talk about about coronavirus relief proposals and the u.s. economy. we'll take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. "washington journal" is next. hoe to washington journal. the impeachment trial of donald trump could be coming to an end. lawyers put up their defense on friday. in a session today, it could close out the proceedings. it is now up to the members of the senate to listen to closing arguments and vote to acquit or convict the former president. what do you think about what you've heard during this impeachment trial? what do you think senators will do with the trial resumes at

10:00 today? we will open up the regular lines. republicans, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000 independent voters, (202) 748-8002. you can always text us at (202) 748-8003. we are always reading on social media. i want to remind everyone at the top of the show that the senate trial will resume as soon as the show is over at 10:00. you can go to it live on c-span two. you can listen to it on the c-span radio app or any time at c-span.org. we know we are going to hear the

closing arguments from both sides, the house impeachment managers and x president trump's lawyers today in front of the senate. let's go back to the beginning of the arguments from president trump's lawyers. his legal team began their arguments in front of the senate by arguing the process was unconstitutional. >> the article of impeachment before the senate is an unjust and blatantly unconstitutional act of political vengeance. this abuse of the constitution only further divides our nation when we should be trying to come together around shared priorities. like every other politically motivated witchhunt the left has engaged in over the past four years, this impeachment is

completely divorced from the facts, the evidence, the interests of the american people. the senate should promptly and decisively vote to reject it. no thinking person could seriously believe that the president's speech on the was an incitement to insurrection. the suggestion is patently absurd. nothing in the text could ever be construed as encouraging, condoning, or enticing unlawful activity of any kind. host: they used just about three hours, less than one quarter of the 16 hours they could've used to defend the ex-president. the new york times has what we can expect to see.

with the bulk of the trial complete, house managers will have up to two hours to make their closing arguments on saturday. senators could hold an up or down vote almost immediately after. a few procedural surprises are still possible. beginning at 10:00, we could begin to hear closing arguments and we could have a vote today. this in trial -- entire trial could be over today. what do you expect the senate to do today? how do you expect the senators to vote. let's start with max from florida on the democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. first of all, i think it's highly unlikely that the former

president will be convicted. that's not reasonable to expect with the divisions between the parties. to turn to the evidence that was put in, i think you will find the house managers presented a brilliant case. they covered everything that would be necessary to establish that the president, former president, was guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. they properly began their case long before the gathering on january 6. host: did you hear anything from the defense attorneys that changed your mind in any way? caller: not at all. i thought their presentation was

ill prepared did not address the points. it was deceptive and what they cut and put in. many of the examples they gave were not comparable to anything that existed when they were trying to analogize things like that to what occurred on january 6. all the things the president had done up until that particular time, most telling of all i think is the fact that when they were asked questions, one of the major questions was by senator collins and senator murkowski in which they asked whether the president -- when the president knew of the invasion and when he

knew vice president pence was not in trouble. what did he do and when did he do it? they asked them to be specific. the defense team said absolutely nothing. they offered no evidence whatever. they said the house managers had not conducted an investigation. host: let's go to dan in arkansas on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i won't take too much of your time. i think this should have lasted two days. that's just a waste of money. the democrats ought to pay this money back to the taxpayers for putting this goofy stage on

here. we have one of the best presidents we've ever had. they treated this guy terrible. host: did you hear anything from the impeachment managers that convinced you in any form or fashion? caller: no. there was nothing. they would take it and turned around like most lawyers do. this guy was honest. he is sincere. he didn't try to start no trouble. like i said, the best president we've ever had. the people are going to suffer from this right here. thank you. host: let's go to curtis from new jersey on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i love the bowtie.

what dan just said, it doesn't matter that he was great. did he do something wrong? by having people storm the capital? i didn't hear anything from the republicans to say he didn't do anything wrong. host: one of the impeachment managers argued during the question-and-answer session that the president's team did not bring any evidence in front of the senate to prove that he should be acquitted. this is what she said yesterday. >> if defense counsel has evidence, you are welcome to give it to us. you had an opportunity to give us evidence that would take the president. the founts -- defense counsel wants to blame everyone else

except the person most responsible. that is president trump. donald trump. he is the person who could foresee this the most. he had the reports. he had access to the information. we all know how he is an avid cable news watcher. he knew would was going to happen. he cultivated these individuals. these are the undisputed facts. the national guard was not deployed until two hours after the attack. mayor bowser does not have authority over the capital or federal buildings. she could not deploy national guard to the capital. that is outside of the jurisdiction of the mayor of the district of columbia. at no point did the president of the united states, our

commander-in-chief, tell anyone or the american people that he was sending help. he did not defend the capital. the president of the united states did not defend the capital of this country. it's indefensible. host: let's look at what some of our social media followers are saying about the impeachment trial. we have several people who have texted this morning. here is one text that says the republicans don't care what trump has done. they never have. another text says most of the republican senators will not look at the overwhelming evidence and will vote to acquit trump. they have no backbone and are

scared of trump's future tweets. it's a sad day for the country. another says too bad they can't be prosecuted for their lies. i think the case was awesome and truthful, unlike democrats. another text says i think the house managers did a great job. the republicans are going to let him walk. it is a sad day for our country and sends the wrong message to the rest of the world. one last text, they provided a powerful and very effective presentation. this was so overwhelming that the managers resorted to the race card. we want to know what you think about the senate trial going on. let's go back to the phone lines. billy is calling from rocklin, new york. -- brooklyn, new york. caller: good morning.

after the mob stormed the capital, threatening lawmakers' lives, they voted against certifying the results. they hate democracy. they want to disenfranchise millions of voters in states they don't even belong. they want to disenfranchise voters in other states, how many times has texas cried state rights when they want guns in synagogues? then they went to decertify ballot election results in other states? trump literally after the mob was saying hang mike pence and built a noose on which to hang him, trump tweeted that mike pence was a coward.

if i were mike pence, he is not apologize. host: did you hear anything in the defense team's presentation yesterday that made you think in any way the president shouldn't be convicted in this impeachment trial? caller: from the defense? it was all what aboutism . elizabeth warren said fight climate change, that's like a soviet propaganda strategy. they say democrats are common nests and using a soviet propaganda strategy as the basis for their argument. host: let's go to bob calling from pittsburgh on the republican line. good morning. caller: i watched 16 hours of

democrats same old junk. they went back to raskin. they went on to racism. the people attacked by white people, it's racist. the democrats look like fools yesterday. 16 hours, the republicans took three hours to turn it all around. i think all of these democrat senators have been making remarks. vice president harris giving money to people who were looting. anyone is going to know. they should end this today. the biggest fear the democrats have is next year or two years from now if the republicans take

over the senate and house. guess what they are going to do and i don't blame them. host: steve is calling from missouri. good morning. caller: good morning. it's just one word, disinformation. i can tell you from a personal standpoint, i dad started listening to rush limbaugh in the 90's. that's when bill clinton became president. his whole mind changed. he went kind of insane. if you mentioned that clinton was doing a good job, he would hang up on me and tell me not to call him no more. we've got fox news and qanon. these people are brainwashed. we could end this if these republicans would come out here and say trump lost the election. host: let's go to phil calling

from wisconsin on the democratic line. good morning. i think i lost phil. let's go to joe calling from north carolina on the democratic line. good morning. are you there? caller: yes. i would like to give my opinion. what i've been watching for the last year or so, i watched trump call people losers, fake, all of these things. he is the biggest loser of all. he has to save face. by creating the problems. most of these people that follow him, they have lost their minds. they can't see the truth. that's the thing between good

and evil. anyone with common sense can see that. god isn't in the picture with republicans. they are about lying and cheating and doing what they can do to ruin the country. host: did you hear anything from the defense team that makes you think he should not be convicted of inciting the riot? caller: i didn't hear anything from them. they made up their minds for the trial even started. common sense will tell you that. host: yesterday, the defense team argued that the house impeachment managers did not legally connect the attack on the capital to the former president. this is the argument they made in the senate.

>> the critical issue in this case is the very narrow issue that is charged against the 45th president. that issue is did the 45th president engaged in incitement? there clearly was no insurrection. it's defined in the law and evolves taking over a country. taking the tv stations over. having some planning what you're going to do when you finally take power. clearly, this is not that. what our colleagues across the aisle meant is incitement to violence. to riot. the word incitement is the critical case. the critical issue in the case. the first time you heard from

us, i told you that you would not hear from our side that what happened on january 6 was anything other than horrific. the 45th president of the united states and his lawyers and his entire team adamantly denounce that violence by those criminals that occurred in this very chamber. there was a reason why we started our presentation back on tuesday in that way. i did not want the senators to consider there was any challenge to that particular fact. and yet, the house managers knowing it was not contested at

all, chose to spend 14 hours showing you pictures of how horrific the attack on the united states capital was. they spent no time at all in connecting legally the attack on the capital to the 45th president of the united states, which is the only question that needs to be answered. was donald trump responsible for inciting the violence that came to this building on january 6? host: the question many people are asking today is how many if any republicans are going to vote to convict president trump. politico has a story today that talks about that specific issue.

how many senate republicans plan to vote for conviction? i want to read a few paragraphs from that story to you. the question, when the senate

gets to the vote which may be later today, how many senate republicans plan to vote for conviction? at 10:00, you will get to see the senate trial begin right here live on c-span on c-span 2. listen live on the c-span radio app. you can watch any time at c-span.org. let's go back to the phones and see what you think about what's been going on at the senate trial. gloria is calling from mississippi on the democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you so much for taking my call. these are republicans, cop killers. that's who they are.

they are not going to do what needs to be done. they are afraid of donald trump. please make it be known, these are cop killers. host: let's go to roy calling from georgia on the republican line. good morning. caller: through the summer there were riots. you saw them in other cities. he was arrested at the capital. kamala harris were advocating riots throughout the year, including the election. wasn't he following their instructions? weren't they encouraging these groups to act?

this man was arrested in utah for riots. now he's arrested in washington. host: are you trying to say that one person out of the hundreds of people who have been arrested means that a group that the police and no one has said is involved is now involved in what happened at the capital? caller: the fbi arrested sullivan. host: they have arrested hundreds of other people. caller: trump people were nonviolent. antifa and all of their members, they are known for violence. host: i think you might not be watching the same thing the rest of the world was watching. i don't think there's any question of who the people who were inside the capital were supporting. that is former president trump

unless you were watching something the world was not watching. caller: let me ask you one last question. wasn't john sullivan arrested inside the building? host: i have no idea who john sullivan is. caller: he is the nt for leader. host: let's go to illinois on the independent line. good morning. go ahead. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: good morning. i'm talking. host: go ahead. all right, let's go to patrick from kansas on the republican line. good morning. caller: i think the people who watched the impeachment proceedings, i'm an attorney. if you wanted to convict donald trump before the started, you

still feel that way. if you feel he was improperly charged, you feel that way. i'm a republican. i think people who believe donald trump was an agent of vladimir putin for three or four years and tried to compete him over that, you believe what the house managers are saying now. the one thing i would like to comment on is c-span. i am old enough to a been watching c-span when brian lam first brought it on the air. you couldn't tell if he was a republican or democrat. it was really objective presentation of what was occurring in society. right now, i'm sorry. the prejudice. i feel like i'm watching msnbc. you interrupt republican callers with lessons. you choose clips that are

presidential -- prejudicial. what has happened to c-span? we have msnbc. why did you lose your objectivity? host: let me interrupt you quickly to say you must be watching the wrong show this morning if you think we are playing clips that are only prejudicial to president trump. i think we have had several times the defense team on screen. let's go to anthony calling from minneapolis. good morning. caller: good morning, jesse. host: go ahead. caller: what we are seeing right now is the dissolvement of

our republic. the republicans aren't listening to anybody. i fear that this is the end. i want to also say one thing to the people who are talking about the riots and there were no riots. in 1968 in detroit, they burned more than they did last summer. the reason why black lives matter, the one time we were sold as a commodity and could be killed at any time by our owners. that's why it is so important. we have lost our country. when the senators do not convict donald trump after all of this, there is no way. we are going to have the same crap at the end.

host: let's find out what's going to happen in the senate later today. let's bring in one of our experts, the senate reporter for national journal. good morning. host: what do we expect to see at 10:00? guest: the senate will make an important decision. they will decide whether to call witnesses, to subpoena additional evidence from the last two days. you have heard from house managers and the president's attorneys lay their case. yesterday, centers had a chance to ask questions of both sides. that was a chance for them to repeat the same points they had made earlier on. when they get past this witness

phase, if they don't call any witnesses or issue subpoenas, they will go directly to closing arguments. the trial could and today with a vote. host: what are the odds on the senate wanting to actually hear from witnesses? we heard recently that former president trump has said he does not want or intend to testify. we hear back and forth between senators about telephone calls. we are hearing a conversation about kevin mccarthy and the call to the white house. do we expect the senate to talk about these issues? guest: there have been few senators who want to bring in witnesses. they want to wrap the trial up quickly. the outcome is more or less known. there won't be enough republicans to convict. a lot of senators say let's move

on. they want another covid aid project. they have a march deadline before employment benefits expire. the cabinet needs to be confirmed. there isn't much interesting in drawing out the process when the final objective is known. the call you are referencing between kevin mccarthy and president on january 6 has attracted a lot of interest. there are house republicans who have said he should speak up now . there are people who have direct knowledge about what president trump was thinking and if he was supporting the insurrection against the capital and celebrating it as the capital

was being mobbed at the time. sheldon whitehouse said we should bring those people in. again, this is something that has very little interest at this point. host: we suspect democratic senators will vote to acquit. -- to convict. what is happening on the republican side? what do we know about what the senators plan to do on the republican side? guest: a number of your viewers should know it's 44. they voted that the senate did not have jurisdiction over the trial. their concerns were on constitutional grounds. he is the first former president to be tried in the senate. all others that happen when the

president was still in office. trump was impeached for acts committed in office. there is a distinction there. there have been officials who have been convicted and impeached after they left office . this is not unprecedented. it's hard for republicans to say they found the trial unconstitutional and vince decide to vote in the same trial. what most people are anticipating maybe five or six republicans, the one that did vote to the trial was constitutional would vote. mitt romney, ben sasse, all of them voted with democrats to justify the constitutional grounds. those would be the names to watch. host: what about mitch mcconnell of kentucky?

where is he standing on this entire process? is he whipping his caucus one way or the other to get them to vote on this trial? guest: the short answer is no. they are not sure where senator mcconnell is at this point. he hasn't really said one way or the other how he will eventually vote. if you read the tea leaves, there is an opening there. it seems unlikely he would vote to convict. he might surprises i the end of the day. he has been as still as a statue listening to both sides, listening very intently. he has not indicated one way or the other which way he is

leaning. the only indication is that he's undecided. host: what about the three most obvious trump allies? ted cruz, mike lee, lindsey graham? what will be their roles moving forward? there is been conversations about them meeting with the defense team and serving as jurors, being able to vote to acquit. what will their role be? guest: this has the trappings of additional proceeding. this is a good example of how it's a political proceeding. all of the witnesses, all of the victims, the jurors are the same people. they were there on that day. their workplace was mobbed and we are asking them to weigh in on the guilt or innocence of the person charged with inciting them. that would never happen in a real court.

you have this blurring of the judicial process and the political process. graham, lee, cruz have met with the president's attorneys. that happened in his first impeachment trial. mitch mcconnell was very adamant at that time. he was not an impartial jury. he was adamant it would end in acquittal. we expect them to be supporters of the president. there is not much of a role for them at this point, especially if the senate votes to dispense with calling witnesses. they will be part of the vote to acquit. host: do we see if the senate acquits president trump on impeachment, do we see any idea of moving to another procedure like censuring the president? guest: there has been some talk

about censuring the president, invoking language of the 14th amendment for bidding those engaged in insurrection from holding public office in the united states. this was an amendment passed after the civil war targeted at those states that were in rebellion against the union as a way of keeping those people out of office. it is part of the constitution that could be invoked if the president seeks to run for a second term in 2024. some of these senators have said we are not going to get the two thirds necessary to convict, a censure resolution only requires a simple majority and some republicans are interested in it. that depends on how the rest of the trial plays out and how the language is adopted.

the real hurdle is on both sides, there is not much interest. democrats feel like a trial is a better way to hold the president accountable. it is much more historic. republicans will not be interested in censure, at least for many of them. it has some hurdles attached to it. just because president trump may be acquitted does it mean some of this could come up in actual to additional courts. -- judicial courts. many writers stormed the capital that day. -- rioters stormed the capital that day. host: is the ending preordained? guest: the one surprise we could

see this morning is if they do decide to debate or call for a vote. that is something the house managers could ask, to bring in witnesses or vote to bring in witnesses. that would extend the trial beyond closing arguments. what they would do is allow for a deposition of those senators or call them to the stand. tommy tuberville is a freshman senator who talked to the president on january 6 around the time mike pence was being evacuated from the senate chamber. if they call witnesses, it's a whole new ballgame. the likelihood of that happening is still slim. the number of senators calling for witnesses is pretty small and managers have not said they are in calling witnesses themselves except president

trump. host: we would like to thank zach:, the senate reporter for national journal for bringing us up-to-date and telling this what to expect. the impeachment trial continues. thank you so much for your time. let's go back to the phone lines and see what you think about the senate impeachment trial, which will resume at 10:00. you can watch it live here on c-span2. nathan is calling from maine. good morning. caller: i am looking from an interesting perspective. we are here in the northern indicted states. we have a tendency to look at things different leap. i watch fox and i watch npr during the week. i think what is scaring me the most about this whole thing is

the involvement of religion. that's the big elephant in the room. it seems to be more of a problem on the right than the left. religion was never supposed to be a part of politics. it is a driving force behind the republican movement. they are thinking they are being disenfranchised by immigrants and people moving into this country. they are running in fear. you are seeing the manifestation of that fear coming out in the riots and in the movement we are seeing. if we don't address this soon, this republic will collapse. that's what happens when we start dealing with ideology as opposed to covenants. host: from detroit michigan -- detroit, michigan on the democratic line. caller: i just wanted to make a

statement. 16 republicans will be up for reelection. i'm not understanding why they would not convict donald trump of doing wrong. what are they teaching the kids? thank you. have a blessed day. host: antony is calling from new jersey on the democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was watching yesterday and i believe it was mr. castor. i have come to the collision that words have no consequence. i would like you to ask to see if any of these brave patriots who marched on the capital january 6 would call to see who or what they wanted to do in

occupying the capital. host: did you hear anything from the defense team that makes you think he should not be convicted of inciting a riot? caller: i didn't hear him say go occupy the capital directly. i heard a lot of unit on -- egging it on to a crowd who is waiting for someone to light the spark that ignited the powder keg. going into this trial, there were 50 people on the democratic side who wanted to convict before any evidence was given. 50 people on the others seemed

to be dead set against that, mostly dead set against conviction. i would never want to go to court with that roadblock in front of me myself. host: let's go to andy in kentucky on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am very concerned about what is happening right now in washington. all of this is nothing but a joke. the democrats have since 2016, they have been after president trump. trump did nothing wrong. he went up there and fought against trying to get rid of the corrupt politicians that were up there in washington. we need to have term limits. i used to be a democrat.

the democratic party has lost their way. they support things that are not biblical. they support abortion. they support the homosexual lifestyle. they do not stand up for israel. israel gave $150 million to iran. thank the lord that trump got that money back. joe biden used to be -- stand up for pro-life. the democrats have said the same thing on the campaign trail, he would like to take trump behind the barn. vice president harris gave veil money to get antifa out. -- bail money. host: let's go to glenn in

virginia. good morning. caller: i think a big problem we have in this country started years ago with an increasing amount of meanness in our mass media, the radio programs, the various different opportunities people have with the internet now to get news and information. when trump started calling the news media enemy of the people and cap hammering and hammering on that, the fourth estate has been losing a lot of its credibility. a lot of organizations are suffering in the eyes of the public as far as what's real and what's truth in front of us. to me people are looking at different truths on the same

ideas. i think it's destroying a lot of our democratic process. host: mary is calling from tennessee on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. trump did insight that right. he told them to go to the capital and fight. that he would be there with him. he went right back to the white house, looking what was going on. he delayed calling the national guard. we heard police officers calling for help. we saw police officers being abused. trump is the cause of this. trump lied and people died. he is doing the same thing again. we've got those coward republicans. when you saw them running with everybody else on tv.

host: let's go to georgia on the republican line. agnes, good morning. caller: i've been thinking about riots. the people rioted and they attacked the capital. then you think about the school situation going on in this country. the kids have been out of school for a year. they can't get them back. all these politicians and journalists, they are not doing anything. you wonder about the parents who see their children deteriorating.

what kind of other -- why they don't go down there and shake up those lawmakers down there. their children haven't been in school for a year. they sit there and they don't do anything. host: you're not advocating that anybody do what happened on january 6? caller: no. maybe there is a reason for people getting so frustrated that they have to do things like this. there is no other alternative. how are these parents going to get their kids back to school? host: yesterday, after the end

of the proceedings, ron johnson brought -- talked to reporters about what he thought about the defense team and how they did. this is what janet -- senator johnson had to say. >> i think they blew the case out of the water. they legally eviscerated them. they showed the distortions of tweets, the selective editing. they proved the first amendment applies to political speech more than anything. i think they blew the house manager case out of the water. host: let's see what some of our social media followers think about what's been going on in the senate. this is a text that says the defense team had nothing. they showed the same videos over and over. they featured entertainers like

madonna and johnny depp who are irrelevant to the case. there is a correlation between what was said and what happened. it's a sad day when people put on blinders where they can't see the truth beyond their politics. here is another text that says republicans despite overwhelming evidence will not convict trump. the defense was pathetic. one final text says the house managers presented an airtight case. republican senators will allow the formal president -- former president to get away. we want to know what you think about what is happening in the senate trial. let's go to susan calling from michigan on the independent

line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would just like to say i watched all this. i have seen all this nonsense. a lot of gas lighting is going on here. when you were talking to the man saying this doesn't work, onto the next. that isn't the way our country works. if anything, president trump has shown us how sickening washington dc is and how they think these politicians that don't care about the people, trump was far from perfect, but he was trying to do stuff for america. they were there. he hadn't given his speech yet. look at those people that broke in. they had all their stuff.

the cops are asking ridiculous. that's not how it works. i am independent. i used to be a democrat. everything changed with the way they sell them to fight in the street and no one says a word about that. our country deserves better. host: let's go to patsy in st. louis on the democratic line. good morning. are you there? caller: yes. i've been holding for a minute. good morning. i wanted to say we saw the trouble they had the capital. the first impeachment, the republicans were blatantly saying no to the conviction of

president trump. they should have a silent vote. if they are so bold, when they vote for conviction, they should say i will give up my democracy for president donald trump. if they say yes to the conviction, they should say i'm not willing to give up my democracy for donald trump. host: yesterday, the legal team accused the house impeachment managers of selectively editing the speeches. this is what they said on the senate floor. >> words matter. they edited the president's words over and over again. they manipulated video, timeshifting clips and making it appear the words were planed to

a crowd when they warrant. let's take a look. >> we are going to walk down. i will be there with you. we are going to walk down to the capital. we are going to walk down to the capital. we are going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. we are not going to be cheering so much for some of them. you will never take back our country with weakness. you have to show strength and you have to be strong. we have come to demand congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated. i know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the capitol building.

to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. >> we are going to walk down to the capital. why are we walking to the capital? they cut that off. to cheer on members of congress. the supreme court ruled that there is a clear standard for incitement. whether this speed was intended to provoke lawless action. go to the capital and cheer on some members of congress but not others. they know it doesn't meet the standard for incitement. host: let's go back to the phone lines. let's see what you say about the senate trial going on. let's go to clarksville, indiana on the republican line. good morning.

caller: this is a sham. i've never seen anything like this. who is the judge? the democrats are up there being a gang. john roberts ain't presiding over it. the democrats being judge and jury and executioner. i think that's totally wrong. even john roberts knows that. he's not going to sit there over and impeachment of somebody that left office. incitement of insurrection, all of these people that showed up, many of them are police and other cities. they are walking in one door and out another door. it just ate right. biden is an empty shell.

if you ask a question, he will walk away as fast as he can. he has no answers. there is nothing he is going to do for our country. host: let's go to glenn in madison, illinois on the democratic line. good morning. caller: all the republicans don't know what's happening. go back and pull up that video of trump sitting in the office with don jr.'s girlfriend, doing the hokey pokey while all of this is going on. i was in there on my 61st birthday. -- 65th birthday. you will not believe how beautiful that place is. you watch thesesuckers tear it . something has got to give.

get rid of this instigator that wants to be a dictator so bad that he will throw everything away. thank you. host: let's go to carol, who is calling from west virginia on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i tried calling in on the independent line. i could not get through. i think what's happened -- i have heard rhetoric from both sides, and, so, to basically say one person is responsible for everything that happened, no. those that went into the capital are the responsible -- capitol or the responsible people, just like when black lives matter was protesting come you cannot say all the protesters in black lives matter are at fault.

where their instigators that had infiltrated both kinds of protests? yes. those are the ones that needs the blame, not everybody. is there going to be peaceful protests where they are going to have people that is in those protests just to cause problems? yes. you cannot say the ones that protested the capitol and went in there and done damage, trump should be held responsible for them and not hold anybody that would not stand up and say no, we do not do this. if you are going to condone it on one side, you need to condone it on both sides. host: let's go to anita calling from missouri on the

independent line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call and thank you for c-span. i noticed you have some one issue people who have been calling in, like the man from kentucky. i would like to mention to him what i think is the most important issue of all, and that is one of the things that the house managers in their videos did not show. there was a time in one of trump's rallies where he said something to the effect of he would be president again and maybe for a third time and maybe even for longer than that. he has demonstrated over and over that he wanted to be america's putin, and so he was willing to do a coup to overthrow our government. that is the most important single issue that there is right

now beyond anything else. if you do not save the republic, all the rest of the issues are knoll and void. please keep that in mind to the man from kentucky. host: i want to bring more information to you about what we were talking about. cnn has a story about the telephone call that happened between house republican leader kevin mccarthy and then president donald trump that happened during the riot that has brought some questions about what is going on during the impeachment trial. i am going to read a couple of paragraphs to you from that story. "in an expletive laced phone call with house minority leader kevin mccarthy while the capitol was under attack, president trump said the rioters cared more about the election results

than mccarthy did. mccarthy insisted that the rioters were trump supporters and begged trump to call them off. described as a shouting match between the men. a furious mccarthy told trump who the blank do you think you are talking to according to a republican lawmaker familiar with the call. " this is one of the questions that the senators may bring up in the trial that may begin at 10:00 a.m. and whether the senate needs to bring in witnesses to find out what was going on between these telephone calls between the white house and the capitol on the day of the riot.

let's go back to our phone lines. let's talk to jacqueline, who is calling from stratford, connecticut, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. the one question senators are asked to vote on today is this -- did donald trump incite the violence on the sixth? donald trump put out a video saying to the violent terrorists during the violent attack, we love you, you are special. this is proof that he wanted the terrorists to incite the violence. americans listening, this is the proof. please call your senators to tell them to convict. thank you. host: let's go to dan, who is calling from georgetown, massachusetts. dan, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for having me on. just to that last caller, also in that same video message, he

told them to go home. that is the typical democrat response here, just like the spliced together videos and audios. they should be held in contempt of court for editing speech in videos and presenting that on the senate floor. that is pretty despicable. but, um, these two groups that have been singled out as being the main violence agitators -- the poor boys and the oath keepers -- isn't that right, jesse? host: i do not know who the poor boys are. caller: oh boys, the proud boys, sorry, i am thinking of some band.

the proud boys and the oath are being singled out as the ones that really agitated the violence with that mob? host: those names have come up during the investigation, yes. caller: guess what, the leader of the proud boys, henrique taro , guess what? he is a longtime fbi informant. the fbi is calling him a prolific fbi informant. his specialty was getting groups of people together to commit violent acts so the fbi could bust them. that is the head of that group. the head of the oath, his name is thomas caldwell. he is in a jail right now in virginia. his lawyer stated yesterday this

guy has worked for the fbi for a long time. he is getting paid by them. [caller laughs] the fbi said this guy is the head of this oathkeepers group. thomas caldwell has said he has never been part of that group. he has been working. number one, he has high security clearance with the government. host: let's go to diana, who is calling from milwaukee, wisconsin, on the democratic line. diana, good morning. caller: good, jesse. i was thinking about kevin mccarthy. he was really scared in his office. i equate that to i know he was upset, but what do you expect? they did the same thing to

pence. they left pence hanging out by himself. i think that is wrong. what raskin was trying to explain to them is you do not leave the door open for another president to come in and do the same thing, and these people -- the mob, the protesters, insurgents -- they remind me of the civil war, like you had the north against the south. they seemed like relics of the civil war, except they drive f-150's instead of covered wagons. host: connecticut senater richard blumenthal came out and talked to reporters after friday's proceeding, and we want to bring you his reaction to what he heard on the senate floor. [video clip] >> i think today was about distraction by the defense, a false equivalence trying to compare what the president did to peaceful protests and trying to throw a lot of red herrings

and false equivalency across tv. i think this was an appeal to president trump and his base. i will be talking to my colleagues overnight. i think a number of my republicans are so deeply troubled they feel in their heart that the right thing to do is to convict donald trump them but whether they have the backbone and grit to stand up and speak out remains to be seen. host: let's see what some of our social media followers are saying about the senate trial of ex-president donald trump. here is one tweet that says, "the trial was over before it began because the outcome was preordained by the gop, who must court trump as their party boss and avoid angering his mega

cold." "i have to admit the trump lawyers inserted reasonable doubt as to trump inciting the insurrection. they threw out a lifeline to the spineless republicans." "trump's defense team was brilliant. all they had to do was expose the truth about dem and media lies, which they did, and it was finally a relief." "the gop will not convict, but i will watch fulton county, where the da is investigating criminal charges. republicans will not have a say so in that case." "house managers, corrupt." tom calling from quaker city,

ohio, on the republican line. tom, good morning. caller: i think it was a disgrace on what happened to our capitol. a lot of what it boils down to me is no matter how you want to title these groups, we need to uphold -- we need to get our law enforcement -- we cannot let any of this happen to any of our cities, and it has always -- we have had an embarrassment right now. it has never happened in the u.s., only in other countries. if you do not nip this real quick, every time there is something major that they are not happy about, it is going to get worse. just like an infection, i think we need to nip this really hard. host: let's go to mary, who is calling from massachusetts on the democratic line. mary, good morning. caller: good morning. i am a democrat, but i totally agree with that person who was just on from ohio.

we just cannot let this happen. really, what happened was when he was first elected, within two days of him being elected as president, he was hollering to anybody who will listen that he lost the state of new hampshire because thousands of illegal immigrants were bus loaded from massachusetts into new hampshire to vote, which was a total made up story. he just made it up. there was no proof of it at all. i am disappointed that the republicans are not having a backbone in this impeachment trial, but the democrats, too, they needed to show a backbone many times over during his presidency. everybody just rolled their eyes . oh, he is blithering on like he does. truly, people believe that what

comes out of his mouth. he is the president of the united states. people who are not from our area at that time, they do not know if he is telling the truth or not. i am disappointed in the democrats, too. we keep overstepping -- everything he says and does that is not the truth throughout four years, we have just been overstepping and overstepping. it is no wonder it got to this point. host: let's go to beverly, who is calling from myrtle beach, south carolina, on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i think that it is a waste of time because he has been in the chair for four years, and everything that they tried to do -- impeachment -- good morning. host: no, keep going.

we can hear you. caller: he has been impeached. it is like they do not have eyes to see or ears to hear anything that he has done wrong, but when it comes to anything the dems do, all of a sudden eyes popped open, and they have ears to hear. it is a waste of time and money because they will not impeach him. host: let's go to dave, who is calling from bedford, new hampshire, on the republican line. dave, good morning. caller: good morning. yeah, what happened the sixth was really terrible. no doubt. i think it is both ways, and it has got to stop, number one. number two, donald trump said he was going to drain the swamp, and that is perfectly what he is doing. we have seen both sides what

they did. all summer long, the democrats had their peaceful protests, which we know it was not peaceful, but the news keeps on pushing the opposite. now, we have seen what the news can do. we know the news does what they want to get their narrative through. we have seen how crooked the stock market is, so he is just draining the swamp, and that is all i got to say. host: let's go to sergio, who is calling from schenectady, new york, on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. thank you to c-span for providing the opportunity to reach across the aisle to speak to all americans. what we saw on january 6 is what we can expect if we do not told donald trump accountable for

what he has done, what he has set forth in this country. i implore all of my patriotic americans -- freedom, freedom, everybody is talking about freedom and patriotism. what kind of freedom do you think we are going to have when we allow our government to dictate to us under the shadow of a news like they held up for mike pence? host: let's go to mark, who is calling from huntsville, alabama, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i was trying to get through while you had a guest on. hopefully, maybe, somebody who calls in after me will have a response to this. what i wanted to know is i know they talked about impeaching trump, so -- not impeach him,

but subpoena him, so he has to testify. so if you send him a subpoena, he is going to have to show up on the house and answer questions, and i imagine his attorneys will tell him to plead the fifth so he does not have to say anything, but we all know donald trump come and he just loves to hear himself talk, and i assume he is going to answer one question, and once he does then he has so-called open the door. you can keep asking him questions on a relevant topic. he can keep pleading the fifth, but once he has opened the door and answer the question, i don't know why they don't subpoena him. host: some senators are talking about perhaps bringing in some witnesses. we have a tweet from sheldon whitehouse where he is saying

one way to clear it up, talking about the conversation between trump and mccarthy and another conversation between senator tommy tuberville and the president, one way to clear it up, suspended trial to depose mccarthy and tub are built under oath and get facts. ask secret service to produce for review communications back to whitehouse re vice president pence safety during siege. what did trump know and when did he know it? there are some senators talking about witnesses. as they concluded yesterday, former president trump's legal team said in defense of president trump that the trial they are going through now is distracting the senate from work that they should be focused on. here is what his team concluded

with yesterday. [video clip] >> members of the senate, our country needs to get back to work. i know that you know that, but instead we are here. the majority party promised to unify and deliver more covid relief, but instead they did this. we will not take most of our time today, us of the defense, in the hopes that you will take back these hours and use them to get delivery of covid relief to the american people. let us be clear. this trial is about far more than president trump. it is about silencing and banning the speech the majority does not agree with. it is about canceling 75 million

trump voters and criminalizing political viewpoints. that is what this trial is really about. it is the only existential issue before us. it asks for constitutional cancel culture to take over in the united states senate. are we going to allow canceling and banning and silencing to be sanctioned in this body? to the democrats who view this as a moment of opportunity, i urge you instead to look to the principles of free expression and free speech. i hope, truly, that the next

time you are in the minority you do not find yourself in this position. to the republicans in this chamber, i ask, when you are next in the majority, please resist what will be an overwhelming temptation to do this very same thing to the opposing party. host: i want to remind everyone that when this show ends at 10:00 a.m., the senate impeachment trial of president trump will resume. you can watch live on c-span2 and on c-span.org, and you can listen live on the free c-span radio app. you can find plenty of information at c-span.org /impeachment. let's see if we can get a few

more calls in on the segment. we will start with sylvia, calling from virginia on the republican line. good morning. caller: thank you. thank you for c-span. i was watching all that happened on january 6, and my granddaughter was here, too, and i had to turn it off because she was here. i feel that the democrats and the republicans that were there were living what happened. i believe that what they said about president -- mike pence was horrific, and to have him have to go and hide with his family made me very shaken up. the witnesses -- the witness from virgin island did a great job. my heart goes out to all of them that had to live that day on january 6 at the capitol. thank you. host: let's go to jack calling

from florida on the independent line. good morning. caller: hi. i just want to emphasize everyone that if trump had not been speaking at that meeting that he summoned and then assembled on the sixth, would what had happened on the sixth ever occurred? if he had been playing golf at mar-a-lago, would we have had innovation of the capitol? he has set a precedent that we don't want other presidents ever to do. we don't want our president to challenge the elections in the court, and then when the courts reject his challenges, assemble a mob and declare the election was a fraud. he had every opportunity in every state to challenge the election. he lost. he lost at the state court. he lost at the federal court. he lost at the u.s. supreme court.

then he called the mob. if he had not done any of that, this event would not have occurred. i don't want, as an independent, i don't want a democrat to ever do what he did host:. let's talk -- what he did. host: let's talk to linda on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i was watching on january 6 as well, and what i saw, for the most part, was, for the longest time, just peaceful protest think. i was listening to the speeches. i watched them when they went to the capitol building. they were outside. i did see when they went inside. they were in the statutory room, and they were just marching back and forth with the flag. it was not until later that you

saw the violence. i was also disturbed by seeing the photographers, so many. there was more photographers at first then there was rioters or even demonstrators. what were all those photographers doing waiting for those people together? i have another question on all of this, to. -- too. justice john roberts by the constitution is supposed to be the judge of this. from what i gathered from what was said was he felt this was unconstitutional, so by having a democratic senator sitting in as a judge, like he is not unbiased because he is a democrat, like he is not impartial. this is like a kangaroo court. it is a fake judge and kangaroo court. host: linda, according to the

constitution, the chief justice only sits in on impeachment trials when it is a sitting president. by the time it got around to the senate, president trump was ex-president trump. host: does it come out that they can have a democratic member elected to the senate sit over this of a republican ex-pres ident and try to be impartial? i do not see how it can happen. host: let's go to monique, who is calling from washington, d.c. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. this is america. 100%. you know, it is shocking, because i live in d.c., and i went through the process, and i saw it firsthand.

my heart, it was like my heart pounded every time -- i live close to the capitol. throughout that day, a lot of rioters were parking on our streets with the trump flags. also, there was a lot of stuff that was going down that the newspeople did not see. trump supporters were beating up people periodically throughout the city. my heart still pounds because this isn't the america i grew up in. this isn't the america that i thought about, and a lot of times the republican callers have been accepting the actions

of our president. the way i was raised, if you do something bad or say something disrespectful, then consequences to your actions. you have to take full responsibility of anything that you do that is not right. host: let's go to jeff, who is calling from auburn, new york, on the democratic line. jeff, good morning. caller: good morning, jesse. i am a veteran. i would like to give my veterans experience and view. first, i would like to make two quotes. if you listen to fools, the mob rules. the second, i am not black, but there are a lot of times i wish i could say i am not white. those are ronnie james steele and frank zappa respectively. as a veteran, i am a navy veteran. i am kind of middle-aged. i am 62. i am offended by the police man

that was beaten with the american flag. if i were to call witnesses, he would be the first witness i would call. he was beaten by the mob with the american flag on its pull. i respect that flag. i think the trump supporters who fly this flag tattered and dirty on their pickup trucks alongside the stars and bars, this is disrespectful to the flag. the flag is supposed to be burnt when it is dishonored and dirty and tattered, and it is supposed to be at a watchfire with the vfw or american legion. i served my country honorably. i took the same oath politicians take as a sailor in the navy to defend the constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. my final point being, as a veteran, i do not want to see trump's name on an aircraft carrier, school, airport,

presidential library, or highway, and i do not want to see his head carved in mount rushmore. host: let's go to paul, who is calling from kansas city, missouri, on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning, jesse. i get so vexed when i hear people make the false equivalency between what happened on the sixth and black lives matter protests over the summer. i'm not going to straight too far from the civics, but what you saw in the protests over the summer was a cross-section of america. you saw black people of all ages. you saw white people of all ages. you saw asian people of all ages. you saw latino people of all ages. you saw a cross-section of america that were out there because in america there has

been a pattern over the centuries of of view of black lives as being less -- host: let's go to terry, who is calling from new bern, tennessee, on the republican line. go ahead, terry. caller: yeah. i just wanted -- everybody getting ready for this new president, you wait and see. trump has the gas prices down around two dollars. everybody wait and see this new president, gas is going to be around five dollars to $10. all you democrats out there, you just wait and see. just wait and see. all i gotta say.

go ahead. you like five dollar gas, go ahead. all i gotta say. host: let's go to larry, who is calling from memphis, tennessee, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you very much for having me today. only thing i wanted to say is i just cannot believe that pence would still be cozy buddies with trump when he just left him high and dry. not about to say he threw him under the bus, but he just left him hanging. on the same token, can you imagine went black lives matter went to the capitol, they had everything from dogs, god, fbi, cia, everybody out there. when these people, proud boys

and all them old people and all this, when they came, they let them in. you know what i am saying. it is what it is. if black lives matter had done some stuff like that, they would still be picking up bodies. host: let's go to louise, who is calling from fredericksburg, virginia, on the republican line. louise, good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to clear up. people are calling about subpoenas. it is interesting. this is not a trial that they are doing now. this is the summation. this is the closing arguments. the trial was held in the house. they should have subpoenaed people in the house, but instead what they did is they quickly crafted together and impeachment, and then they take their summation, their closing

arguments to the senate that acts as the jurors. the trial should have taken place in the house of representatives. the questions to the witnesses should have been in the house of representatives, and out of nowhere, we have been through this before, so surely you should know how the court system works. i am pro-trump, and i am pro america. i am paying very close attention to all of this, and i tell you, it would have to be a cold day in hell before i would vote for a democrat. host: we would like to thank all of our callers and guests for that first segment. for the next hour, we are going to take a look at pandemic relief proposals and their impacts on the u.s. economy with joel griffith of the heritage foundation and thea lee of the

economic policy institute. stick with us. we will be right back. ♪ announcer: today on the communicators, long time amazon executive colin briar and bill barr talk about working backwards, insights, stories, and stories from inside amazon. >> how is it that a silicon valley company is going to become a hollywood producer of tv shows? these businesses, kindle, amazon music, prime video are so globally popular today because there are a suite of devices that amazon has developed to enable people to watch and read and in fact award-winning content as well. >> we are excited to talk about

what we think will be an enduring legacy of amazon, which is advances in management and science and long-term customer thinking that really take pride in operational excellence. host: watch "the communicators" today on c-span. the 117th congress includes more than 116 members. this includes television reporters and former college and professional athletes. watch our conversations with new members of congress, all next week on monday, president's day. we feature freshman house democrats and senate republican members. frank mrvan, carolyn bourdeaux, cynthia lummis, bill hagerty. watch interviews with new members of congress at 8:00 p.m.

eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org, or listen on the c-span radio app. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back, and this next segment, we are going to talk about the covid-19 pandemic relief proposals and how they are or will the fact the u.s. economy. with me this morning's joel griffith, who is a heritage foundation research fellow, and thea lee, who is the present of the economic -- president of the economic policy institute. good morning to both of you. guest: good morning. guest: good morning. host: i am going to put this question to both of you. what and how would you describe the state of the u.s. economy right now? we know there are more than 10 million workers who are still out there and have not found a job.

joel, tell me what you think the state of the u.s. economy is, and thea, give me your response. guest: thank you for having me this morning. it is great to be on with thea. the state of the u.s. economy is a tale of two different economies. we have a number of states that have reopened. economies are booming again. there are seven states right now that the economy is larger now than it was pre-pandemic. states like utah, idaho, georgia. these states are bigger now. that is because the governors and mayors have largely reopened the states, and they did it quickly. if you go to manhattan, which i did a few months ago, you have got a place where half a million people have left, tens of thousands of businesses have gone under, and you have an unemployment rate in the double digits across that entire region.

if you travel miami versus new york city -- the governor and mayor of new york and illinois and also california that have put these draconian restrictions on people , and the damage is overwhelming. host: thea, what do you think about the state of the u.s. economy right now? guest: the economy is tremendously damaged by this pandemic and the recession that came with it. you mentioned there are 10 million people out of work. it is more like 25 million people who have been impacted by the pandemic. people who have lost their jobs and are looking for jobs. there are a lot of folks working, but they are working fewer hours, or they cannot work because they have to stay home and take care of their kids or someone in their family or other pandemic related reasons. i would agree with joel that

there are two economies. some people call it a k-shaped recovery. some people have done fine. i would not make it a political divide because the point has been this pandemic devastated businesses, families, and so the decision to reopen is one that has to be made when it is safe. right now, we have whole sectors that have been devastated. leisure, hospitality, travel, a lot of business, office buildings and so on. then we have a lot of people, and it has been a tremendously disparate impact of this economy on low income people, on essential workers, on black and latino and asian workers, women workers, young workers. this is far from a healthy economy even in the places joel mentioned. host: it is always great to start these conversations with people agreeing with each other.

let's go to the next point. describe to meet your view of president biden's american rescue plan. thea, what are the pros and cons of biden's american rescue plan? guest: i think biden's $1.9 trillion rescue plan is exactly what the economy needs right now. this is a bold and ambitious plan that would help small businesses, individuals, individuals who are still on unemployment insurance. it is at the scale of the problem because there has been such a norm is hole busted into the u.s. economy. this requires a big effort from the u.s. government. it is not perfect. nothing is ever perfect. i think this will give people who are struggling the resources they need, but it will also put enough juice into the economy so

that small businesses can recover and reopen, so that people have money in their pockets so they can go out and help fuel a strong recovery, not just link back to where we might have been before, but address some of the underlying structural problems that were exposed during the pandemic. host: joel, what do you think? guest: this $1.9 trillion is wasteful, and it will result in slower long-term economic growth. the fact is the economy has been juiced. it has been juiced by the reopening. quarter three, we sought record economic growth. we sought economic growth coming back because states, cities reopened. as far as the package itself, if you look at the details of the package and realize the cronyism and inefficiency -- take the transportation component. the majority of these funds in

the transportation component go to mass transit systems. mass transit only accounts for about 5% of daily travel for americans, but half of this goes to mass transit. this program would basically give the cities that have mass transit, it would cover 60% of their operating costs. you are making people pay for the failing mass transit systems in places like new york city, which their mass transit system was failing before because the public sector unions have a stranglehold on the city government. the typical union worker for the new york city mass transit system is making upwards of $150,000 a year. we are going to put those costs on the taxpayer across the rest of the country. another example of the waste in this package is the $30 billion of aid going for rental eight.

that sounds good on its pace. -- on its face. if you look at the stats, it does not make sense. you have got around a two percentage point increase throughout the pandemic. if you multiply that by the total number of renting households in this country, you are talking of roughly around one million to 1.5 million people that are late on rent because of covid. this package would distribute $20,000 to $30,000 per unit to state and local governments. this does not pass the smell test. i could go on for the whole hour. i will not. host: joel insists this package is wasteful. do you agree? guest: i wish i had heard the same kind of righteous indignation from you and the

republican party when the republican tax bill in 2017 to trillion dollars to folks that did not need it, 85% of the benefits going to the richest folks. the indignation you muster for a transit worker, people who have been putting their lives at risk going to work every single day so nurses and other essential workers can get to work. i cannot fathom that you would begrudge that or the rental aid. across the country, people are in tremendous difficulty. kids are going hungry. people are being thrown out in the street maybe not in your social circle, joel, but these are people who are working hard and to have put their lives at risk every single day. if you do not have those mass transit systems, people cannot get to work. if we do not build the daycare system, people cannot go to work. it is not wasteful to give people money to pay their rent. that helps the people who pay rent, and it helps their landlord.

it is not wasteful to get mass transit systems running again. they have been decimated. they did not have any revenues for almost a year. think forward, joel. just think forward. as we try to reopen the entire economy and send kids to school and people back to work, we are going to need to spend money to do it right. schools are going to need money for technology, ventilation, staffing, cleaning, and that money does not come from anywhere. the state and local governments during the pandemic lost revenue to sales tax and so on because people stayed home. if we do not replace that, think forward, if we do not replace that, there is a second wave of job cuts, layoffs, and cuts to essential public services that will wreck this recovery, which is not terribly strong. you mentioned the third quarter, but in the fourth quarter, growth was starting to flatline again. we are very far from repairing

the damage done. we are down 35 million jobs from where we need to be from the capacity of the economy. spending that money now is a good investment in getting the economy healthy and getting people back to work. host: joel, i will let you respond before i go to the next topic. guest: number one, we know there are people that are suffering. that is why we should be encouraging cities, states, local governments to reopen safely. when it comes to the evictions, my point is not that we should not help people who need it. my point is if you look at the number of delinquencies, you have one million additional to liquid sees right now. if you divide that $30 billion in aid by one million, that is close to $30,000 per unit. that does not pass the smell test. where is all this money going?

$30,000 per extra delinquency. thea mentioned mass transit workers. of course, we should value the contributions of all public servants. we know that places like chicago and new york city, these mass transit systems have been buckling under financial pressure not because they do not have enough revenue, but because the average amounts they are paying per employee is a multiple of what a typical person in the private sector earns in some of these states. if you look at median household income, the typical mass transit worker in new york is at $150,000. thea mentioned city and state local governments are seeing a revenue crunch. actually, state and local government revenue combined is

up slightly. from april to september, we saw a dip during the shutdown. the federal government delivered aid to cities and states that was a multiple of eight times the revenue lost. that is an absolute myth that state and local governments have decreased revenue over the past year. that is true. you can look at data from the census bureau that will show that. host: this is a great conversation. let me remind our viewers that they can take part in it. for this conversation, we are going to open up regional lines. that means if you are in the eastern or central time zones, we want you to call in at (202) 748-8000. if you are in the mountain and pacific time zones, your number is going to be (202) 748-8001. we are going to open up a

special line for those of you who are unemployed. those of you who are unemployed, we want to know what you think about the pandemic relief plan being talked about in congress and the economy. if you are unemployed, call (202) 748-8003 --if you are unemployed, call (202) 748-8002. you can always text (202) 748-8003. thea and joel, i want to show both of you what federal reserve chairman jerome powell said earlier this week on wednesday when he discussed monetary policy and the pandemic, and he previewed the jobs outlook. this comes from an event hosted by the economic club of new york. i will show it, and i want you to respond. [video clip] >> can deliver substantial economic and social benefits, including higher employment and income levels, improved and

expanded job opportunities, narrower economic disparities, and healing of the entrenched damage inflicted by past recessions on individual's economic well-being. at present, we are a long way from such a labor market. fully recognizing the benefits of such a strong labor market will take continued support from near-term policy and longer run investments so all those seeking jobs have the skills and opportunities that will enable them to contribute to and share in the benefits of prosperity. we need only look to february of last year to see how beneficial a strong labor market can be. the overall unemployment rate was 3.5%, the lowest in a half-century. host: joel, what do you think about what federal reserve chairman jerome powell said? guest: i agree with him that we

need to incentivize investments. that is why we saw the most important tax reform of a generation passed a couple years ago, which incentivized investment and business investment. we cannot have a real productivity growth without this type of investment. when it comes to the labor market in general, this is not a monolithic labor market in the u.s. in this pandemic. utah, alabama, iowa, nebraska, they have unemployment rates that are under 5%. we have entire metro areas that are under 3% unemployment, and that is because those individuals have been allowed to reopen their businesses and go back to work. i encourage listeners that are in places like new york and chicago to actually get out and visit some of these locations. visit atlanta, south carolina,

jacksonville, florida, dallas, texas, and you will see the economies in those areas are night and day compared to what is going on in chicago and new york. we have unemployment in 17 states that are under 5%. the labor market has bounced back and many of those locations. a lot of people in the service sector in many of these other cities that have true county and orders in place, they are -- that have draconian orders in place, they are high. guest: i completely agree with federal reserve chair powell, he did not mention investment, having a strong labor market is important for now in the future. when people are traumatized by long-term unemployment, it often has a lifetime impact on them and their children. fed chair powell is rightly

focused on what it is we need to do to get the unemployment employment strong in this country. mentioning that there are places with less than 5% unemployment is irrelevant. we need national policy that will address all of it. if some places do not need money, they do not need money. you cannot draw a correlation between reopening and the health of the economy. there are a lot of other factors at play. what the stimulus relief and recovery bill can do is help the places that need help and help the whole economy get stronger. it is a question of national macroeconomic policy that will allow people to get to work in a healthy way. joel, telling people to travel to atlanta, nobody can travel to atlanta because it is not safe. this is not a question of governments shutting down the

economy, people do not want to go to places that it is not safe until we have the virus under control. putting everything in terms of the question about the reopening and not reopening, you can see that it does not have to do with government control, it has to do with people feeling safe, whether they are confident. the economy is getting back on track because president biden and vice president harris are investing in the control pieces, safe and healthy workplaces so people can get the vaccine. that will eventually get the economy going again. it will also take a tremendous amount of investment from the federal government because there are sectors of the economy that have been devastated and are not going to come back on their own. host: your response. guest: there is a direct link between shutdowns and economic growth.

if you go to manhattan now, you will see entire blocks that are boarded up. there are so many news stories over the past few months of restaurants that have abandoned their plans for new york and come to places like florida where business is booming. people actually want to travel. i have got to atlanta a number of times visiting family during the last year. the atlanta airport, charlotte airport is full with travelers. if you come to south florida, you will see people, thousands from new york city, that have fled what is going on in new york with the shutdown. people are eager to travel, and they are eager to find freedom. we see this push for dublin the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. we want people to enjoy opportunities to succeed, but

this would actually knock off the round of economic opportunity for people that need training. think about those minimum-wage jobs we know from the congressional budget office, 1.3 million jobs would be lost by doubling the federal minimum wage. this will disproportionately impact those that have a criminal record, that do not have education, experience. we are going to price them out of the marketplace. the cbo suggests that for every two people lifted out of poverty , three people are going to lose their jobs. this is the last thing we need as we are trying to emerge from these disastrous shutdowns. host: you took the question out of our next viewer's mouth. we have a social media question that asks the question you just talked about. they wanted both of you to

address the $15 minimum wage. joel, we know what you think. thea, $15 minimum wage, what do you think? guest: i think raising the federal minimum wage to $15 by 2025, so in stages over the next several years, is exactly what we need to make sure working people can earn a decent living. joel, you mentioned the congressional budget office report, which my staff has taken a close look at. the finding is that 1.4 million people would lose their jobs. the congressional budget office used some outdated numbers and did not even use their own best elasticity to find that number. they found 27 million workers would see a raise. they said 900,000 people would be lifted out of poverty. 27 million people who have been earning too little money for too

long would see a raise. this is exactly what is needed for businesses because you need people to have money in their pockets to go outcorner, and toe able to get to work and so on. what we have seen, the empirical evidence on minimum wage is very strong over the last couple years. unions have outdated old-fashioned ideology to talk about minimum wage, but the fact that is in most of the states, 29 states raise their minimum wage over the federal minimum wage. we have not seen any negative job impacts when that happens, because you know what happens? when people earn more money, they stick around longer, there is less turnover, so there is less cost to business, and more incentive for business to invest in their employees, because they are more productive, stick around longer, and then there is -- it is more attractive for

people to come to a place where they can earn a decent living. right now, the $7.25 minimum wage is a poverty wage for most people and has not raised -- been raised since 2009. it's worth less than it was in 1968 if you correct for inflation, which is ridiculous. economy has grown, technology has improved, we need to make sure people who work in these tough jobs -- and most of them are not kids and not entry-level workers. a lot of them are adults with family, and they need to be able to pay their bills, and that is only the right thing to do, and good for the economy and it is good for business as well. host: let's include some of our callers. ralph is calling from georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to bring up two points. first of all, i would ask

griffith, i employed him to go outside to some of these rural areas while people are working for several dollars an hour, and i would like to see him -- can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead, ralph. caller: i would ask mr. griffith to go out, and see some of these areas where people are working for seven dollars an hour. they have to walk to work for mile -- for a mile. they might have to go to work at night, at 10:00 in mcdonald's. other places, if they paid a wage where they could afford a car, this would be good. i had a niece that wanted to work, she worked at mcdonald's, and she was told she could not afford a car at this time. thank god she got a college education. i employ her to go outside of

washington cut -- employee you to go outside of washington, d.c., and see how people there are living. guest: thanks for that question. i think it is very important definitely to be in areas -- i think there is disconnect with a lot of politicians that don't have experience working those jobs. when i was in college and just after college, i worked several jobs at $2.13 per hour plus tips at a number of restaurants, and that was definitely a minimum wage. it gave a lot of valuable experience, just with dealing with other people, managing other people at times, and you learn a lot on good jobs. when you start at a minimum wage job, the goal is not to stay there forever, it is to learn the skills so you can move on.

i was fortunate enough that i did not go to college, so i was able to quickly move on as soon as i got a more permanent job. but a lot of individuals do not have that opportunity. the majority of americans do not get a college degree. for them, we need to make sure that they have ample opportunities to get on-the-job training. we know from study after study that when we do this, we knock that wrong off of that letter for those folks and we do not give them the chance. we are telling people with a $15 minimum wage, if you cannot produce $35,000 per year, it is better off you don't have a job at all. i think that is so disrespectful to people, and this is just the wrong avenue to go down. with our free market economy, the system we have, that we are so privileged to live in, we have to be having household income at all-time records in the last few years. that is because we have been able to see investments in businesses and technologies

where we can see the typical person far more productive. and we are all sharing in that and i want to see a continuation of that. host: thea, what do you think? guest: the problem is that we are not all sharing, that we have had growing inequality over the last four decades in the united states. for the typical worker, the middle wage distribution, has barely seen wage increases over the last 20 to 30 years, even though the person is much more productive than he or she used to be. here's the thing. this is a tremendously productive economy, and joel, when you were back in whatever it was, high school, when you worked at minimum wage, it was worth more than it is today. there is no reason for that. one of the things we need to do, when we raise minimum wage to $15 an hour, we need to index it to inflation so we do not have to go through this political

charade every couple years and see the political football gets kicked around. people's lives are at stake here, and what we have seen over and over again, what the empirical evidence shows clearly is raising minimum wage is good for business, good for jobs, and definitely good for working people. it gives people the dignity they need to be able to -- as ralph said, to be able to get transportation to work, childcare. the minimum wages so low that it is dysfunctional. people cannot afford to work for $7.25 per hour, and they should not have to. host: this question is for both of you. under the american rescue plan, we see four hundred dollars per week of unemployment insurance supplements -- $400 per week of unemployment insurance supplements, $350 billion for states and local governments, a

$15 per hour minimum wage, expanded sick leave, and increased tax credits, but what about social media -- but one of our social media followers asked this, don't the relief measures operate under the assumption the covid virus will be controlled in the next year? what if the pandemic continues into 2022, 2023 -- 2022-2023? we can't rule that out. what should we done if we cannot stop at this year -- be done if we cannot stop at this year. guest: that's a really important question. this virus has taken a lot longer than most people thought it was going to, and as we see, it is mutating. i'm not a public health expert so i don't know much about that, but we should have contingency plans. to me, the $1.9 trillion is a really strong start, but we might have to reconsider. one thing that i think we ought to do is revamp some of our

social safety net programs permanently, especially the unemployment insurance. it is antiquated, underfunded, understaffed, the technology is old. i would like to see that program be made more expensive and more generous than it is. also, things like paid sick leave and universal health care, these things should be built into our economy. this is one of the things i think president biden is talking about. we don't want to go back to where we were before the pandemic, especially with racial lines that have been exacerbated during the pandemic. we would like to get to and -- get to a place where our economy is more resilience, robust, and fair, so having paid sick leave, for example, i hope we have all learned it is not really good for the economy if people have no choice but to go to work sick. that makes everyone else sick,

their coworkers, customers, so on. so addressing some of these underlying structural problems can help minimum wage and that will build in more resilience for the future if we are so unlucky as to have this pandemic of one or have another pandemic around the corner. host: joel, what should we do about our economy at the pandemic continues into next year and the year after? what should we be doing now to prepare to save our economy? guest: i think what thea said was revealing. we saw many on the left using the economic crisis from the shutdowns as an excuse to push through very radical ideas that would bankrupt our country. i don't concede the point that this bill considered is a covid relief package. as we discussed a few of the specifics before, this is not

covid relief, we are seeing massive bailouts of states like new york and california, states already crumbling before from decades of management, we are seeing bailouts for those cities, bailouts for the public sector union, bailouts for mass transits, bailouts for the public school districts mismanaging their resources, and we see this big transfer of wealth from parts of the country that are governed efficiently, and we are seeing that put into these failing areas. same thing goes with we talked about the eviction aid or rental aid. this is far in excess of anything we have seen as far as losses from the shutdowns. same thing -- we can put a point in that. the bottom line, this package is not covid relief, it is a massive bailout and spending package. i would say, if you look at what we have seen in states like georgia, florida, texas throughout this pandemic, we

have seen those states reopen. we have seen those read -- those economies bounce back. thankfully, we are seeing the vaccine distributed and people vaccinated, and i hope they continue to bring relief across the country, but many states have already seen their economy recover from the shutdowns. the more states that reopen, the more economic recovery can continue. the last thing we should do is use this pandemic to steal from future generations with what has become an enormous debt burden. we will feel the impact of that. host: let's go back to our phone lines to gregory calling from maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. mr. griffith, first of all, i want to entirely agree with what miss leah said so far. i completely agree with her,

stimulus, stimulus, stimulus. where i disagree with joel griffith is the fact that it seems as though he is not living in the current, real america. he seems like one of these individuals that is i guess privileged and also well-off. whereas we, the rest of us here, americans, are dealing with this tragedy, and all of this insight that joel has offered so far, it is contemporaneous at best. it is meaningless at most. sir, i want to express my sincere impression that you are not living in the same world or same reality that the rest of america is living in. host: go ahead and respond,

joel. guest: thank you for that call. i would say first of all, i do feel i am fortunate to have a job where i was not affected by the shutdown, i was able to work from home for a year. i definitely understand and appreciate that many others, many millions do not have that opportunity. we see many of them that are still without work. i can sense that in what you are saying and i can appreciate that. i think it is very important for those of us in the policy world to really be in the real world outside of d.c. and new york. my family business, my dad's business, he works with a lot of retail, bars, restaurants, repair centers, nail salons. just from talking from him throughout the last year, i know how frightening it was, where he is based in ohio, where he saw upwards of 50% of businesses he

deal with, they went out of business. his public checking account closed. the jobs disappeared and a lot of the small businesses, these are people that had invested their entire life, really their entire future retirement invested in these businesses, many of them businesses, restaurants, bars, nail salons, places that were not allowed to operate or had restrictions. i know i get caught up in the data sometimes, but the data is a reflection of the painful reality that we see so many of these employees and small business owners going through, and talking to somebody people as i visited friends in florida, you can see these individuals, they did not want to leave new york. they did not want to find a job elsewhere. some of them are still looking for work elsewhere. they were forced to do that because it was so difficult on them. people i was with last night, they are still looking for them. nobody wants to be out of a job.

they were shut down anywhere from six months later. now, having to leave and come to florida to find other opportunities. that is the real world, and heartbreaking to see, and it is why i'm so passionate about being -- seeing places like new york and chicago to reopen their doors and allow functioning again. host: theo, -- thea, your response? guest: i would like to thank gregory for the call and his heartfelt impression. joel, i guess part of what i'm hearing from you is you are trying to divide us all and talk about the red states versus blue states and who is bailing out whom. i can't take it seriously when the republican put forward attacks -- a tax bill that bailed out corporations and wealthy people in 2017 the economy was strong. now the economy is weak. this is the moment where the

federal government needs to step up and do the right thing. it makes much more sense to go big event to go small at this point in time. not to be worrying about whether people will get more money than they need, because this economy has been devastated by hundreds of thousands of deaths. every death is a family, and i know we all know people who have died, who have died alone, died needlessly, and because we haven't done the right thing of investing the resources we needed to public health, into all of the kinds of measures that need to be taken to keep us safe, to keep people safe at the workplace, safe as they go about their lives. and so, the error of spending too much money, being too generous, giving people a little bit more money than they need right now, is not a big deal. that is putting money into people's pockets so they can pay their rent without worrying. you gave me numbers about how much -- if the money is not needed, it won't be spent.

nobody is talking about writing people money for checks that they don't need. we are talking about that making sure, because there is uncertainty in the future about the course of the pandemic, the course of the economy, we have seen how hard this recession has been on working people, particularly black people, particularly latinos, particularly asian. because of the impact, it's my take more resources to build back to a place that she talked about the radical agenda i talk about. i want you to answer me, do you think paid sick leave as a radical idea? guest: first of all, you mentioned a second ago that we are not just writing checks to people regardless of need. actually, we set up a round of that, distributing stimulus checks to everyone, not just those who have economic uncertainty, but the tens of millions of people. any of us that received the checks, i'm sure everyone likes to see money in their checking account, but this is almost a

situation of politicians buying political support with money from future generations. we have to be fiscally responsible and recognize deeds decisions have -- these decisions have consequences. everything we are doing today, the $27 trillion of debt, we are going to ac -- going to see higher taxes or an erosion of the value of the dollar. that is a direct -- that is related to what we are doing with the borrowing and printing of trillions of dollars. and paid sick leave, everyone wants time to be with their families and for themselves, and i understand that. i encourage private businesses to do that. i am thankful to be at one where we have that is a benefit, but you have to recognize too, that every mandate that comes from the federal government, even if it is well-intentioned, you have to look at the consequences. with the minimum wage, i think everyone wants our neighbors, friends, and family to once

more, but we have to do it the right way. it has to be done with allowing our economy to continue to produce more so we can all share in that abundance. that's all. that's what i'm encouraging everyone to do, every mandate has a consequence -- do, remind everyone that every mandate as a consequence. guest: can i just say one thing? joel, in terms of people getting checks that don't need him, donald trump was for the $2000 payment to the people, whether they needed it or not. there's a lot of bipartisan support for that aid because that is important to helping people get through the crisis. guest: thank you for bringing that up. you are right. this has been an idea with much bipartisan support, but some of the worst ideas are the ones with bipartisan support. i understand president trump is

a republican and biden is a democrat and they both support this idea of giving checks to people directly impacted by this or not. whether that is a republican or democrat, that does not determine what is a good or bad idea. when i was speaking out, and many of us are concerned about our nation's economic future, we are speaking about this over the summer and fall. nothing changes now that we have a new president. an idea that was not a good idea five minutes ago is still not a good idea today for the same reasons, we are borrowing from future generations for pure political benefit now. if we look at the savings rate, we know the checks that came to people that weren't able to spend the money, we saw the savings rate triple over the past here. normally, that is a good thing. in this case, we borrowed money from china, and from others, and reprinted money and went ahead and deposited it in people's counts.

that is not prudent, even though it may have been politically advantageous. guest: that's the same money borrowed for the tax cut in 2017, the same money we borrowed and -- in pockets of people that also didn't spend it. host: let me let some of our colors get into this conversation as well. let's go to crag calling from daytona beach, florida. crag, good morning. -- craig, good morning. caller: how are you doing? host: go ahead. caller: this field lee, how much did she get an hour? -- this thea lee, how much did she get an hour? host: we will see if she wants to answer it. but what does that have to do with your question? caller: how much do she get an hour? host: turned on your television. if thea wants to answer, i will let her. caller: how much do you get an

hour? guest: i don't think that is any of your business. caller: that's not any of my business, really? i would say $10 an hour a raise would be great. i would say $10 an hour would be great. host: what do you mean, $10 per hour as a wage? caller: for minimum wage. it was $7.60-$7.80 down here when i was doing calls. i had a job, and it was like $7.80, and it went up. it was $7.60 and it went up to $7.80. and i was like woo! host: are you trying to argue

that the $15 per hour is too high? caller: i'm just saying, for people, $10 an hour is great. yeah, i am arguing that. i am totally arguing that. host: thea, you want to respond to that? guest: i would say if the proposal is to relate -- the proposal is to raise minimum wage over several years, incrementally a little bit. because minimum wage has lost value over the last 10 years since it has not been raise for that much time, people are working more hours and working for the last. -- working for last. they cannot make ends meet. a lot of the minimum wage people are parents, have kids come on public assistance because the wages so low. -- wage is so low. what we have seen as economists, when we do raise minimum wage, the results are good, people

earn more money, they can stay at jobs longer, get more skills, they can get to work more easily. it is -- it can be a good business move as well, because you find you might attract better workers when you pay more money, and they are sick less often, and they can get to work more efficiently. there are a lot of good things for economy. one is to have a healthy community where people can go out and spend money, and that creates the circle. when people have money in their pockets, they spend it, creating more jobs. that is what we are looking for, a healthy economy where everyone who wants jobs can't have one and everyone who has a job is not living in poverty. host: crag says $10 per hour, not 15. is -- craig says $10 per hour and not $15 per hour. guest: this varies by region.

we should allow local governments and states to decide for themselves what they want the minimum-wage to be. it is a big country. $15 per hour for minimum wage in d.c. is equivalent to $30 an hour or something in mississippi because the cost of living is more affordable. places where you see affordable living, -- many places of the country were already paying $11 to $12 per hour. you can see signs all the time, and there's a family where they are being paid well in excess of the federal minimum wage. it is different state by states, but thea mentioned we need to focus on everyone who once a job has a job, but the problem with the minimum-wage hike is that it will kill jobs.

there are many studies over the past several decades that show minimum wage increases do in fact have a direct impact on the jobs. there is a study in my county close to d.c. several years ago that estimated a $15 minimum wage there would eradicate one in three low income jobs. that's not fair. people that don't yet have experience or on-the-job training deserve to have a job as well. people trying to rebuild their record after may be a criminal conviction, they deserve a chance to get a job as well. when we go ahead and create -- push hundreds of thousands of these individuals out of the marketplace, we deny them the chance to rebuild their lives or build their lives in the first place. we deny their chance to achieve the american dream. for that reason, we all should be weary of these efforts to double the federal minimum wage. host: let's see if we can get

another quick caller and before he and the segment. let's go to jane calling from ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. how is everyone today? [laughter] host: just fine. go ahead, jane. caller: honey, i wanted to ask couple questions. i'm an older lady, 85 years old. i wanted to know how we are going to pay all of this money back. ok? then, i want to say that really, how is a business going to pay all of that money an hour? it will close the businessman down. is he going to have someone to work with them or not? i also want to say, when they do get a job, they need insurance and need sick pay. that is two things they do. i daughter is a manager of the store and i do know this. i'm worried about, if you put a

minimum-wage and make it too high, they may not even have a job. can you ask them about that? host: thea, we will let you take that question on first. guest: i would like to say thank you, jane, for your call. for the first one, that is an important question, how do we pay the money back. this is something that joel raise, saddling our children with dad. the chair of the federal reserve, jerome powell, a republican, and the secretary of jezreel -- treasury, janet yellen, are both in agreement that this is the right thing to do because, first of all, interest rates and inflation are low right now. which means it is not expensive to borrow money. the other thing that economists understand is that if we can get the economy strong again, really going at a strong rate, that will create a ton of energy that people will start creating jobs and paying taxes. we are going to be able to pay

off the money more easily. i know it's a little hard to believe, but when you get the economy going and get everybody back to work, everybody paying taxes, get people off of social where for programs, that that generates more economic growth, more tax revenue, and it is easier to pay the money back then if we go the other route, which is what joel is talking about, which is we live with a higher unemployment for the next five years, which is what the congressional budget office in a different study said, that if we don't do a more significant plan, we will end up having high unemployment for at least five or as many as eight to 10 years. that is what happened at the last -- after the last recession, we limped along for the next 10 years. that's what republicans believe,

republicans and democrats, believe that getting the economy strong will allow us to pay off the debts much more easily in terms of cutting back then in terms of cutting back. -- pay off debts more easily than in terms of cutting back. because there is less turnover, that saves businesses money. if you pay people too little and they never show up for work because as ralph said, walking to work in the middle of the night or taking the bus that breaks down and so on, there are a lot of benefits to business of having workers paid more money, who can get to work, are healthier, can take care of their kids, who do not as many problems, who might stick around longer and be more productive employees. host: joel, you get the last word but you have to be quick. guest: thank you for that call. i grew up right on the street from you in ohio, a few miles away. you raise very valid points. how are we going to pay for it?

i know thea mentioned these plans will more easily pay for it. unfortunately, every study coming out shows we are on an upward trajectory of debt, thanks in part to these plans, and despite the low interest rates now, which have been creeping up on treasury bonds, we will be spending more and more of our national income to serve that dads, money out of middle-class paychecks to go ahead and pay the bondholders. within the current generation, you are talking about an excess of 2% of gdp just going to service the debt. when it comes to business owners being able to shoulder the minimum wage, many will not be able to. think about the restaurant businesses, offering a tight profit margin, often times 5% profit margin. if you do -- double the labor cost, you are threatening to wipe out all of the profit.

we estimate the heritage foundation, fast food restaurants would have to hike the prices by 30% to stay solvent. a lot of people are not going be willing to pay 30% more for the big mac. there will be real job losses and business closures. take a look at what happened over the last several years in seattle. host: we would like to thank joe griffith of the heritage foundation and thea lee of the economic policy institute for being with us this morning and talking about the pandemic relief plans and economy. thank you both. guest: thank for having me. guest: thank you. host: coming up next, back to our phone lines and we will have you tell us about what you think of the senate impeachment trial. you see the numbers on screen. we will be right back. ♪ >> sunday night on q&a, a profile on vice president kamala harris's mother with a journalist, followed by the discussion on indian immigration

to the u.s. with the director of asia programs at johns hopkins school of advanced international study. >> my ascension to the vice presidency has echoes of her mother's -- are ascension to the vice presidency has echoes of her mother's well, coming to a country she has never been to before, didn't know anyone, she was a stranger, but it did not deter her. we see that in vice president harris' career trajectory and the barrier breaking nature of some of the positions she helped. >> if you look at immigration 100 years ago, italy, the immigrants come in and basically they climb the stairs to above and gradually move upwards. second-generation goes to the first floor, the next generation to the second floor, so on. but indians essentially came and

took the elevator, because of the tech boom, and the tech boom expanded their opportunities. so they rose much faster. they came with higher skills, and they entered a sector which moved much more. >> that is sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q and a -- q&a. >> robin hood's ceo testifies before the house financial services committee on gamestop's rapid price increase and its decision to hold on buying these stocks. watch online on c-span.org, on-air, or in the free c-span radio app.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: we are going to talk to you this morning about what you think about the senate impeachment trial. i want to remind you the trial will resume at 10:00 a.m. after the show ends, you can watch it live on c-span and c-span.org. you can always listen to it live on the free c-span radio app and you can find more information at c-span.org/impeachement. as we have been going to the show this morning, there has been actual news with the impeachment trial. i want to bring you these tweets that we will talk a little bit about what will happen today. here's the first week. two senate democrats are calling for witnesses as key details about trump's conduct while the january 6 violence have come to life. this is from kyle cheney.

the big question, well house managers agree? here's another tweet from kyle cheney, a third senate democrats, chris van hollen, says he will welcome witnesses if house managers ask for them. seems like we are working toward whether house managers will call for them. now, a source with the trump legal team, from kyle cheney of politico, a source for the trump legal team says any move by democrats to call witnesses will get real ugly real quick. "the first two witnesses we would call would be nancy pelosi and mario bowser, and they can explain why they rejected additional security and national guard help." there may be a fight on the floor over witnesses coming up soon. here's another bit of news coming out just now. in an email to colleagues, senate republican leader mitch mcconnell says he will vote to

acquit ex-president trump in his impeachment trial. this is coming from burgess everett who has two sources familiar with the matter saying the senate republican leader is saying he will vote to commit -- acquit president trump. once again, the trial the president -- ex president donald trump will begin a time :00 a.m. stick with us here on c-span. let's go to our phone lines and start with keith, calling from denver colorado on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for c-span. so i've come to realize that it has been a slow progression, but right now, we only have one functioning political party.

and then we have unfortunately a detained political party. we are witnessing that in real time. we know they are going to acquit, because they are cochairs, so they have a lot on the line if they voted to convict. they are not voting for impeachment. he has been impeached twice. trump has two, including the most bipartisan in u.s. history. we gotta keep saying that, the most bipartisan impeachment in u.s. history. they cannot convict because they are co-conspirators. host: let's go to rich calling from marion, ohio on the republican line. good morning. caller: interesting conversations. it seems the supreme court's justice is not showing up on this impeachment, it very

biased, is on the cousins to touche and they are not going by because the supreme court justices -- host: to interrupt you really quick, the constitution says the supreme court justice only sits when the president is being impeached. donald trump is the former president, so by the constitution, the chief justice does not have to be there. caller: last time we had the impeachment, they were coming -- the virus was coming over from china. china is delighted with this problem. we tried to stop the planes and we told the president he is a bigot and you can do that. now he denies he did that. we have people in nursing homes dying, and we have a border that is opened, letting people in while we are saying look at me, look at all the great things i'm doing while we are killing people.

why did we have the border down -- open down there. there? -- have the border open down there? host: let's go to john on the independent line. caller: i consider both parties to be defective. the democrats only bought -- brought one article, inciting an insurrection for the sore loser insurrection. the sore loser insurrection, why did they not to bring another article forward, dereliction of duty, for when the president did not send in the national guard in a timely way? they designed this to fail, just like they designed the last impeachment to fail. they are very stupid. in terms of the republican, they are wonderful. they are still under the control of the mob.

they are afraid. that is why they won't convict. host: let's go to gregory calling from nashville, tennessee on the democratic line. gregory, good morning. caller: good morning. i have a lot to say, but the last caller, he is right in some ways, but i think we are the stupid ones. they are the smart words, -- smart ones, it is all a game show anymore. trump started that, and i don't dislike what he did as a president, but it is a game show now. how much money and time are we going to waste on this impeachment trial? it is ridiculous. host: let's remind our former president trump's defense team left off yesterday. yesterday, they included their defense of the former president by saying -- concluded their defense of the former president by saying this trial has distracted from the work the senate should be doing. >> members of the senate, our

country needs to get back to work. i know that you know that, but instead, we are here. the majority party promised to unify and deliver more covid relief, but instead, they did this. we will not take most of our time today, us of the defense, in the hopes that you will take back these hours and use them to get delivery of covid relief to the american people. let us be clear, this trial is about far more than president trump. it is about silencing and banning the speech the majority does not agree with. it is about canceling 75 million

trump voters and criminalizing political viewpoints. that is what this trial is really about. it is the only existential issue before us. it asks for constitutional cancel culture to take over in the united states senate. are we going to allow canceling and banning, and silencing to be sanctioned in this body? to the democrats, who view this as a moment of opportunity, iras you instead to look to the principles of free expression and free speech. i hope, truly, the next time you

are in the minority, you don't find yourself in this position. to the republicans in the chamber, i asked, when you're next in the majority, please resist what will be an overwhelmingly temp take -- overwhelming temptation to do this very same thing to the opposing party. host: let's talk to africa, calling from virginia. on the republican line. africa, good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: just fine. how are -- just fine. go ahead. caller: i'm getting mad with trump. i came to this country, my father was a diplomat. they brought us here the speak english. america was the most beautiful

place in the world, but now it is a pain in the neck. we have a president now that [indiscernible]and that is just disgusting. that is what i'm calling about, because i cannot take it anymore. and what happened, i don't think with the president done. i think it was pelosi, schumer, the president, and his son, and that is disgusting. host: let's go to mary soul calling -- mighty soul -- mar isol calling. caller: i'm going to speak from a perspective as a juror, what i watched yesterday was just bizarre.

i don't remember ever seeing a defense presented in this way because it did not look like a defense. i've never seen hypocrisy presented as a defense against anything. they started off with a blatant lie, saying there was no interference with the election while the senate intelligence committee reported on august 18 at 2020, which was bipartisan, said they did. the videos presented from the defense seemed more like a campaign rally presentation. the president declines to show up to defend himself or answer any questions. his own attorneys suggested during their presentation that perhaps he should be tried in criminal court. even after all of that, to see the president didn't even bother

to check up on his own vice president and tweet it to his supporters that basically the vice president betrayed them, a man that has been so loyal to him and did not even bother to protect the other branch of government. it is disturbing to me, and i just -- i do not understand how these senators have no integrity. host: let's go to gail calling from west frink spirit -- west springfield, massachusetts. good morning. caller: good morning. i will be brief. my question about this whole, bizarre trial in courts is why is it that, of all of the markets in washington dc, ex-president trump decided to come out and address this

particular crowd? thank you. host: as we get closer to 10:00, we can see senators and their staffers beginning to arrive in the capital. we will bring video to you up senators and staffers arriving at the u.s. capitol to begin the senate impeachment trial, which were will zoom -- which will resume on c-span at 10:00 a.m. we will go to that as we finish the show. stick with us on c-span. let's go back to the phones and get to nancy calling from tucson, arizona on the republican line. good morning. caller: hi, how are you? i will be very brief. number one, they never saw the other side, never saw the right news, they lied and lied for four years. this man did more for this country than any other president. i'm very smart. i used to be a democrat, and these are not democrats anymore. when he was out there talking, they had already gone through

the barrier. this was prearranged and they hard all -- had already started before they ever did his speech. look at the economy under him, all of the unemployment, look at the unemployment records for the minorities, look at the safety for the border. there are only worried about the vote of the democrats. they want to stop the courts, take care of our constitution, go do something in the supreme court. they are insane people and they are really, -- they really, really should be stopped. you need to watch the real news and see what is really going on. host: let's go to morgan calling from pennsylvania on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. republicans are not going to convict trump. as much as i dislike him, i give him credit. he shows you how you can punk an entire political party. they won't stand up to him for anything.

drag queens got more heart and guts than any of these republicans in leadership. host: as you see, senators are beginning to show up for today's impeachment trial. as we move forward, we are getting breaking news from the senators themselves tweeting out information. i will bring a couple tweets from senator lindsey graham who says isn't it odd the liberal news reports about impeachment, just like what happened during brett kavanaugh, which proved to be unreliable, always come out right before we are set to vote? i realize the source of the stories and -- stories is the liberal media with the agenda. if you want a delay, it will be a long one with many witnesses. that is lindsey graham talking about the report that senators won a delay to consider calling witnesses in today's impeachment trial. we have that news coming out 10

minutes before the trial is going to resume at the u.s. capitol. let's see if we can get a couple more calls. teresa is calling from lemont, illinois on the republican line. teresa, good morning. caller: good morning. i cue for taking my call. you know, when the attorneys showed the tape that was doctored by these managers, i think that is lying to senate, which is a criminal offense. they should have had handcuffs put on them and have been led to jail. if trump is not above the law, why are they? thank you for taking my call. host: let's go to calling calling from arizona on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. as far as the gentleman who had

called earlier about the additional charges, i emailed senator schumer, sent him -- senator schumer and others. i could not sent to pelosi, because she does not accept from non-constituents. adding them to add a second charge on the attempt to overturn the election with the republican secretary of state down in georgia. that should not be included. they are not going to get a conviction and cannot deny the freedom of speech would stand. but i think they could have gotten a conviction first if they have added the additional charge, because that was against multiple fellow republicans urging them to violate their constitutional duty, including mike pence himself.

i am very disappointed in the democrats. it seemed like they almost wanted to lose. host: speaking of senate majority leader chuck schumer, he came out to the floor friday and called for the awarding of the congressional gold medal to capitol police officer eugene goodman. here's what he said. >> mr. president, in a moment, i will ask the senate to pass legislation that would award eugene goodman the congressional gold medal. in the weeks after the impact on january the sixth -- attack on january the sixth, the world learned about the incredible bravery of officer goodman on that fateful day. here in the trial, we saw new video, powerful video, showing calmness under pressure, his courage in the line of duty, his foresight in the midst of chaos, and is willing to make himself a target of the mobs rage so others might be -- might reach

safety. officer goodman is in the chamber tonight. officer goodman, thank you. [applause] host: once again, we want to remind you the senate impeachment trial will begin at 10:00 a.m. you can watch on c-span two and c-span.org. you can always listen to us live on the free c-span radio app or any time you can find more information at c-span.org/impeachment. let's see if we can get a couple more calls in before we have to go. one nita is calling from georgia on the democratic line. good morning -- wanita is calling from georgia on the democratic line. caller: it is hanita.

host: go ahead. caller: i feel like trump should be held responsible for all of the things he has done. it is ridiculous how he can just get away with this and put the president in danger like that. i just think he needs to be held accountable. host: let's go to melvin calling from fort lauderdale florida on the democratic line. melvin, good morning. caller: yes, the reason i calling, several things. first of all, get some information straight. the lady from virginia was trying to tell about how the impeachment was working. she had it backwards. the house is the grand jury and the senate is the actual trial. to hear these people always talking about the 75 million people that are going to lose their vote because of what has

happened to trump. the man got elected with 85 million votes. i've never heard anyone talk like this before. they never said anything about the additional votes, the popular vote when trump was elected. the 5 million additional people who did not vote for trump got disenfranchised because he got elected with less votes. so i'm trying to understand, what are they trying to say? les now means more than the more -- then before? host: davis calling from las vegas, nevada. good morning. caller: first of all, donald trump should be impeached. he should also be brought up on criminal charges. the d.c. police should arrest him for inciting the ride. he does everything that is bad for this country, doesn't care about the country, just wants to give tax breaks to the rich.

that is my comment. second of all, trump should be out of office. those republicans are going to acquit him, and it is wrong. everyone knows he was trying to overthrow the united states government. host: let's get one last caller in. kim is calling from denver colorado. -- ken is calling from denver, colorado. good morning. caller: if trump is acquitted, he will go down fifth avenue and kill somebody and not be held accountable. in his case, it is five times because five police officers died during the insurgents. that is all on trump -- insurgence. that is all on trump. host: once again, you can see senators arriving for the senate impeachment trial. remember, you can watch it live starting at 10:00 on c-span two,

c-span.org, or listen to it live on the free c-span radio app, and you can get more information anytime at c-span.org/impeachment. we would like to thank all of our callers and guests, and all of you for sticking with us for another "washington journal." join us tomorrow at 7:00 a.m., wash her hands, and remember to stay safe, 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] >> today on "the communicators," long time amazon executives talk

about their book "working backwards." >> how is it that an e-commerce company is going to become a holiday it -- hollywood producer of movies and tv shows? the kindle e-book business, the amazon music, they are so globally popular because they are a suite of devices amazon has developed to enable people to watch and read and, in fact, award-winning content as well. >> we talk about what we think will be an enduring legacy of amazon being able to operate the customer focused long-term thinking for organizations that really take pride in operational excellence. >> watch "the communicators"

today at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> sunday night on "q&a," a profile of vice president kamala harris's mother, as well as an interview with the director of the johns hopkins school of international studies. >> she has echoes of her mother's fierce will to come to a country she had never been to before. she did not know anyone. she was a stranger. but we have not seen the deterrence in vice president harris's career trajectory and the positions she has held.

>> the emigrants come in and basically they climbed the stairs and gradually move upwards. the second generation goes to the lower schools, the next generation to the second lower. the tech boom expanded and so they rose much faster. so they entered the sector and moved much more quickly. >> sunday night at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q&a." host: i want to remind everyone at the top of the show the senate trial will resume as soon

as we finish at 10 a.m.. of course you can listen to it any time on the c-span radio app or c-span.org/impeachment. we will hear closing arguments from both sides -- the house impeachment managers and president trump's lawyers, but let's take a the senate. let's go back to the beginning of the arguments from president trump's lawyers. his legal team began their arguments in front of the senate by arguing the process was unconstitutional. >> the article of impeachment before the senate is an unjust and blatantly unconstitutional act of political vengeance. this abuse of the constitution only further divides our nation when we should be trying to come together around shared priorities.