caller is right. a letter money was poured into trump properties through -- a lot of money was poured into trump properties through social security. let me make it clear. what he did was not illegal. you may not like what he did and that is your opinion, and a lot of people have that opinion, but he did not break the law even with 300 golfing trips to his property. if he goes to his properties or his children go to his properties and money comes in from secret service and taxpayers, that is not illegal. as the law was amended under the

obama administration, one thing the president would not lose, even if he was convicted after leaving office, would be secret service protection. host: we spent a lot of time talking about the benefits former presidents get. but before you go, are there any benefits for former vice presidents? are there any benefits specifically for former first ladies? guest: former first ladies get secret service protection and former vice presidents. get secret service protection as well. if a president declines secret service protection, will get $1 million and the former first lady would get $500,000. host: let's see if we can squeeze in a couple more quick calls. gloria is from maryland on the democratic line.

caller: good morning. god bless america and god bless c-span. i appreciate this discussion. i am an 83-year-old, totally blind gospel preacher who is also an activist. i probably look at this from a slightly different point of view. trump asked a long time ago -- i am also black -- what do you have to lose? i lost three children, a house, and, for a brief time, my voice. but i want to point this out, america. trump is going to need his civil service protection because apparently those crooked people who followed him did not realize -- trump is not normal. i will not go into that.

i am a pretty well-educated counselor though. we should learn from this disaster. go back to the days when character mattered. america put into office -- not by all those line numbers trump claims. 2016 he lost the popular vote. mitch malarkey was lying. host: quickly respond before we run out of time. guest: i think it is quite right and proper, particularly in this perilous age, that every former president gets secret service protection. i support that part of the law that would say even if trump got convicted -- very unlikely -- he should still be entitled to secret service protection. host: do we have any idea at this point if there is any move

to change any of the presidential perks? is that something a sitting president would have to do or would it have to be a new law passed by congress? guest: it would not necessarily have to be a brand-new law. but the former presidents act is an act of congress. it cannot be changed unilaterally by a president. you would not have to have a new law, but you could have amendments like you had during the obama administration. and you could have congress and the president sign an amendment that could deal with the situation of what would happen if a president was tried and convicted after the president left office. again, something that was not contemplated at the time the former presidents act was written or amended. host: let's see we can squeeze in one more person.

that will be chris from silver spring, maryland on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. it appears the wrong guy is being impeached. there are no immaculate elections, but there are videos attesting to fraud. i think there was mass dereliction of duty at all levels. urban areas, their votes were appropriated by fake votes. people had all sorts of time to plan to disrupt the event. thank you. guest: all of those claims made were litigated in the courts. they were rejected you nana unanimously by judges, many of whom were appointed by

donald trump himself. trump had the opportunity, as he should in our system, to make legal challenges and, through the normal course of events, that was rejected. his own attorney general, his own chief of elections security, both said there was no widespread fraud as did republican and democratic local officials in every state. the republican officials in the state of georgia did not rig the election for joe biden. on those same ballots in lots of states republicans did extremely well. it is time to put the bed this idea that this was a stolen election. our system dealt with it and our system unanimously rejected it. host: we would like to thank allan lichtman, distinct

professor of history at american university. by the way, author of a new book out this january "repeal the second amendment: the case for a safer america." professor lichtman, thank you for your time this morning. guest: take care. my pleasure. host: coming up next, we will turn to the center for presidential transitions max stier who will be here to discuss the challenges facing the biden administration as it seeks to fill cabin and other key positions. stick with us. we will be right back. ♪ announcer: sunday night on cumin day, a discussion about the -- q and a a discussion about the rollout of the people the over vaccine with elaina conis. >> once the vaccine was approved, and it was approved in just a few hours after the test

results came out, the nation had to scramble to ensure that everyone who needed the vaccine would get access to that vaccine. they were in the works at least a year before it was approved for market. announcer: the history and development of the pulley vaccine sunday night at 8:00 eastern on q and a. announcer: i did nominees -- biden nominees will be on capitol hill tuesday. -- dennis mcdonough testifies before the senate veterans affairs committee. watch the confirmation hearings live on c-span, ondemand at c-span.org, or listen on the

c-span radio app. ♪ announcer: you are watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government. c-span was created by america's cable television companies in 1979. today we are brought to you by these companies, who provide c-span2 viewers as a public service. ♪ announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with max stier, president and ceo of the center for presidential transition. he is with us this morning to talk about what the biden administration will be doing develop president biden's cabinet and the agency workforce. max, good morning. guest: good morning. host: first of all, let's get into with the biden administration faces. on screen are going to see the biden political appointee

tracker, which is done by our public service, that biden has picked 51 nominees to fill key roles so far. only 2 have been confirmed by the senate. max, what does president biden face when it comes to filling his key cabinet rules? guest: it is a big task and as you say the biden team is ahead of the curve in the historical term. they have got over 50 nominations they have made in the next highest administration in terms of having the outside the gate was the obama administration at 42. that is just nomination, not confirmation. there are over 1200 positions that the incoming administration has to fill that are senate confirmed. 4000 total appointees of those

1250 that require senate confirmation. president biden currently only has 2 people actually confirmed, the director for national intelligence and the secretary of defense. they have a long way to go while the biden team has nominated more. they are still in a position where they are not leading on the confirmations. frankly, the senate is a tricky place right now. in ordinary times -- [indiscernible] they are not sure how to operate with the 50-50 tie including the impeachment trial coming up and legislation that is fundamental to our health and safety and responding to the epidemic. this is an extraordinary time.

the real challenge to the biden team would be to multitasking, getting a lot done at the same time. in order to do that well they the people in place. they have a long way to go on the senate confirmed side. where they have more control is around the non-senate additions. that is a good thing, but it is not everything. they have got more to do. host: you said earlier the biden administration was a little ahead of the curve. i want to play a little bit from senate majority leader chuck schumer who came to the floor of the senate and talked about his concerns about the rate of confirmation for president biden's nominees. [video clip] >> the senate confirmed to several national security nominees for the incoming administration rang the first few days. even as power changes hands from one administration to the other the work of keeping our nation

safe must not be paused or be disrupted. foreign adversaries will seek to explore this transition and we cannot allow america's military intelligence and national security policy to be disrupted by staffing delays. in 2017, president trump had his defense secretary and secretary of homeland security in place on inauguration day. president biden deserves his national security team in place as soon as possible. as well as key officials in charge of responding to the health and economic crisis. with the cooperation of our republican colleagues we can and should confirm the secretaries of defense, homeland security, and treasury without much delay. host: where are we when it comes to appointments? are things running as normal?

are they ahead, are they behind? how can we judge it and where are we? guest: sure. there are two answers to that question. are we running normally and what is it we need? normally it has been slow. just to give context i mentioned earlier there are 1250 thereabouts senate confirmed additions the president has to fill. the first hundred days, which is a pretty typical marker to talk about your first work in the administration, the high watermark in any administration has been the obama administration. of those 1250 the obama administration had gone in 69. the metaphor is like the start of the super bowl and you have your center and quarterback of the field and nobody else. that is the high watermark. everyone else is in last. the trump administration had 28

in the first 100 days. right now the biden team has been working hard. they have prepared early. they were the best organized pre-inauguration transition effort. that is what we discussed earlier. they have over 50 nominations, but it takes two to tango. they have to nominate folks in the senate has to exercise divisive consent and give us a thumbs up or thumbs down to the nominees. that is not happening very fast. it is happening slower than in the historical norm. the norm is too slow anyway. this is a big issue and i agree with the statement you played from senator schumer. we have got such big problems -- i would only stand on the list senator schumer gave in critical people. you need your national security

folks, yes your treasury secretary, but honestly you need your health and human services secretary. that is the focus of the pandemic response activity. you need your hud secretary. all these people are performing important functions that are both responsive to the needs of the pandemic and beyond. there should be a huge priority and we need to see consistent change. part of the problem is even if you do everything right, the senate is such a small part that you cannot move 1250 people through in real time. host: who is in charge of these agencies now while the biden administration waits for its political pix to run the agencies? who is in charge? who is running the government? guest: in each of those agencies

the biden team has chosen somebody to serve as the acting head of that entity or agency. in most instances, not all, it is a career professional who has been picked by the biden team to lead until the senate confirmed individual can come into play. these are people who have deep knowledge about the organization, who are highly qualified, and who are terrific in what they can do. the problem though is they are the proverbial substitute teacher. they may be an amazing educator, but the challenges everybody knows they are temporary. therefore they do not have the same authority as perceived by others or themselves as the president's pick confirmed by the senate. our government is operating. it is not as if nothing is going on. but again, someone in acting position is not full the equipped to deal with the

long-term harder problems that we face across-the-board. host: if you are interested in who is serving in those acting capacities, there is a list available on whitehouse.gov of the agencies and the person put in charge in acting capacity by the biden administration. max, are these acting directors term limited in any way? can they only serve a certain amount of time before a permanent person is put at the top, or are they there until someone is confirmed by the senate? guest: that is a good question. in most instances there is a law that congress passed that governs the issue around vacancies when you do not have a confirmed individual in place. the statute provides for a time limit that someone can serve in acting capacity.

although, when it is the secretary of the agency there is no other recourse. the reality is, you know, the biden team has actually nominated people for all those positions and once they have nominated someone the clock stops anyway. it is now incumbent upon the senate for those top positions, secretaries or agency heads. for the other positions, the deputy secretaries, assistant secretaries, and the list goes on, a few of those have been nominated by the biden team. there are many more that need to be nominated and the senate needs to act on all of them. it is really -- again, to change metaphors -- the two lane country highway and there is a traffic jam. ultimately, to your question, there will be someone in acting role as long as the biden team has nominated someone -- they

have done their job. they can serve in acting capacity. if no one has been nominated, it is a different story and there is a time limit for an individual to serve in acting serve in an active capacity. at the front-end of the administration, that should provide even longer time someone can serve in any acting role. that needs to be updated. the trump administration played a lot of games with it and avoided having the senate confirm leaders. there were over 130 top additions where they never even nominated every -- anybody over the course of their four years. we have a lot of cleanup to do. hopefully a lot of learning from challenges that came up in the last administration. the fundamental issue is that this is all about solving big problems we face, whether it is the pandemic, the cyber attack,

global warming, you name it, there is a huge diverse set of massive problems our government is responsible for addressing, and leaders in those agencies matter in terms of the effectiveness of the response. so we should care, and we need to see who has bid -- who fits in the rules we have right now, and we need to see changing the rules. because it is so hard to get that many people put in place quickly. and time matters here. we don't have the luxury of a year weight. the game is going to be over by then. host: let me remind our viewers they can take part in this conversation. let's open up regular lines meaning democrats can called (202) 748-8000. republicans, your line is (202) 748-8001. independence, you can call -- independents, you can call (202)

748-8002. keep in mind, you can always text us at (202) 748-8003. we are always reading on social media, on twitter @cspanwj and on facebook, facebook.com/cspan. we've already talked about the senate is split 50-50 with the tie-breaking vote coming from vice president kamala harris. i want to ask you a later about how that makes a difference -- ask you later about how that makes a difference, or does it make a difference with the senate so closely split when it comes to biden's choices to run the government. first, i want to show you something that florida republican senator rick scott said when he announced he is going to oppose the nomination of treasury secretary nominee janet yellen. here is a portion of what senator rick scott said thursday. >> based on what i'm concerned, -- i have heard, i am concerned

undisturbed. -- and disturbed. when i ran for the senate, i did so to fix washington's broken ways of doing things. we have to address washington's unconscionable need to waste tax dollars on things that do not actually help. or even hurt american families, especially working families and those on fixed income. i will never give up this fight. in 2018, -- said if i had a magic wand, i would raise taxes. we know that is not the real answer to solving our debt issue, it is just a lazy liberal approach. it's time to get value out of every dollar we spend and make hard choices to ensure a strong and economic future for our nation. i cannot support the nomination of a candidate that promotes joe biden policies to mortgage our kids and grandkids futures with irresponsible and shortsighted taxes and spending. host: so those are the types of objections some of president

biden's nominees are getting. how much of a difference doesn't make that the senate is so closely divided with only one vote, the vote of the vice president, able to swing it one way or the other? guest: it makes a huge difference. primarily, he has to look at the moment right now. the senate is at loggerhead because senators mcconnell and schumer have to come to an agreement about how to organize even, what the rules of the game will be for them, given this 50/50 split. a lot of this is simply not happening because of that. this is a tricky situation, and the truth again is that the senate is a bottleneck. it only operates with some level of efficiency if there is comedy , agreement amongst the senators to move things forward

collectively. anything else takes a lot of time. time is what they do not have. they have so many different things that need to happen, that anything that absorbs additional time means there's a lot of things that do not get done. if you listen to senator scott, i think there are important words that he had to say, but it represents a different perspective on even the role of the senate, in terms of reviewing and -- or the biden consent rule of reviewing the president's nominations. what i heard him say was he can't deport secker -- support separate designee yelling because she supports the policies -- designee janet yellen because she supports the policies of the president. the president is given the

prerogative in choosing the people that they want to help him or her pursue the policies that they desired, and the review was around their capability, whether they were in fact capable and appropriate figures to be leading the large organizations, rather than going after them around supporting the president's policies. presumably a president will always pick people that support his or her policies. it is a different standard. it's a standard of saying, i will keep resisting the president's policies by slowing down their ability to bring in their leadership team, rather than saying i will be reviewing those nominations on the basis of whether they are qualified for the position. that is a big difference, attacking him on the policy versus qualification. when you are talking about a president's cabinet nominations,

that becomes a problem if it will be a fight over everyone of them. ultimately, this is what has led to many changes in the rules in the senate that limit the ability of the minority to prevent people from coming through. we can still eat up more time, and time is not everything, it is a lot for the u.s. senate, given all they have to do. host: let's let some of our viewers join in on this conversation. we start with wilbert from pennsylvania on the democratic line. wilbert, good morning. caller: good morning. jesse, first i have a question and a statement. when they were attacking the u.s. capitol, i used to work on both sides of the houses of the u.s. senate, and u.s. house, so every space they were in, i knew exactly where they were at. i felt so sad for the police officer on capitol hill, and i

think all of them need to be tried and given 20 years or more. my question is, i hope the democrats have some backbone and push that nuclear option through the u.s. senate, and stop playing with the republicans. they do not want to pass anything for the american people. what the democrats voted for the president, the first two years, use the nuclear option and give mitch mcconnell and the desk get the republicans to stand up for their vote and go back to their district. either you are for the american people or are not. host: when it come -- one of the rules when it comes to filibusters and presidential nominees? guest: those rules have changed. when it comes to the confirmation process itself, you can no longer filibuster the president's nominations. you can slow it down, but even

those rules were changed so there is a much more limited time you can do that. the filibuster is still available for run-of-the-mill legislation, most legislation unless it is part of a special process called the budget reconciliation process, but we've got a very different system now, the senate. there has been an erosion over recent times of the ability of the minority to stop the action of the majority, but it is still the case that the minority can take up a bunch of time, and time is something that has a real cost to the ability to get other business done. this is a heart issue and any issue that -- an issue that is central to the lack of agreement between senators mcconnell and schumer organizing this next congress in the senate.

as to whether or not the filibuster is going to be -- removing the filibuster for legislation would be taken off of the table. it is hard to know. this has been a road of each side taking away more and more of the traditional rules that protected the minorities ability -- minority's ability to speak up and stop things. these are tricky issues. in my view, as i said earlier, one of the ways to deal with it is to remove some of the business that is of lesser importance to the senate docket. there are lots of positions that are part-time boards and other less significant leadership positions in government that still require senate confirmation. what ends up happening is it never happens. where if you just remove the senate confirmation requirement, you would make it easier for the senate to focus on what is truly

important, and enable more of these leadership jobs to get built faster. in this arena, my suggested solution, you don't have to test a filibuster because it is not relevant to this conversation, but to reduce the overall positions by a significant amount. for the senators, they think this gives them more power, but it does not really, if these positions wind up being filled by people that can never get to the confirmation question to begin with, or presidents try to do an end run to having more acting folks. in this area, i think that would be a more successful approach. host: so senators are not able to filibuster, but talk a little bit about a hold. there is a story in the hills newspaper about senator josh hawley putting on hold a cabinet nominee for president joe biden.

let me read a couple prayer graphs -- paragraphs. josh hawley announced on tuesday he would place a hold on alejandra mail to us -- alejandro mayorkas. holly, who has come under fire recently amid allegations, played a role in the capitol riot this month, made the announcement hours after the senate committee on homeland security and government wrapped its meeting. move delays the nomination of a post democrats argued is critical to fill immediately to protect national security. tell us about this hold. what is a hold, and what does that do to a nomination? guest: i should start by saying i am no expert on procedure. i have some familiarity, but i want to make sure i am careful about being clear that we are on uncertain turf here.

as i understand it, it is not permanent in the sense i can prevent ultimately the confirmation of mr. may arcus -- mayorkas. there's an additional burden that requires the senate to address before they can get someone confirmed. in this instance, i think senator hawley is coming up the works with the ability of moving mr. mayorkas as the defense secretary. it's important to remember any defense agency, the department of homeland security has the most, i think, challenging leadership issues. at the back end, for almost all of the trump administration,

there were fewer confirmed leaders at the department of homeland security with percentages filled more than any other agency. even more concerning was there was more turnover at the top and had more secretaries at dhs then i think any other cabinet agency, and there were multiple courts and the gao that found the leadership, the acting leadership at the department of homeland security was not legally there, that they had come into office without real authority, because they had followed the lines of succession , and therefore, their actions or decisions may not have had legal weight. so one, the department of homeland security is a critical element of our government, especially these days.

whether it is the pandemic or having fema play leadership role by being part of the department of homeland security, or issues around the cyberattack. there was significant cyber intrusion. i think it is the pearl harbor of our day, really critical and i think not receiving enough attention, or issues around immigration. the department of homeland security plays a fundamental role in our government in many many different respects. so having leadership there is absolutely vital and the gap in leadership that has existed there for so much of the trump administration creates even more problems. if you look at employee morale at the department of homeland security, the lowest of all of the large agencies in the government. there is a lot of work that needs to be done. i think it is a real problem not

to have a firm leadership in place immediately at the department of homeland security, and i think it is incumbent, in terms of all priorities, there is lots that needs to get done. it's hard to believe any agency leadership is more important right now. it is at the top with maybe a couple other examples, but it is critical to get that done, and it is normally the case that, especially at the front end of the administration, that a president has a little bit of a honeymoon and people at the senate are giving the president the benefit of the debt dashed out. getting your leadership team in place is so fundamental. to come back to the original point, it doesn't stop it from happening, it slows it down, and that slowing down can come at a real cost. i don't think we are going to want to pay. host: speaking of the

confirmation process, you can watch a lot of this here on c-span. coming up later on today, pete buttigieg, nominated to be the transportation secretary, will discuss the transportation goals of the biden administration during the winter meeting. you will find the coverage beginning live today at noon eastern on c-span, c-span.org it, and c-span radio. actual confirmation, you will be able to watch part of the confirmation hearing later on of the senate energy and natural resources committee. they will hold a confirmation hearing for former mr. -- michigan governor -- a former michigan governor coming up on wednesday. 9:30 a.m. time, you can watch that confirmation hearing for energy secretary come alive here on c-span, c-span.org, and

always on the free c-span radio app. max, we have a question from one of our social media followers. this person says, isn't it just political bluster that confirmations hinder presidents? isn't it true presidents can appoint cabinet members for 30 days? is that true, max? guest: so it is not. there is a provision that would enable the president to bring in their cabinet secretary in essence as an advisor into the agency, but that does not put them in the position of the cabinet secretary. it does not enable them to be the decision-maker across the agency. so this matters, absolutely. it is a tough thing. it's not like you will be able to say, these people got hurt in

this way specifically because of the delay here. but there is no doubt, we all know how many troubles we face as a nation here, and there is no doubt the ability of the government can be able to respond as fast as possible to address the issues if not having the confirmed leadership in place. right now, we are talking about the top person. there is no, literally, hundreds of other confirmed people that can come in. if you start so slow at the beginning, imagine it will -- imagine how long it will take when you get to the assistant secretaries and others that are a couple ayers down in the organization. this is not a good start. even the fact you have other things like the impeachment trial underway, it should be an issue of real concern. we saw this with the last administration. they were extremely slow, the

slowest of any prior administration in nominating, had the most turnover, and we saw a lot of dysfunction from the government. a significant amount was caused by the inability to have good leaders in place on a permanent basis to run the government. sometimes, it may feel like inside baseball. it's a bunch of partisan fighting, whatever, and that is not it. what this is about is making sure our taxpayer dollars that go to trying to keep us safe, healthy, and address all of the myriad of challenges we face in the world, if they are used well and the organizations are run to the best of their ability, to help the american people, we have an incredible service. but leadership matters, and permanent leaders matter. if we want to solve our

problems, compete effectively against china and the rest of the world, we need a government operating at its best, and that requires great people in place, working well together, and working well with the workforce. again, right now, and in the long race, the biden team has started strong and the senate process requires the administration and senate to work together to get the government that we really want and deserve. host: let's take some more phone calls. for we do, i want to put an emphasis on the point max made. let's look at the senate confirmations by the first 100 days. that 100 day period. you can see slow down max was talking about for president trump. in his first 100 days, president george w. bush was able to get 202 people confirmed by the senate. for his first one hundred days, president obama got 218 people

confirmed by the senate. in his first 100 days, president trump was only able to get to 90 people nominated and confirmed by the senate. let's see if we can get a couple more calls in before the end of the segment. this color is from syracuse, new york on the republican the line. ray, good morning. caller: i had a question for you , and get you a little out of the norm, but sometimes things don't happen the way you think they are. can you tell me who currently is in command of our own armed forces of the united states? guest: so we have civilian control. it is the secretary of defense, and we have a confirmed secretary of defense, so that is where the ultimate control is. again, i think the defense department is an important

example of the turmoil that really has to be addressed. it was unique, never have been done before, that a secretary of defense was fired between the period of the election and outgoing president. there has been a lot of turmoil there. the defense department in particular was one of the few places where there was not good collaboration with the incoming biden administration. so they were not getting -- the biden team was not getting all of the information they needed to get up and ready. it was the first time since 1980 nine an incoming president did not have their secretary of defense confirmed on day one, day three is not a huge delay, but at the moment, the defense department has a secretary of defense and a lot of other people that's now have to be

confirmed, but you have the person at the top who knows the issues and the organization, so he's going to have his work cut out for him. but he is at least in seat. host: tell me the difference between a civilian leader inside of a government agency and a political appointee. what is the difference between those two positions that one has to be confirmed by the senate and the other one is a permanent employee, and as a part of the question as well, how many of the current -- the past administrations, how many of the trump administration appointees will get to stay in their jobs in the federal government, and how many get replaced when a new administration comes in? guest: thank you for asking that. it is a really important question, and i will roll back the clock to the 1880's to give you the answer.

in 1883, president garfield was assassinated by a disappointed jobs -- in the 1880's, the system we had in the government was if you won the presidency, you were the king. you could give away jobs to your political friends, could give them away as political patronage to everybody. that all changed when president garfield was assassinated, because there was a realization, a political realization that that was no way to run our government, and what we needed was a government in which the people who were there to serve the public were there because they were the best person for the job, rather than because they were someone that was going to be a political ally of the party that was the president.

that put us on a road of professionalizing our government, and that is the basis of the career civil servants. if you are a career silver servant -- silver servant -- civil servant, you have to prove you are there for the job and are there on the base of your merit and not because a political affiliation. that is the norm for most federal workers. there are about 2 million civilian professionals who fall within the category. that number seems like a lot, but actually, it is the same number of people we had in 1960. 85% of them are in washington dc. so people talk about sometimes a government being washington, d.c., and most federal employees are not in washington dc but spread out across the country. that is a civil servant that is supposed to be there because they have proven they are best in class, that they compete for the job, and are there because

of their merit. on top of that, there are 4000 political appointees that are of the prior political patronage system. there, the idea is when the president comes in, they are able to make these appointments not based on merit but because they want that individual. a good president is going to try to collect people that have good merit, but others, are they supporters of you? do they have the same political affiliation? the logic is that you need more than just one person to make sure the whole of government is following your policies. invite view -- in my view, there are too many and we should have fewer. that number has grown over time. you asked about the senate confirmed. of the 4000, 12 hundred require senate confirmation. there is a provision in the constitution that gives the

senate the power, in essence, to review the decision of the president to appoints the most senior people. and the most senior people list has also grown. it is not required everyone on the list be on the list, but the senate then has purview over 1250 of those jobs, thereabouts. again, in my view, no -- not only do we have too many political appointees but we have too many that require confirmation. we would improve the system by removing both. in the last administration, there were concerns about wasn't -- whether president trump put more of the civil servants into but looks like political appointments. just yesterday, president biden revoked the executive order president trump at issued that might have done so. to president biden's credit, he appears to recognize the value

of the civil service, and i saw a video recently that he did talking about how different parts of the government are important, and they are really the heart and soul of the government. dr. fauci is a career civil servant. when we talk about career civil servants, we talk about people like him, who have the long term commitment to the public good. frankly, we need more leaders like him. host: let's go to diane calling from fayetteville, new york on the independent line. diane, good morning. caller: good morning. i have just one simple question. i just started watching your program, and -- hello? caller: keep going, dan -- host: keep going, diane. caller: i just started watching a program this year, but my question is, how does the impeachment of the former

president gum up the works for these nominees getting confirmed? also, one sideline, how much does the impeachment trial cost the american public with taxes? thank you, very much. be safe and healthy. guest: great question. if you look at the metaphor of the senate being like a two lane country highway and you need to get all of this traffic through and all of these confirmations through, the impeachment trial is basically roadwork. it stops the whole highway. the only thing that will be happening during the impeachment trial will be the impeachment trial. i'm unclear how long that will be, but forever -- whatever. of time -- whatever period of time it goes on, that would hold the confirmation of other nominees that need to get through the senate. this is a question of a small

pipe, and it is being jammed through with all sorts of stuff, confirmation, legislation, and now the impeachment trial, which apparently will begin february 9. for whatever period of time the trial is ongoing, it appears as if there will not be other senate business taking place. that means there will be further delays of the confirmation process for those that are otherwise ready to be confirmed. you also asked about the financial cost. i can't really answer that question. i will tell you that in my view, all -- dollars doesn't matter about the delay in conversation ash confirmation will be even more expensive then whatever the actual cost is to the trial itself. so again, i think there are lots of important things the senate has to do, but we are always making choices. doing one thing is not doing

something else. that has real consequence for the functioning of government. that is where i think the big issue arises, is it displaces confirmation work that might otherwise take place. again, the senate could act expeditiously between now and then to move through the nominees, you know when you have holds or other delay tactics by people like senator hawley, that it sometime as well. this is tricky turf. my view is that there is too much partisanship and too little focus on the consequences of the partisanship. it is appropriate for people to have different views and argue about, but putting sand in the machine can hurt us all. we really do need the instrument of government to be working well in order to be able to meet some

serious problems we face in the country, and they are not going away. and these other problems we know about. we said -- we should also know that they will be new problems popping up in the world and we live in today. host: we would like to thank max stier, president and ceo for the center of presidential transition, for being with us here this morning and walking us through the building of president joe biden's cabinet and agency workforce. max, thank you for taking time with us this morning. guest: thank you so much, and have a good rest of the weekend. host: next, we go back to the phone lines and talk to you about your top public policy issue for the biden administration. you see the numbers on screen and we will hear your calls when we come right back. stick with us. ♪ >> today, on the communicators, author sarah fryer discusses her book, no filter, which chronicles the founding of instagram and the impact the app has had on the tech industry and society.

>> you have to think instagram also reflects all of the celebrities around the world as well, right? and all of the brands. c-span i'm sure has any instagram, bloomberg has an instagram. it is all of these accounts that are doing instagram, but also these homegrown people, these people who otherwise may be would not have a voice, who are building these audiences without having to go through the normal gatekeepers, becoming a comedian without needing to get booked for a set, becoming a fitness instructor without having to work at an equinox. this is a place where people can demonstrate what they are good at. and they can build a following and eventually become famous. >> author sarah fryer, today at 6:30 p.m. eastern, on the communicators, on c-span. ♪ >> president joe biden and vice

president kamala harris were officially sworn in wednesday. watch the historic 59th inaugural ceremonies again this weekend on c-span. see the arrivals of former presidents and celebrity performances. >> america has attested a new and america has risen to the challenge. >> joe biden some arguer speech and amanda gorman's poem. watch president joe biden's inauguration, first at 8:00 p.m. eastern and again at midnight on c-span. -- c-span, on demand at c-span.org, or on the c-span radio app. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back and want to hear from you, your top public policy issue for the biden administration. regular lines are open. we are waiting to hear from you.

before we get into that, we have to report news from the world of media. at larry king, the longtime cnn host two became an icon through his radio and television show has died. here is the story they came from cnn this morning. larry king, the longtime cnn host two became an icon through his interviews with countless newsmakers and his sensibilities has died. he was 87. his son chance confirmed his death saturday morning. king hosted larry king live on cnn for over 25 years. he interviewed presidential candidates, celebrities, athletes, movie stars, and everyday people. he retired in 2010 after taping more than 6000 episodes of the show. once again, that is larry king, who unfortunately passed this morning at the age of 87. once again, we want to hear from you on what your top public

policy issues are for the biden administration. let's go back to the phone lines and start with greg calling from t washington dco on the democratic lin -- d.c. on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to talk to the guy, you know the senate, and all of this other stuff, the senate has done less and less. we have real problems for real solutions. and to slow things down because it is 50-50 and sharing is what needs to happen. stop all of the games being played and work for the american people. that is not a hard thing to do.

but there is a party who does not want to do that. and we have to stop playing games, guys. this is real work for real solutions. host: let's go to duncan calling from atlanta, georgia on the independent line. duncan, good morning. caller: hey, good morning. thank you for your show. we enjoy c-span, my family and i. i just wanted to say exactly what they are doing, just taking care of economic concerns andw the coronavirus concern -- and the coronavirus concerns are what they should be doing. they are definitely in our prayers. we definitely want everything for people and for people to get healthy and for people to have jobs that -- again, and the country to be in better shape. host: let's go to peter calling from arizona on the republican

line. peter, good morning. caller: good morning, sir. how are you doing? host: just fine. go ahead, peter. caller: what i always thought would be one of the best things for a country and for all parties considered would be something that really is epic. we had different markets open up throughout the early century. you had aircraft, medicine, nuclear science, computers, and these were all grand horizons that inspired dollars to be put towards things. and we do not have that grandeur anymore. what i'm looking at is, and biden touched on it, and i am a republican and accept him as our president, and i want to see him succeed, and god bless him. what we need is a national infrastructure run a straight ash renovation act. but this will be, similar to

government spending, where the very amendment is documented in this instrument, and that permits, and there will be specified that minority contractors for repair and renovation of the infrastructure will get first bite of the apple with contracts. providing they are commercial acceptable and skilled, you know, up to the task. if not, we initiate training programs from a bull perthshire up to it -- pusher up to a nuclear science. they we get star city, incorporate the best of everything. and it will be made by the local people who will have direct input. there shouldn't be a person on welfare in 10 years after this, and it is an engine you keep going. host: on, yesterday, president

joe biden issued an executive order that would expand food assistance benefits for those in greatest need, due to the coronavirus pandemic. here, president biden elaborates on the details of his executive order. here's what he said. pres. biden: we need to tackle the growing hunger crisis in america. one in seven households in america, one in seven, more than one in five black and latino households in america, report they do not have enough food to eat. that includes 30 million adults and 12 million children. again, they are in this situation through no fault of their own. it is unconscionable. the american rescue plan provides additional food and nutrition assistance for tens of millions of children and families to address this crisis. but families literally cannot wait another day. as a result of the executive

order i will shortly sign, the department of agriculture will consider taking immediate steps to make it easier for the hardest hit families to enroll and claim more generous benefits in the critical food and nutrition assistance area. this will help tens of millions of families, especially those who cannot provide meals for their kids, remote learning at home, not receiving the regular meal plans they have for school breakfast or lunch. host: let's go back to our phone lines, luke calling on the democratic line from florida. good morning. caller: good morning. i guess i want to say two things. first, the most important thing is the virus has to be killed. everyone in the country has to get behind the president and do whatever it takes to stop this virus from spreading. i think his team is the perfect team to do this.

i believe in faucher he and other physicians working on this. it's not like we are giving money to one specific aspect of the country. it is circulated, so everyone should realize that money put into the economy stays in the economy. it gets moved around. that is basically what i want to say. host: let's go to darlene calling from washington on the republican line. caller: you were almost there, it is muclteo.

good morning, and my big policy, i don't care republican or democrat, but my big thing is somebody has to help the least fortunate people. and it is the homeless. i live in washington by seattle, but it is nothing compared to los angeles, but these people are just suffering. i do not think, at the state level, they can figure it out. i think the federal government needs to come in, with money, to help these poor people get off of the street. whether we need to go back to build a silo him -- build asylums, insane asylums, tell people and get doctors in there on the rehab side, but we have got to get these poor people off of our streets. host: let's go to can calling

from san diego, california on the democratic line. ken, good morning. caller: good, jesse. thanks for taking my call. my top public policy issue for president biden is to rescind at least one of the executive orders, specifically the keystone xl order. keystone xl is a net zero emissions project. in my opinion, this is a poor executive order because it means more pollution via truck and rail transport, which will happen, and i'm just hoping the president will consider this, and also, because of the jobs, being lost on the canadian and american side of the border. thank you very much, sir. host: there is a story coming out of texas we want to talk about a little bit this morning, where the first major lawsuit

against the biden administration has been filed over deportation. i want to redo you a little bit from the story out of reuters. the texas attorney general filed a lawsuit on friday that seeks to block joe biden's move to pause certain deportations for 100 days. a controversial opening move by the democratic president that has provoked blowback from some republicans. in the filing, ken paxton says the state would face irreparable harm if the deportation moratorium was allowed to go into effect. biden promised on the campaign trail to enact a 100 a moratorium on deportation if elected. a proposal that contrasted sharply with the immigration crackdown promoted by then president, a republican. in the court filing friday, paxson argued the moratorium violated their constitutional duty to execute laws. he also said it violated an

enforcement agreement the state brokered with the outgoing trump administration earlier this month. the first major lawsuit filed against the biden administration in taxes over the deportation moratorium. let's go back to the phone lines and talk to mary calling from pennsylvania on the democratic line. mary, good morning. caller: good, c-span. i think our top issues that president biden needs to address his immigration reform. illegal immigration reform. because we need to know who is in our country based on security reasons. i'm not about for people crossing the border illegally and hiding underground. we have to know, as a country, who is in our country. president reagan, i remember

years ago, when we had 5 million undocumented immigrant citizens in our country that cross the border illegally. he made it a point for them to come out to legally, and we provided them with a valid social security number, temporary resident status. they have to earn the right to become citizens in this country, and they need to be held accountable for the actions of their illegal actions for crossing the border, the employers and landlords need to be held accountable for hiring and renting to them. this is the law that is in place, and we need to adhere to it host: host:. let's go to bill -- it. host: let's go to bill on the independent line from texas. good morning. caller: good morning. host: are you there?

caller: yes sir, how are you doing? host: just fine. go ahead, bill. caller: my number one policy would be similar to the gentleman from arizona, infrastructure plan. let's take the money that people pay in taxes and give it back to the people through jobs, building back our country. i don't agree with him, the man from arizona for minorities getting first tips on contracts. that seems anti-american, but that would be my number one. number two would be that the president supports the states as much as possible in fighting the coronavirus, because we have a republic, we have a president limited to what he can mandate throughout the country. those are my two. host: on yesterday, president biden also announced an executive order to make eligible

for unemployment benefits, those who refused to return to work due to concerns about their health because of the pandemic. there is a portion of what president biden had to say. pres. biden: we also need to protect the health and safety of the american worker. right now, proximally 40% of households have at least one member with a pre-existing condition. just imagine you are out of work through no fault of your own, you file for unemployment while you are looking for a job, you find one, and you get an offer, but then you find out there is a high risk of you getting infected with covid-19 because of your condition. you and your loved one -- and you and your loved ones have an even greater risk of death and illness because of the pre-existing conditions. so you turn it down. right now, if you did that, you could be denied unemployment insurance because you are offered a job and did not take it.

it is wrong. no one should have to choose between their livelihoods and on health or the health of their loved ones in the middle of a deadly pandemic. because of the executive order i'm about to sign, i expect the department of labor to guarantee the right to refuse employment that will jeopardize your health, and if you do so, you will still be able to qualify for insurance. that is a judgment the labor department will make. host: there was a question earlier about the keystone pipeline i want to bring to you. -- pipeline, i want to bring to you what president biden has done when it comes to that. this is from oilandgas.com. on his first in office, he issued an executive order to block the keystone i sell pipeline, initiating steps to tougher air emission from oil and cash -- and gas operation, and reverse trump policies that reversed obama policies. biden issued his mandate i need

the name of protecting the environment and human health, and minimizing climate change. many of the mandates will require review of regulation, which after, lengthy -- on its first day in office, he issued an executive order that would block the proposed xl pipeline. let's see if we can get more calls in before the end of the show. let's start with ken from north carolina on the democratic line. ken, good morning. caller: hello. thank you for taking my call. i have two priorities. the first would be stop partisanship in the senate and house of representatives. we need these people to represent all of us, and they need to get over their philosophies, their own beliefs, and represent the people. the second issue is get the money out of politics.

i believe that only an individual who can vote for a candidate should be able to contribute to them. i would set a maximum amount at $10,000. thank you very much. host: let's talk to racquel from connecticut on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i also believe to stop patterson. i am really sad that everything i hear is one party -- partisan. i am really sad that everything i hear is one party. i think we should all give the opportunity to president biden to go ahead with his plan. he has a good heart and experience. please. host: let's go to anthony calling from michigan on the

democratic line. anthony, good morning. caller: morning. i think outside of the pandemic, obviously, the next thing should be infrastructure. followed by immigration. i think we should expect our government to be able to multitask. we need to be able to do a lot of things together. maybe not full bore, but make small changes, implement a -- influential changes on a number of items. host: a couple programming notes for you. today, live at noon, eastern time, you can hear -- you can see, here on c-span, the secretary nominee, pete buttigieg, discussing the transportation goes of the biden administration during the universe -- during the conference of mayors. coverage will begin at noon on c-span, online at c-span.org, or

live on the free c-span radio app. there are couple other nominations hearing -- nomination hearings coming up. the senate resource committee will hold a hearing for former mishna governor jennifer grant off to serve as energy secretary. you can see it live euro c-span, and 9:30 eastern on wednesday. on wednesday, you can watch it here on c-span or c-span.org, and once again on the free c-span radio app. finally, the senate veterans affairs committee will hold a confirmation hearing also on wednesday for dennis mcdonough to serve as veteran affairs secretary. as always, you can watch live coverage of these conference -- confirmation hearings here on c-span, live online at c-span.org, or you can always listen to us live with the free c-span radio app.

let's get a couple calls in before the end of the show. let's start with david calling from albuquerque, new mexico on the republican line. good morning. host: yeah, you caller: caller: know, everything since inaugurate -- caller: yeah, you know, everything since inauguration that you did for biden, how come you talk -- don't talk about all of those little kids on tv. host: that is a ridiculous statement so we won't even address it. we go to new york on the independent line. barbie, good morning. caller: hi. people on social security only make $800 per month. what are they going to do about this? this is $4000 below the poverty level. host: all right, let's go to mark calling from new york on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning.

i finally just got in. it was the policies for biden, what i think is important. i think an important thing to look at is the concept of war. when you do things like the keystone pipeline and you cancel that, and you make it so we cannot generate energy here inside of the united states to save our environment, we have to go to war somewhere else to get our resources. i think that needs to be considered and put their, instead of playing politics with this, make sure we are not going to go kill people around the world. that i think is the most important thing that needs to be addressed. host: let's go to roger calling from nebraska on the democratic line. roger, good morning. caller: yeah, i'm here. host: go ahead. caller: yeah, this is roger. i'm concerned about the immigration that biden -- host: you still there, roger?

caller: yes. host: keep going. caller: morning. i am wary about the immigration law biden has passed. i'm afraid all of these illegal aliens or illegal immigrants that might come in have covid, and we are dealing with that real bad now. host: let's go to tom calling from baltimore, maryland on the democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you so much for my opportunity to use my first amendment. my problem is with this coming administration and all of them. the administration needs to be investigated fairly and cleaned up because they are not doing the job they are supposed to be doing. they are not serving veterans, they are serving themselves. veterans are just cash cows for the veterans administration, and every time -- before the virus, anytime you needed anything, you had a reported person so they could get billable hours.

also, i use cannabis for years, and they hold that against me, the veterans administration. i needed a hip operation for six years and would not give it to me because i use cannabis. i think decriminalization of cannabis on a federal level is so important, because that way it will feed into the v.a.. the v.a. does not help -- host: if you want to see the confirmation hearing of the man nominated by president joe biden to be the next veteran affairs secretary, live coverage of denis mcdonough's confirmation will be here on sunday at 3:00 p.m. eastern. let's go to robert calling from vicksburg, mississippi on the republican line. robert, good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say that trump did not inside that riot. his people, his rally was

infiltrated by people that wanted to get him out of office. nancy pelosi was involved in inciting that's right. host: we would like to thank all of our callers, viewers, and guests for being with us again for another edition of "washington journal". make sure you keep -- "washington journal." make sure to keep yourself safe and wash her hands. join us tomorrow morning for another edition of "washington journal." have a great saturday, everyone. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> pete buttigieg, nominated for

transportation secretary, discusses the goals during the u.s. conference of mayors winter meeting, live coverage begins today at noon eastern read online at c-span.org or you can listen live on the pre-c-span radio app. ♪ >> the president and vice president were officially sworn in on wednesday, watch the ceremony again this weekend on c-span. see the arrivals of the former presidents and celebrity performances. >> americans have been tested and they have risen to the challenge. >> see the inauguration speech, followed by the official white house arrival. watch the inauguration on c-span

on demand at c-span.org or listen on the c-span radio app app. >> next the confirmation hearing for avril haines, the nominee for director of national intelligence. she previously served as deputy national security advisor and deputy cia director, and she testified before the senate intelligence committee. this runs two hours. [indiscernible conversation]