dinner. the white house correspondents association dinner live saturday on c-span, radio, c-span.org and the c-span now video app. c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center/ it is more. >> comcast is partnering with community centers soloing families -- centers so low income families can get what they need. >> c-span, along with these other providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> next, it is cut in on firearm rights and gun violence prevention with maj toure from black guns matter and daniel webster from the johns hopkins center for gun violence solutions talks about research

and approaches to reducing gun violence. then denise gilman, law professor at the university of texas at austin, talks about legal and political challenges to title 42 and the so-called remains in mexico policy. host: good morning. it is wednesday, april 27, 2022. the house will meet at 10:00 a.m. eastern clear with your for the next three hours -- we are with you for the next three hours. we begin with the latest audio recordings of house speaker kevin mccarthy and aides revealing the minority leader was concerned rhetoric from rank and file republicans regarding them president -- regarding then

president donald trump, worrying that his actions may foment violence. phone lines split by political party. republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. consider this a text, (202) 748-8003. if you do come include your name and where you are from. catch up on social media, on c-span at c-span debbie -- at c-span wj. this is the lead of a story. representative kevin mccarthy feared in the aftermath of the january 6 attack that several far right members of congress would incite violence against other lawmakers, identifying several by name as security risks. and the calls with other leaders

on january 10, 2020, mr. mccarthy referred chiefly to new dose representatives, matt gaetz of florida, mo brooks of alabama, as endangering the security of other lawmakers at the capitol complex. along with the public -- the published story, the tapes as well. here is one where mccarthy was discussing matt gaetz. >> the other thing i want to bring up, i just got something about newsmax, matt gaetz saying he is calling people's names out as anti-trump in this type of atmosphere. this is serious stuff. it has to stop. >> mo and louis posto comments tol, members have had concerns. >> louis was at the -- i mean,

mo was at the rally -- >> what did he say? >> i just saw that on twitter. >> i am calling him and explaining to him -- i will have some other people to call him too. i will get another briefing from the fbi tomorrow. >> that's -- it is potentially illegal, what he's doing. >> he's putting people in jeopardy. he does not need to be doing this. we saw what people would do in the capitol, you know. >> that from the leaked audio recordings published by the new york times, a series of quattro

different recordings available on the new york times website, getting a lot of attention,. here's one more that was published yesterday. >> don't assume i see everything or know everything but we need one central point, so don't sit around. . tension is too high. i don't want to think we cause something at -- or missed something and someone got hurt. host: those comments made just

days after the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol. getting a lot of attention today and some pushback from members of congress mentioned, including matt gaetz, the republican from florida, with a tweet yesterday evening. he said congressman mccarthy and scully's, the minority whip, held views that they feared on sniffling calls with liz cheney, then leadership at the time, not us. this is the behavior of weak men he said, not leaders. people know what i said -- because i tell them clearly and directly. while i was protecting president trump from impeachment, they were protecting liz cheney from criticism. they deemed it incendiary or illegal to call cheney and anna king's anger anti-trump -- and

adam kinzinger anti-trump. they disparaged trump and the republicans in congress. matt gaetz in his tweet last night also getting criticism from other well-known conservatives. it was tucker carlsen last night on his program calling kevin mccarthy a puppet of the democratic party. thus the washington examiner right up. we are getting your reaction to the latest leaked tapes published by the new york times. alexander barnes and jonathan martin the reporters. the recordings were obtained in reporting as part of their forthcoming book, this will not pass, trump, biden and the battle for america's future.

we saw the first last week after they published their first story in which mccarthy was talking about, in the tapes, his plan to ask then president donald trump to resign and plans about possible impeachment proceedings. those have only continued in the days since. phone lines as usual, republicans, democrats, independents. john is up first, a republican from pennsylvania. good morning. caller: thank you for having me on cnn this morning. hunter biden's story has been out. mccarthy is a liar. he is a rino just like mcconnell. they need to get rid of these clowns. every day, you find something to beat up on the republicans. yesterday, you had your wife or

somebody writing an article, megan mcardle? host: no relation. caller: yeah. i don't understand how you cannot do anything against joe biden and the democrats but are on these tapes that the new york times have been sitting on just to release at a certain time? host: that is john in pennsylvania. this is sophia out of florida on the line for democrats. caller: i would like to say that i feel extremely ashamed of america and the republican party and how all these lies that are being told, and how they are disgracing this country, just like that college is now. we are in a state of shame. all the lies that are being told. and we have these republicans running around telling these lies and they know it is a line. mccarthy should not be in

office. the republicans have not done a damn thing since they have been in office in this congress. they are us up the same road as trump. this has to stop. host: in georgetown, massachusetts, an independent. good morning. caller: thank you for having me on. you look at the content of this club and -- this clip and it goes right in line with what the media is dishing out. i think our country seems to be a victim of whatever the media dishes out. tickets eden on the others -- it gets eaten on the others. it doesn't matter.

we are a nation of drive-thru news. we want to pull up, spend as little money as possible, have it as quick as possible, presented to us in a nice little bag that we can open up and get our tasty treats that make us feel good, but you know want? when it comes to news, we need to stop the drive-thru. we need to get out of the car. we need to look at the food. we need to put it together and then consume it, because the processed news that we are getting has led us to this state. listen to these phone calls coming in on new and -- on two different endsa. this is the deep state laughing at us. we need to learn that industry

big governments have one role. they want to get more powerful and control the population. that is what is happening in america. the high hypocrisy -- the hypocrisy right now is through the roof. host: to tapes like this matter? some republicans, matt gaetz and tupper carlsen, jumping on this, these reports from politico, asking house republicans about these tapes. the recordings like this, especially at a tense time, do they matter, knowing when the leadership of the house republicans were saying to each other? caller: well, you know, leaked tapes. that's a problem in itself. then we have all kinds of

problem under the last -- of problems under the last administration about leaked tapes and information? some of it was real, some was not, but it was all printed and put out there. it is as if there is no responsibility left in our media and on top of that there is no responsibility left in our whole medical industry, which we just observed over the last two years, so we need to get on track. host: that is dan in massachusetts. this is cheryl out of goshen, new york. caller: first time caller, and it is just heartbreaking how low we have sunk as a nation. people are just so hateful and vile. you are a democrat, you are a republican, it is just pitiful.

and people need to pay attention. we are in serious trouble here, and you cannot believe the people who are supposed to be representing you. they are liars. they all have a case of power. what is the power for? i don't understand it. i just don't understand the attitudes and the people that are talking and the hatefulness. i watched mtg last week line her way through hours of testimony, if you want to -- last week lie her way through hours of testimony, if you want to call it that. mccarthy, skill -- scalise, their all disappointments. host: the new york times,

writing mo brooks dismissed the leader's criticisms, noting that the speech by the white house before the attack on the capitol, that lawsuit had been dismissed. "kevin mccarthy spoke before knowing the facts," he said, noting that he never spoke with him directly. in that phone call, mr. mccarthy wasn't speaking to a small group of republican leaders, including steve scalise, tom cheney -- liz cheney and a number of aides. that is where these recordings came from and it appears that is where the call with donald trump

came from as well. your thoughts on these tapes? caller: hello? host: hello. caller: hey, john. unfortunately, you get to be the guy that gets picked on by me this morning on the same topic i talked about last time i called in. it is find that you are covering this topic this morning, but i have to come again, ask -- to, again, ask, why is it that one year and a half later we still have not heard any audiotapes or seen any videos of hunter biden's laptop? that is a story, john. it really is a story and it was one that was neglected to your into africa. it is still being neglected by

the powers that be including c-span. i wish she would get maranda on the program and let's have a real look at the hunter laptop story and the joe biden-hunter biden story. host: it came up yesterday when the attorney general was on capitol hill, bill hagerty of tennessee, who was asking about the hunter biden investigation. here's a little bit of that from that committee hearing yesterday. [video clip] >> i want to touch on something that is of great concern to my constituents and the confidence of many people in our system that you have controlled, that is the hunter biden investigation. i want to ask about how the communications have worked within your department. have you been briefed on the hunter biden investigation yourself? >> so the hunter biden investigation as i said, even in my own nomination, confirmation hearing, is being run and

supervised by the united states attorney for the district of delaware. >> he reports to you. >> he is supervising the investigation and i'm not at liberty to talk about internal justice department deliberations, but he is in charge of that investigation. there will not be interference of any political or improper kind. >> are any senior officials in your department being briefed? >> again, he is the supervisor of this investigation, and, you know, the normal processes of the department occur, but he is the supervisor. >> if you will not be able to say whether there have been communications, i would like for you to tell me -- to answer this question, if you would. would it be appropriate for the president to call you into the oval office and tell you that his son didn't break the law regarding this matter? >> absolutely not, and the

president has not done that and the president has committed not to interfere not only in that investigation but any kind of -- investigation. >> i do wonder this, then, why the president is resorting to tv and having surrogates go on tv to say that message. earlier this month, white house chief of staff ron klein stated on television that the president is confident his son didn't break the law, and the communications director said president biden maintains his position that his son did nothing. this was on national television. the president has already told his subordinates, people he can fire at will, that he and his family did nothing wrong. how can the american people be confident that his administration is conducting a serious investigation? >> we put it in the hands of a trump appointee from the previous administration, the u.s. attorney for the district

of delaware, and because you have me as attorney general. host: the attorney general yesterday in an exchange with bill hagerty out of tennessee. did you get anything out of that exchange? caller: i missed it yesterday. i just listened now and i will go back and listen to it again. i knew you would find a way to get out of it. all i can say -- and i will not bring this up again if i call in again. i have only called twice and both times it has been on this topic, but if you look into that camera and tell us all that c-span and all the other media outlets have done a good job or an honest and fair job on this story, you -- to come across as being honest about it, you have to know, and you all have to

know that this has been covered for a year and a half, and might have even caused donald trump an election by not being covered at the time. this is serious stuff and it needs to change. i just ask you to consider my viewpoint on it and many other peoples. i will not keep harping on it but that's something i wish you would consider. we are viewing, we are seeing that the coverage is very, very different, so, anyway, thank you. host: thanks for the call and we consider all viewpoints on this program. that is what we do every day, give you a chance to state your viewpoint. three hours every day, seven days a week. this is linda in mississippi, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: yes. caller: that last collar and the first call you had, john, those republicans are only worried about a man that is not elected,

not in the federal government -- they have no concern about those people trying to destroy this constitutional republic. the only thing i care about trump is he pulled the scab off to show the world who the republicans really were. he was power, greedy and racist, and nobody is trying to get to the bottom of why these republicans care nothing about this country, only about trying to not down the president. they care nothing about donald trump's children in the white house making money with china. host: that is linda in

mississippi. this is derek in seattle, washington, an independent. good morning. caller: this is all about democracy. this is about the racism, hatred and the attack on the capitol. no democracy ever lasted more than 250 years. what we see with trump is he is an indication of history. his wife has admitted that -- host: before we get to the hitler's comparisons, can we talk about this story? caller: look it up. host: this is janice in san diego, california, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i have so much i want to say. i hope you let me say what i want to say. that last collar, unbelievable.

at the end of the day, what i want to say is cheney, romney, michalowski, collins -- romney, murkowski, collins, mcconnell, they need to go. there should be term limits and they are the reason why. they are in their own state of mind. they believe in doing things only one way. my thing is i don't understand -- all these elites that are coming up our -- all these leaks that are coming up are always coming up on the republican side . it is not just about hunter biden going and breaking the law and selling of the country, but his father was part of it. this is tapes and emails that have not been leaked, but have been surfacing throughout facebook. we send them all throughout messenger. everyone has read some excerpts

from hunter biden's laptop and it is disgusting. it is illegal. somebody should be arrested. i don't understand why you haven't spoke on hillary clinton and the docket that came to be found fake. she has been fined. she has to pay what she did -- pay for what she did monetarily, not that that really means anything because she has the money, and the cover-up that is going on in washington with the democrats, the only thing that blows me away with the democratic voters is they do not care to hear about hunter biden's laptop but they want to talk about trump's kids and that they were taking money on the inside and this, that and the other. do people remember that donald trump did not even take a paycheck for four years? host: that is janet. on hillary clinton, this story on the front page of the washington times today,

reporting on special counsel john durham revealing that employees of the research firm fusion gps sent journalists hundreds of emails with unverified accusations against donald trump to trigger negative news stories. the researcher tried to sell news stories. durham responding to people with ties to the clinton campaign to keep potentially explosive evidence out of his hands during the upcoming trial of a clinton campaign lawyer accused of lying to the fbi. in a motion filed monday, durham said the emails undercuts the assertions of the clinton campaign officials that fusion gps's research for them should be protected under attorney-client privilege. jeff murdoch with that story. he's been a guest on that program -- on this program before to talk about his reporting. william in ohio, you are next. caller: good morning, john.

this is the old crazy tennessean again. it is a shame. we don't have no government. we have a giverntment. i will never go to a voting place for as long as i live again. host: william, in terms of never going to vote again -- caller: i will never, whether it is local, city, state or federal. they are all crooks. they get their pockets lined by the speculators and the lobbyists. we have a lot of that going on

in ohio, didn't -- ohio, and i will say i am a democrat. i voted for one republican in my life. you asked me before who i voted for. i voted for mike turner the first time he ran for mayor. and i will never vote for mike turner again. host: you have a primary date coming up next week in ohio. doesn't matter to you who wins the primary -- does it matter to you who wins the primary? caller: there won't be a primary next month because they cannot get the cooks to all get together on anything. it has been in the courts three different times and they say the redistricting favors the republicans, so there isn't going to be a primary, but if there is, i still won't go. look what we have got to vote for. just a bunch of crooks. host: william in ohio this morning. this is jim, spencer, north

carolina, independent. your thoughts on these latest mccarthy tapes? caller: good morning. appreciate everything c-span does. you set the bar. the guy who called earlier about the hunter biden laptop, for all those who want to know about it, if you would go to newsmax, you would get all the coverage that you want. it is right there. if you want coverage on the right, covering the right, go to msnbc. they will give you all you want. c-span, stay the course. you rock. you lead the pack. thank you very much. host: took file in illinois -- to file -- kyle in illinois. caller: the doj i think has something on these people to keep their mouth shut. if you would, play the tape of

joe biden when he was vice president on, if you don't get the aid, i'm leaving in six hours. he put obama in there with him so these kinzinger at all these others -- kinzinger, i called to him to complain about the law. the poa. they were trying a case, where his wife was saying it would take two or three weeks to clean.

-- put money in their pockets. you have the making tons of money over the people. we believe green. our government -- we bleed red. it doesn't matter who you are. our government bleeds green. host: that's kyle. you bring up ashli babbitt, referred to in those tapes released by the new york times. this is from the print edition. they note that congressman moore, congressman brooks tweeted the weekend after january 6 about the fatal shooting of ashli babbitt by a member of the capitol police force, noting it was a black police officer shot the white female veteran, and added you know that doesn't fit the narrative. immediately after that comment was read out loud on the january

10 leadership call, mr. mccarthy expressed a wish that the big social media companies would ban some members of the republican conference as they had done with mr. trump after the insurrection. that among the four tapes released by the new york times today. the headline, carthy raised alarm about gop lawmakers, that they would put people in jeopardy after january 6. that getting a lot of attention. phone calls for you to talk about this this first hour. republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents, (202) 748-8002. keeping you up-to-date on other stories happening. today on capitol hill, the supreme court yesterday examined the executive branch's leeway over immigration policies, hearing the biden administration's appeal of a lower court order that sought to

abandon the remaining mexico policy. talking more about that later at 9:00 a.m. eastern with denise gilman of the university of texas, law professor and director of the immigration clinic there. we will talk about those laws. this getting a lot of attention. president biden gave his strongest indication yet in a private meeting with house democrats that he's poised to release student loans, a move that could include canceling tens of thousands of dollars in debt for some individuals. that's coming from a meeting yesterday with members of the congressional hispanic caucus. that meeting -- on monday. the reporting taking place today. vice president harris testing positive for covid-19 yesterday. the latest white house official to contract the virus.

harris not exhibiting any symptoms according to her office. the spokesperson for her office adding that she would return to the white house when she tests negative. she's fully vaccinated and boosted twice. in light of that news, the press secretary was asked about precautions president biden is taking to avoid contracting the virus. here is what jen psaki had to say in the briefing room yesterday. [video clip] >> naturally, he has access to the best health care in the world. he consults closely with his doctor. we take a range of steps that go beyond even most workplaces in the country in terms of required testing, those who will be around him, social distancing. he obviously has his own regular testing cadence but we make assessments about when he feels it is important for him to attend or participate in an event. you have mentioned two of them.

this weekend, he will be attending the white house correspondents dinner. it is an opportunity to honor the work of you and your colleagues and to talk about the importance of journalism in the world. that's an event he has attended many times in the past and he made the decision that he could it -- he could attend and wanted to again. former vice president mondale is someone he had an important personal relationship with. he wanted to attend his memorial service. these discussions are always done through our scheduling team and covid team to make sure we are taking every step, but just like every american, he makes risk assessments. host: jen psaki from the white house briefing room yesterday. your calls on this story, house minority leader mccarthy raised alarms about gop colleagues in a call with other members of house republican leadership january 10 of 2021 in the days after the january 6 on the capitol building. your reaction on the phone lines.

this is jasper and wanted to come at d.c. line for democrats -- jasper in washington, d.c. on the line for democrats. good morning. we will go to james, murfreesboro, tennessee, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. when you listen to mccarthy, no one recalls anything they said. it is like marjorie taylor greene. she doesn't recall. how is it that you cannot remember anything you say but can remember everything about somebody else? these people -- what is wrong with these people? trumpet's code and stalin and all those people in 1 -- trump is putin and stalin and all those people in one.

host: caller in oregon. caller: black guns matter all the republicans -- caller: all the republicans want is to have a fair and legal election, for one, harder to cheat, easier to vote, so mccarthy was not doing anything. all these tapes that they have, to me, there is not anything that is going to hurt any of those guys. all i can say is that, in a couple of weeks, huge, volcanic information will come out about hillary and her team, hunter biden and his dad, with china, ukraine, and another one out

there. that's why a lot of these things are happening, because joe biden is tied down because of what his son has done. it is just an absolute just criminal, corrupt and all these democrats -- i mean, i really feel bad for them, but all these tapes that the january 6 has, there isn't anything that's going to go against any of, you know, mccarthy or anything. host: that is tom in oregon this morning. we mentioned reaction from matt gaetz who was referred to repeatedly during the tapes, tucker carlsen making kevin mccarthy part of his monologue yesterday. the politico story noting that

some members of congress, some republicans, have called these tapes and nothing burger, but not all of them are ready to let the drama fade. they could be easy ammunition for republicans who want to squeeze mccarthy or party members who want to make a name for themselves with the base. the head of the allied freedom caucus until january told one network that his comments in the audio undermined colleagues. biggs added on one american news that mccarthy wasn't candid with other republicans that a call for the impeachment of trump was discussed. the call -- the trump resignation call part of that first set of tapes, that first story last week that got a lot of attention.

this story coming out first, kevin mccarthy denying he had said that and then the audio coming out later, kevin mccarthy since then being asked quite a bit about those tapes, even when he was on the border back on monday leading a republican delegation to talk about border issues, the ending of title 42, concerns about security at the border. here's kevin mccarthy from monday responding to one of those questions about those tapes. [video clip] >> i am glad you asked but what is more important than something that happened 15 months ago in a private conversation with four people is what is happening now. you asked that question on the same day that we found a body. you asked that on the same day just a month from now that they are going to lift title 42, on the same day i watched a grown man cry over what's happening.

you asked that on the same day when we toured with the border agents, when they put the numbers up about the amount of drugs they have been able to capture, the more than one million people who have come across, the people who have gotten away, the more than 175 sex traffickers they have picked up. i don't think that is what the american people are asking. i think they want to know about what is going to happen here and how we will secure the border. host: that was kevin mccarthy on monday. this is coming late yesterday. new audiotapes coming out. democratic members of congress jumping on this latest story. congressman eric swalwell of california saying america would be better off if kevin mccarthy's tryst with the truth lasted longer than a week.

this is congressman don byer, democrat from virginia, saying the difference between his private criticism of his party versus his public comments could not be more stark. two faced does not begin to describe it. he put his party before our country. two democratic members of congress on twitter. this is rudy out of douglas., georgia, a democrat good morning. caller: words do matter. when i was in junior high, governor george wallace of alabama said segregation yesterday, segregation today, segregation tomorrow. that worked for him in alabama but when he ran for president and they quoted him, it didn't work for him, so words matter. what kevin mccarthy said after january 6, condemning donald trump, and now he's praising donald trump. if a politician's words don't

matter, what do we have to go by? thank you. host: let me run through a couple of your text messages. the number is (202) 748-8003. dave from annapolis saying this is all meaningless, inside-the-beltway trash. what matters is inflation. george in virginia saying establishment republicans have no backbone or courage. you should have been passed over for speaker 10 years ago. bobby minnesota -- bob in minnesota said kevin mccarthy is proving politics is more important to him than the constitution and democracy by changing his position. audrey in philadelphia saying charlie cook, who was on this program recently, saying that -- charlie cook noted that republican members were rational for one week after the insurrection act then political

pressure changed the rhetoric. it is the difference between authenticity and pandering. -- caller: used to be abc, nbc, cbs.

now they are not even reporting the news. they are just reporting what gets them sponsors, keep feeding these people a narrative, and i think politicians have, if you watch, it is just a money game with the lobbyists and everything. people are going off on hunter biden. are you worried about trump? are you the same person -- host: charles, did tapes like those, they give a glimpse into what was meant to be a private conversation among leadership at a to mulch it was time in this country, do tapes like this -- does this story matter? caller: no. does trump's impeachment matter? does all this matter? no it does not.

it is to feed the left, to feed the right, and to keep the people in power for the money. now, if you go back and look at hr and sr one, if you read those bills, i read the 680 pages and every american should read that. it takes money out of politics. it creates an office to go after these people. it goes after lobbyists. it cleans up the system. everybody that was yelling about, boy, this guy is all bad. well, until we clean up the system, it is not the people who are bad. it is the system. host: charles, if hr.1 is a hopeful bill for you, does it give you hope that it was introduced and as the first bill in a new congress? caller: no because again it is all about the money and the democrats knew immediately that

the republicans were going to shut it down. they know it is going to get shut down so it is just, you know -- and that is what i see in most politics. they introduce the stuff that they know will not go through. the republicans are telling their base about how democrats they are, back-and-forth, and it has got us in this quagmire, but all the time, lobbyists are there. they are making their money. they spend 20% of their time dialing for dollars. and in these gerrymandered districts, hr.1 would take care of that too. why do you think mccarthy was down in florida meeting with trump after all this? it is not because he believes in him but because he's pandering to the base. host: that's charles in colorado. this is mike in dearborn, missouri, republican.

good morning. caller: i am just calling because i am a republican but i am telling people what -- people whether you be a democrat, republican or independent, you need to be watching everyone of these 535 members in congress like a field mouse being watched by a hawk getting ready to swoop. the military has pretty much made sure and they have done their jobs, the rank and file. those people are out now running for congress. people ought to be paying attention. their records should be checked well because there are some bad veterans out there but the majority of those veterans will get the job done. host: is there a veteran running this cycle that you are particularly in supportive? caller: basically all 535

members of congress. it is one of those things. like i said, you are five months out from fiscal year 2023's budget, and we still don't even have this year's budget in place. host: we have a 2020 21. a lot of the hearings now are on the budget. the expectation is that it will not get done on time either. caller: it is one of those things where i sit there and tell my congressman and two senators, both, you better be ready to sign, put your name in writing for specific things. if you cannot, don't come to me asking me for a vote. don't come to me asking for a contribution because i cannot conscientiously give you my vote. i cannot give you money to support you. host: that is mike in missouri.

on budget requests for fiscal 2023, a couple hearings we are covering today if you want to watch them live. 10:15 made -- 10:15 a.m. eastern, xavier becerra testifying before the house energy and commerce committee. this being aired on c-span3 at 10:15. also c-span.org and the c-span now app. 2:00 p.m. eastern this afternoon, alejandra mayorkas will testify on his departments 23 budget requests before the house homeland security committee, also on c-span3, c-span.org and the c-span video app. we have been showing several but you hearings this week. there's something like a dozen members of the president's cabinet and top officials coming to capitol hill this week to talk about budget issues.

robert in california, your thoughts on this latest story about kevin mccarthy, the tapes from that meeting? caller: yes. good morning. i like your style. you ask people questions and don't let people just give you a story, you ask where they got it from. i appreciate that. and you are not biased at all. all you guys are excellent. host: what are your thoughts on the story? caller: real fast. the first part you said, you talked about the benghazi trial. for three years, the republicans were so hard on trying to find something against hillary clinton, they finally found something after $50 million and three years. i like the fact that he spoke honestly about donald trump.

he will wind up being another john boehner because he has heart. politics sometimes, i understand that, and -- anyway. host: this story from the new york times makes you think better of kevin mccarthy as a democrat? caller: yes. i do. at first, i didn't like him, but i read the story and i like the -- but when he just recently set about donald trump, i mean, he was sincere, calm when he said it and had his whereabouts with him, but earlier u.s. to democrat about the hitler story. tony schwartz is a ghostwriter -- host: we never have to you will productive -- we never have too

productive of a discussion we have hitler conversations so that is why we are holding off on that. anthony, michigan, good morning. caller: about the mccarthy thing, i'm not into this congressional investigation format. if there are criminal acts to be uncovered, and it than i think a court of law -- uncovered, then i think it would be a court of law. think about the 9/11 commission, what a joke that was, so, hey, this is nothing but politics. we are not in the realm of meat and potatoes now, just politics and personality. host: this from punch bowl news. congressman thompson, democrat from mississippi, chair of that select committee, said the panel will hold their public hearings in june and said the panel is

set to issue a final report in the fall instead of releasing an interim report followed by a final wrap up expected to be the process they will take but it looks just like a final report in the fall and open hearings in june, so expecting to hear more from them, and we have certainly heard a lot in recent weeks, stories coming from their investigation and leaks about who has testified and what they said in those testimonies before the select committee. this is arnold out of new york, democrat, good morning. host: good morning. i'm amazed to hear callers call in and none of them address the issue at hand. you ask about these politicians lying.

marjorie taylor greene sat on the stand and said she could not recall -- the thousands of things they have on tape. when people ask you a question, they already know the answer, but people call and try to pretend that these people -- lindsey graham from the beginning said donald trump was a racist, was a hatemonger, and then went back down and i don't know if he is on the tape, but then he flip-flops. and i'm saying these people have lied to us out right. i am sitting here. don't look here, look over there. they have attacked you, every other news media outlet, trying to place blame. address the issue. these people have been caught on tape lying to you in your face and you do nothing. you give them your vote every year year after year and they lie to you. when obama was in office, they

sat there for eight years and did nothing, past nothing. no legislation went through. same thing with biden. no legislation passed. and they give these people their votes to make 180,000 dollars a year to do nothing. host: that's arnold in new york. this is i've been out of oklahoma on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: you want to talk about mccarthy. people being charged with crimes during january 6, what they call an insurrection, they are not even going to be allowed to have an actual trial if they don't get to hear all the evidence. nancy pelosi is not above the law. for tweets, her phone calls, are being introduced as evidence, and if they are not, every case should be thrown out because of the fact that people will not

get to be shown the evidence that they need to show, the nancy pelosi was the one that -- host: are you with us, ivan? caller: democrats in china released a virus on our country to take away our elections. host: that's ivan. this is gladys in california. good morning. caller: good morning. a few minutes ago, you showed a clip saying that a black man shot a white woman, i think it was from the -- host: from the audio. they were discussing the january 6 attack. caller: yes. what i need to know is what

paper that was in you are reading from. host: sure. this whole story, actually, the audiotapes -- and you can listen to them -- all available from the new york times. the two reporters on that story have been releasing various parts of their investigation for a future book, alexander burns, jonathan martin are the two reporters on that story. last week, they got a lot of attention. you can read it yourself in the new york times. clive discussion this morning about trust in media -- live discussion this morning about trust in media. a new york times editorial today on that topic, saying it is not surprising that americans find the weather channel more trustworthy than the new york times or the washington post according to a recent yugo poll -- recent yougov poll, writing

elon musk is spot on in pointing out that free speech is essential to a democracy and his acquisition of twitter appears like nothing less than a rescue mission to save the first amendment. if you want more from the editorial board of the washington times, you can read that on their website. we have time for one or two more phone calls on this topic of the new york times story, on kevin mccarthy, the latest tapes. camera, st. louis, missouri, you are next. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to say that of course he is a liar but people will still vote for him and, as a democrat, a down the middle democrat, i just wanted to say that we have to get our voters back.

the same people that listen to people like mccarthy and marjorie taylor greene and matt gaetz and still want to vote for them, we have to reach out as democrats and progressives together to reach out to get these people back because we are the party that supports them, especially here in missouri. we have republicans in missouri that will vote against their own interests because we need them for the midterms. host: that is our last collar in this first hour. in our second hour, we turn to the topic of gun rights.

next, it is the cofounder of -- stick around for that conversation. >> are you a student preparing for the advanced placement u.s. government and politics exam? get your notes ready in tune

into "washington journal" live saturday at 9 a.m. eastern forever annual cram the exam where teachers take your phone calls to help you prepare for the test. join our teachers as they answer your questions on the content and structure of this year's exam. watch "washington journal" and the crimper exam special 9:00 a.m. -- and the cram for exam special at 9:00 a.m. saturday. >> american history tv saturday on c-span2, exploring the people and events that tells the american story. at 1 p.m. eastern coming discussion on the advanced placement u.s. history exam with co-authors of fabric of a nation with skills and sources for the u.s. history course. it provides strategies for answering questions and analyze

historical documents and a 2 p.m. eastern on the presidency, political experts look to see how the presidency changed in the first two decades of the 21st century under president bush, obama, trump and biden including a look at the late 20th century presidency of bill clinton. exploring the american story, watch american history tv saturday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> this mother's day, give mom the gift of c-span during our annual mother's day sale going on right now at c-spanshop.org. save up to 30%. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. c-span's mother's day sale, going on right now as c-span

shop.org. start shopping with the code on the right. >> "washington journal" continues. host: a conversation on gun rights. remind viewers which are grouped mission is. >> we guest: are here to go to the areas where there is high levels of violent crime which goes hand-in-hand with the restrictions on human rights to keep and bear arms. most cities across the country have these gun control restrictions on the people's rights to defend themselves but they coat and neck with a violent crime. we do free classes voluntarily funded by the general public so people that want to learn. host: if someone is an absolute beginner, what will they learn in a class of yours? guest: they will need safety

protocols as far as owning and handling of our arm, conflict resolution and de-escalation in a little bit of physics. with physics being taken -- with civics be taken out of the public school, we don't know the rights and responsibilities. we have that mix in each class. you will learn something about all of those things. host: based in philly, what is the solution every center? >> we have that in philadelphia. we are doing not only classes on firearms and training but also taxes and basic defense, personal protection, welding, anything that improves the quality of life for citizens because we can teach you how to defend yourselves but what about building equity in your actual life in this area? host: what are your using general ongoing collation in this country -- on gun regulations country? guest: if you disagree with

somebody in this country, you are called racist. legislation that was designed to stop a group of people from having the means to defend themselves is literally the origin of gun control in this country. they do a good job of rebranding and as public safety but the rules against murder are already there. murder is illegal. all gun control is racist. it's an actual fact. we just need to get people aware of that so they can highlight which politicians in d.c. or locally are advocating for more of these racist policies especially toward the black community they say they want to help so desperately. host: is it a good thing to take a class like yours before leona gun? guest: people doing things voluntarily to inform them selves is great but when you have the state that over the

last two years printed up $7 trillion -- $700 trillion and didn't get the money were supposed to go in when you have a government that is giving away firearms all over the place, the state is not the arbitrator of what we do to defend our lives. we absolutely stressed education in that sense but we have the very balance about how we approach that. host: there are like 120 guns for every 100 americans. mass shootings are happening more often than ever. are those two things related? guest: no, if we want to have a conversation about more guns in america than you and if guns were the problems and gun owners, the non-gun owners attacking her human rights would be much more trouble. that's not the answer. we have to have a conversation about diet and mental health and psychotropic drugs. now are you going down toward

the money rabbit hole. we are in d.c.. it's bought and paid for literally by a big chunk of big pharma so we are not allowed to have that conversation. we talk about mass shootings which make up less than 1% stop all of them are wrong and horrific but when you look at the mass amount of mass shooters that are actually shooting, there is a connection there than the simple inanimate object that americans have the right to have. host: is the root cause of violence the larger issue? guest: if we say things are linked, if gun ownership and lawful ownership is linked with more crime than the areas that have more restrictions on ownership means those areas would be safer which is the opposite. the actual solution is not only just harming people to exercise their second amendment rights

but you have a community that's been targeted by the state for long -- for a long time that don't deal with the equity of the people in that community. we are talking about giving someone a sense of purpose and having the means to defend the equity they built up stop that's more of a deterrent and saying you americans cannot have firearms. host: with us until 8:30 a.m. eastern if you want to join the conversation, our phone lines are open. go ahead and start calling in this morning. you always wear an interesting t-shirt. making criminals afraid again? guest: let's be clear what the definition of crime is. crime has to have a victim but when you talk about robbery and rape and homicide, those are crimes. when you talk about i want to smoke a plant in the government set i cancer now you should go

to jail for 10 years for that, that's not an actual crime. when you are talking about going into neighborhoods and going into someone's home and violently costing someone's property or their buddy, that's the type of crime we are talking about was that they are saying we don't want you to have the means to defend yourself and we will pretend like we want to defund the police even they dish even though they stole a bunch of the covid money. in order to make a violent criminal afraid, there is no such thing as a random act of violence, it's only random to the victim. to make that criminal afraid, when you have a strong, well organized empathetic, loving the community citizen that has the means to defend his or herself. that's absolutely going to make a criminal very afraid. host: what about the ghost guns? guest: that's what casper has. it's a cute term that lefties

have. it's not going to float around and kill anybody. this is the new scare tactic. as if every criminal as if every criminal is using a firearm or a ghost gun step most of the people have never 3d printed a firearm. the ghost gun is a sensationalized misnomer to explain a concept of americans printing their own 3d printed firearm. host: president biden last week issued a new regulation on the idea of limiting ghost guns in this country. guest: folks, a gun can be made as little as 30 minutes in the fire our will not have background checks because they have no serial numbers but they show up at a crime scene and they can't be traced.

harder to find and prove who used them. you cannot connect the gun to the shooter and hold them accountable. in fact, the atf reports they've been able to trace less than 1% of ghost guns imported by law enforcement. it makes sense police across the country are increasingly finding ghost guns at crime scenes. by the way, ghost guns can be made as assault weapons. this is one version of the kit you can buy. last year alone, law enforcement reported approximately 20,000 suspected ghost guns to the bureau of alcohol tobacco and firearms and explosives. that's a tenfold increase in these ghost guns from 2016. tenfold. in five years. these guns are weapons of choice for many criminals.

we are going to do everything we can to deprive them of that choice. and when we find them, put them in jail for a long time. host: your thoughts? guest: he is a clown and is wrong when he's lying step he said is the weapon of choice but these are slick words. he said the atf has found this many suspected in a crime ghost guns. you're saying that something is suspected and if it's the weapon of choice, white aren't we seeing definite numbers? it's just patently false. i can't articulate the level of wrong. he said 3d printing can be done in less than half an hour and that's absolutely wrong step these people have no information. this is the same guide is that you should get a shot and put rounds in the air off the front step which is literally what he told his wife to do.

i am respectful to my elders but our president, joe biden, is clearly dealing with some dementia. he is not articulate not well-versed in the subject as well as this new potential atf nominee he is presenting is just as horrible as the last one. they just don't have a really good framework on what 3d printed firearms are but they want to scare the general public by using false information that is patently inaccurate. host: the nominee for atf, what do you know about his background? guest: they should know more about the atf. it's a rogue organization that attempts to tell americans that they don't have second amendment rights. that organization exists. if someone is utilizing firearms for that matter to arm citizens in general, i want them to have their day in court with a trial

of their peers and be afforded their rights and i want them to go to jail for very long time. i agree with the president in that sense but a lot of things they are doing is not overnight going to make people who have kids be prosecuted overnight. if you do not turn in your magazines over a certain capacity, you won't be looking at intentionally 10 years and potential penitentiary. that's not crime, that's possession to defend your property or your life but somehow, americans, the guys on the hill and law enforcement is not subject to the aim so -- the same rule so it's more of the same. host: we will start in georgia with calls. this is a gun owner, good morning. caller: good morning, i'm glad about your organization.

i've been following you and i'm so happy. i'm really happy to say that there is a growing number of us black women getting guns and learning how to use them and i'm one of them. i'm so glad that our governor change the law now. i had to get a gun permit but now i the permit to carry. i'm glad because black people have always been the ones that have been on the receiving line of people attacking us we are having to turn the other cheek which i don't recommend that. it's not guns they kill people, it's people that kill people and if i put my gun in the table and nobody bothers me, no one is shooting anybody. everyone is concerned about the tool of death but not who's doing it. you could kill somebody with a battery knife and were not getting rid of those.

guest: this is 100% right. they don't factor in other data. more people die from bats and firearms in 50% of the deaths related to firearms on average are suicides. they are playing the numbers game the general public to convince black people that they shouldn't have the means to defend themselves and that's foolish. host: he referring to constitutional carriers. guest: if you are a citizen that's not a prohibited purchase, you have a right to purchase a firearm without infringements. we do still challenge everyone after you get that firearm, to take reputable classes and learn about that firearm. no different than when you get a new videogame.

you have to learn about the tools you get like chain saws so forth. a huge shout out to the state of georgia for becoming a constitutional carrier state. host: good morning. guest: caller: when your guest spoke about the three basics of his organization, i was on board. when he made the comment that gun control is racist, i'm going to have to disagree. my problem with the previous caller called and spoke about the state taking away the requirement for getting a license and background checks guest: that's not what she said. caller: i have a problem with that. when you look at the guns floating into the southside of chicago and other areas that are bought illegally and i think that's a problem across the country, not just on the south

side of chicago. even supreme court justice scalia said there should be limits and that was for everybody. you don't get fools like the guy who shut up las vegas with hundreds of rounds of ammunition and multiple guns. there has to be a way to stop that and there can be limits as skill he is said who is not a lefty. i will listen for your response. guest: i love when people say that. i understand we want to be safe. i agree with that but when you give the example of the guns flowing into chicago from indiana, the gun is a problem and if there is more guns in indiana that flow into chicago, why doesn't india have a dish why doesn't india have the same gun laws? the people of chicago, there is more restrictions of the general public having the means to defend themselves and it creates

a culture of shooting fish in a barrel. i'm the bad guy and i don't follow the rules. you good people follow the rules so you become a potential victim. this of the cultural part that people who more identify as anti-gun don't get that part of it. in regards to somebody having more rounds, the guy in vegas in these different things, every time i hear that argument, i can look at the church in texas a year or so ago when a guy walked in and was about to create carnage and one of the test several of the parishioners pulled their firearm in the one parishioner put rounds on that threat and stop that threat to save however many people's lives in that church stop for every one of those that people can give in that regard, i can give for were firearms are used in defense. host: another gun owner, good morning to you. caller: good morning, i'm calling in to say that i live in

mississippi and mississippi has got a somewhat loose gun laws. a woman don't have to have a carry permit and a man can tote a pistol as long as it's not concealed legally in the state of mississippi. mississippi is one of the lowest income states that our crime rate is lower than the guy the just called in from illinois, much lower. why do you think that is because people have got weapons that can protect themselves. guest: 100 percent, defensive gun uses in the millions. they will say it's 30-40,000 deaths and we will ignore the fact that 70% are suicides. there are over a million every year of defensive gun use.

someone uses a firearm, nonlegal to stop actual criminals. they play this stat game. the other brother talked about gun control and of course he will not think it's racist, he will not acknowledge the historical fact with certain states that stop black people from having the means to defend themselves. to the caller the just called income he brought up an excellent point. mississippi is a poor state would load literacy rate but somehow, this place that has less resources and more guns have lower violent crime than the places that anti-gun people espouse. they are not looking at the cultural and safety component and the defensive gun use component. host: this is alan on the line for non-gun owners. caller: good morning and i thank you for taking my call. i've been watching for years and

love the show, best show on tv. i agree with what you say with the problem but i don't agree with your solution. the thing you missed about the ghost guns, it was not about 3d printing poster it is a fit that you can buy to assemble a gun. you can buy parts to make a house but you don't get a whole house. it's not about 3d printing. you can buy separate parts of a gun and put it together yourself, that's what ghost gun is. you talk about the violence in chicago and yes, they have strict laws and there are people who easily come to indiana or wisconsin to buy guns and take them to chicago. yes, i live in chicago and yes, there is a gun violence problem.

i can read the paper any day that there is a shooting going on up here. these are the smaller cities like indianapolis. they also have a gun violence problem there. we have a problem with the semi-automatic handgun's. rifles and shotguns are great but we have a problem with semi automatic weapons. host: you bring up a lot of issues. guest: kids are not serialized. the kids are pieces that come and that relates to people privately making firearms that don't have a kids. the administrations going after all of these things. a few years back, it was no one's coming for your guns. others say they were coming for your guns. this is the same line of thinking. they don't mean private 3d

printers, they only mean kids. that's false. we have seen where they said one thing and on another. it's also need separate parts. the reason why they are kids is because they are plastic. certain portions of firearms are hard plastic but barrels and bullets are metal so they just so those things get put together at a certain point. as far as semiautomatic firearms, rifles or semiautomatic as well. a lot of callers that call in or not very well versed on the nomenclature or the actual fact of what goes into 3d printing and the kids and they say these things. going back to indianapolis in these different places, even if it's a bigger city, those bigger cities still generally have more gun control. philadelphia is a blue city in the middle of the red state of pennsylvania. it's the only city that has a million inhabitants but it's a

heavily gun controlled city that tries to do different rules outside with the state constitution and state laws are. you have to factor that in. we cannot say it's solely based on population. they have policies that influence save gun owners. host: from twitter. guest: i think that law enforcement officer, there needs to be better scenario training. i don't want to take out one slice of the pie. when need to look at the judges signed up for these -- on these warrants and the policy fun of rand paul instituted the no-knock breonna taylor law. i don't think -- i think that's poor policing.

it's going to get law enforcement killed as well as citizens. if you months ago, law enforcement officer was breaking into houses. we don't who you are. there is a balance there and in regards to there being more aggression toward black line -- gun owners, that's not a thing. or black people in america benefit from stand your ground defense than any other ethnic ruben america. i want people to step back and decipher between with the actual facts of this thing are what the sensationalized component is. there is no initial aggression and if you are being threatened, you are a gun owner and can defend yourself. host: a couple of minutes left from lack guns matter and this is bobby in oklahoma, line for gun owners. caller: good morning. i don't think takes been dish i

don't think it takes an ar-15 to kill a deer. if a man needs that to kill a deer, he's not a very good shot. also, look at louisiana, black kill each other on average of 2-3, 4 or five day at shreveport. they can't kill each other they just have knives. guest: that's stupid. violence is violence. when you say they wouldn't kill each other if they had knives, places and the united kingdom like london that outlawed private gun ownership for the most part and now they're literally going around saying we me -- we need more night control. people will find a way to stab you if they can't shoot you and if you don't have the means to defend yourself.

the other thing in regards to this conversation about black on black violence, violence is based on proximity. white people who live in white neighborhoods, if they attack each other, have an issue that will be white on white crime but somehow, that phrase is not in the lexicon. crime is about proximity. i think people should recognize that step given the fact that there are many black on black violence or murders, we still have to go back to the basic fact that these things are happening in cities with very little respect for the second amendment. we cannot escape that. host: line for gun owners, go ahead. caller: [inaudible] a lot of people commit crime in

this country [indiscernible] [indiscernible] the crime is high like washington, d.c. and baltimore. host: i think we got it. guest: he's proving my point. the cities he named our -- have policies that make it more difficult. when you have places like georgia and the governor down there saying we want constitutional carry, there will be precedent set that if i'm a rapist dude, there is a 70% chance this young woman is armed more than likely, i will think twice about raping this woman as

opposed to a city where no no one has a firearm. what he said about shipping people somewhere else, i don't know what type of reverse slavery he's talking about but i live in america. host: if you want to learn more about black guns matter? guest: they can go to our website and all the classes are free based on voluntary donations. they can email us and follow me on instagram. on top of all of those things, email us if you're going through something. 70% of these debts are suicide so if you're going through something and you need a voice, email me. send me your phone number and let's talk about it. i would rather talk to you about your issues then read your obituary. host: we appreciate your time. up next, another perspective on gun violence in this country, daniel webster is with johns hopkins university center for gun violence solutions and

later, a look at recent news about immigration policy with the university of texas. we will be right back. >> there are a lot of places to get political information but only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. weather happens here or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. >> book tv every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.

live at noon eastern on in-depth, foxbusiness host takes your calls on wall street, the u.s. economy and taxes. is the author of several books. at 10 p.m. eastern on afterwards, george mason university effexor talks about his book which looks in six countries that experience a demographic shift and how they responded. watch book tv every sunday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at book tv.org. >> are you a student preparing for the advanced placement u.s. government politics exam? get your notes ready in 10 into "washington journal" live

saturday at 9:00 a.m. saturday for the annual cram for the exam were teachers take your phone calls and tweets to help you prepare for the test. joined the teachers as they answer your questions on the content and structure of this year's exam. watch the annual cram for the exam special saturday at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we continue our conversation on guns in america with daniel webster who is the codirector of the johns hopkins center for gun violence solutions. explain the center's mission. guest: our mission is to conduct research on one of the biggest public safety and health problems in our country, gun violence. we were established in 1995 at the johns hopkins bloomberg school of public health and we

are interested in all forms of gun violence, studying the best ways to reduce those forms of gun violence. we also are committed to evidence-based policy. we recently joined with colleagues who are also adept at taking on research and communicating that effectively to policymakers. host: one form of gun violence is shooting in this country with the washington post with this set of statistics, 100 51 active shootings in this country that involve four or more people. -- for more victims. that's through april 23 of this year that compares to 156 last year and that is significantly higher than in recent years throughout the 2010.

what is the reason for the increase in mass shootings this country? guest: most of the mass shootings that are now being counted by gun violence archives involve fewer victims. mass shootings can include two sets of individuals who are in opposing street crews. it can be domestic violence scenarios in which an estranged boyfriend or husband is going after his former partner and children and family members. sometimes, it takes the form of the thing that gets headlines which is someone takes a gun into a school or movie theater or mall or something like that. most mass shootings really look like another form of gun violence we study and occurs on

a regular basis. the general pattern is following the overall rates of gun violence we've been seeing that have increased substantially from 2019-2020. the largest one-year increase in our nations history. this pattern we see over all and gun violence is also seen in mass shootings. host: is there a way to regulate our way out of this gun violence problem? guest: no one solution will be totally effective. based on our research, we have found that certain regulations translate into lives saved, but many key gun laws to save lives. that's what error scientists are set up to do is to formally examine how laws differ across

states and how rates of gun violence change when gun laws change. what we find is that when we think about our federal laws, there are some huge gaps that are exploited by people who should not have ends and the people who profit from selling them. our state laws vary in some states try to address those gaps. when they do, we find that when you extend background checks to private transfers, you have less gun trafficking. you have a large impact in reducing homicides, suicides and mass shootings. when you couple that background check requirement with the licensing requirement when you purchase a handgun, you have to have a license if we're driving a motor vehicle.

some states have decided the same applies if you are to purchase a handgun. what we find is that gun laws are quite effective in reducing all sorts of gun violence, even gun violence between law enforcement and civilians. host: you have to have a license to drive a car and you need insurance. i sent from one of our viewers, should we mandate gun odors -- gun owners carry insurance, with that decrease gun violence? guest: i honestly cannot say whether it would would not step we haven't done it so we haven't had an opportunity to study it. i think it's a rational idea and concept, i think probably there are other things we can do to reduce gun violence. what's going on we think about policies to address gun

violence, we can track how much we will gain from less gun violence and how much burden will we put on gun owners? while i think there is a rationale, and economic rationale for requiring insurance, right now, i think it's going to be hard to do politically uncertain outcomes. host: here are the phone lines. start calling in and he is with us until the top of the hour. we get to the heart of the question, why is the u.s. the only develop country with the

level of gun violence we are experiencing? guest: there is not one factor that explains that. clearly, an important factor is that our gun laws are radically different from our peers in western democracy. those other nations have much more comprehensive regulation of firearms. there's actually been some interesting studies when you compare other forms of violence, anything from bullying in schools to robberies and aggravated assault, the united states really doesn't stand out as an outlier at all. the only metric by which we are abnormal is lethal violence.

our violence is far more lethal than in other countries and that's explained principally because our violence is likely to include a firearm. i overheard part of a discussion with your previous guest that what's the difference if they don't get you with a gun, they will get you with a knife? it's incredibly clear that it's far easier to attack with a knife than a gun. it's very well-known and documented.i don't want knife attacks of course and i'm happy if there are weapons that are far less lethal. host: what about magazine requirements? some states track high-capacity magazines. with that have an effect? -- would that have an effect? guest: we published us -- a policy that looked at state and

federal laws and to the extent that they are assisted with mass shootings. one of the policies we found most effective i already mentioned which is handgun purchaser licensing. that's a policy that was shown to be protective. another one is a ban on high-capacity magazines. at least in the context of mass shootings, it is a policy that is rational and evidence-based. most of our shootings do not involve high-capacity magazines. it is a factor and there is other research that says the type of gun you're shut with can determine how many people get shot and whether they survive or not will stop host: let's chat

with some callers out of market, michigan. caller: mr. webster, the subject is a good subject for saving lives but something that has affected my family is something that killed a quarter million people every year yet we should be putting her money and johns hopkins should put their money in to death by medical errors. that stomps on gun violence so can we address something like that? host: the focus we are talking about is gun violence solutions in the country. he is stating that pretty deeply so we will keep the focus on that topic this morning. jean in syracuse, new york on the line for owners -- morning caller: good morning, your previous guest gave a very

cogent and well researched answer for gun violence in the country. it's pretty clear from every available way of accounting that people having guns legally to exercise their second amendment, is the best way to take care of that problem. he mentioned less guns is less violence which is wrong but he didn't mention that taking away people's rights to a gun is taking away a right, not something you should have to earn by getting a license step it's in the constitution and preexisted the company -- the constitution. host: mr. webster?

>> lots of factual errors there. there is simply no date this supports the general idea that the more guns we have, the less violent crime we have. it's not borne out in the data at all. it's actually the reverse with respect to lethal forms of violence. as it relates to the general question of whether a licensing fireman violates the constitution or second amendment right, no court has decided that handgun purchaser licensing requirements violate the second amendment. it's fine if someone wants to have their own talk about what the constitution says or doesn't say but the way our government works is the courts decide that. thus far, no court has

determined that a purchaser -- a purchasing license requirement for firearms it the second amendment. host: a question from twitter -- >> guest: that's a good question. i'm sorry to say that the data to answer it or not so good. for the everyday shootings, and incredibly high rate of shootings in our community throughout the united states, the data collected about those, we don't have the criminal history in the background on the individual commits those and how many were illegal to possess their guns and how many were not step we did a study looking at people who are incarcerated in

state resin for committing violent crimes with guns and based upon their survey responses and their histories and their ages and things like that, we were able to look at what share of the people who are incarcerated for violent crimes with guns were legal possessors? the standards for legal gun ownership are different across states. in the states with the weakest standards, the majority, 60% were legal gun owners before they committed that violent crime with a gun stop there is a lot of rhetoric around legal and illegal gun possessors. the data around it are not as clear of what the argument suggests. we know a little more about the

backgrounds of people who commit fatal mass shootings. most of those individuals who commit those acts could legally purchase a firearm that they used. host: to new york city, paul on the line for non-gun owners stop caller: good morning, my question is surrounding the issue of gun control laws and the level of gun homicides that i've seen on the internet. it seems that places like russia , latin america and africa have very high gun murder rates. if you look at bangladesh and vietnam which have lower income per capita but also have gun control laws, it's much lower. it seems to be poverty oriented

and if you look at the u.s. which has lower gun deaths per person, and you compare to latin america and russia, you find that russia and latin america have more stringent gun control laws on average. when you are discussing different states having a higher -- is more than the states. you will see very specific areas of new york city where there is a higher homicide rate. for some reason, that is not discussed. what's not discussed is why is it happening in these communities more even though the gun control laws might be the same? i don't see how that is left out and why is it that proponents of gun-control -- i am kind of neutral on but i think putting people in jail and having lots

of incarcerations which is what the laws lead to. it's not like you pass these laws and they don't have implications for people. why are we drawing those parallels because it seems to be manipulated toward pro-gun control. guest: i'd like to respond to that. a lot of that had to do with comparing different countries and gun violence. that's a whole different conversation. i like to focus on the last part which is we know whatever city we're looking at whether his new york, chicago, baltimore, philadelphia, louisville, the gun violence is equally -- is not equally distributed. there has been good research on that.

it's been clear from that research that structural racism plays in his role in how gun violence, the geography of gun violence in our cities. if you put guns in the safest context with lots of resources, low stress, i don't expect a lot of harm to occur. when you compound the many stressors and problems of historical racism in our country with free-flowing, unregulated gun laws we tend to have, the violence that occurs in stressors that occur within those committees are more likely to lead to gun violence. with respect to the question of whether these laws will lead to more incarcerations -- i think it's important and

essential not to say just gun laws. there are all kind laws. -- of gun laws. the ones that are used to address the flow of guns from illegal guns, those are upstream laws. the there's not much data to suggest that more people are going to jail for violating those crimes. they are more primary prevention and public health. other laws lead to more incarcerations, having more to do with gun possession and use. i think generally what we know in criminological research is that you don't need a long prison sentence to have an effect to deter a crime.

just need to have some response so there is a value. it's not just laws. it's how they were applied. what we know generally about gun law enforcement like so many other ways we address can -- gun violence, the more dense the more highly focused that is, the more effective and there it is. you don't need new broad stop and frisk all over the neighborhood. you just need to know and be close enough to communities to know who is behind the gun violence and have your resources focused on those individuals. host: baltimore, maryland on the line for gun owners. caller: good morning. i agree with what a lot of he just said stop i made former baltimore city police officer.

i used to do crop analysis. a lot of these weapons that are being placed on these streets, stolen levels -- stolen weapons. once they steal a weapon, it's not that the people who obtained the gun illegally but the ones who are still -- stealing weapons. if you have a large portion of individuals bringing home constantly stealing weapons, you will have the kind of chaos. in baltimore, there is no repercussion for any crime there. they barely prosecute these things is for a shootings. they understand that talking to the guys on the street and you talk to them, go into jail, it's

almost like going on a family vacation. there is no consequence. they need to make the jail laws were need to make -- ted put people in jail for 20 years when it's a reserve for them. you have to find another way to make it harder for them and make it so they don't want to go to jail you basically creating a family reunion. guest: gun theft is an important problem. we should be more intentional about ways to prevent gun theft in part because promoting a requiring suit good in storage.

in many cities around the country like in states that have made easy for civilians to carry concealed firearms, more and more guns are being stolen out of motor vehicles because more guns are available on dish and metal from homes with more vehicles as well so we need to be intentional about that. the general idea is that people committing violent crimes are not really concerned about -- the potential of going to jail. they say that but i honestly don't think any individual who is free would prefer to be behind bars. i think our strategies to address gun violence in the data supports this, that the most effective approach is don't rely solely on law enforcement.

you need effective and very focused law-enforcement to slow enforcement on the individuals driving the violence which is a small proportion in any city in any particular neighborhood. you get the best impact when new complement that with community interventions that actually try to steer people away and expand their capacity to respond to provocations and conflicts by alternative methods and open apart virginity's -- open up opportunities that weren't there before. this is a very complex problem. i will don't want to pretend the gun laws will solve everything. there is a host of things we can do that will make a difference. we need to have our law enforcement be fair and focused. we need our community violence intervention invested in their

and create a true system and infrastructure to make those programs work. host: two ghost guns make a difference? guest: absolutely. these are privately made firearms that are either sold through kits you can get online and make yourself or some individual can do this with 3d printing. the rate at which these guns are showing up in the hands of criminals, if we don't do something, that problem will grow much bigger than it is now. this is benefiting no one except

people who are violent and the people selling them. they are a threat to communities. we have to respond to that. host: kristin is waiting in south carolina on the line for gun owners. caller: good morning. i'm wondering if the solution to gun violence, it seems like it's a water ball effect. his gun violence not surrounded by drugs? it seems as though there are many citizens that will go to owners who have there been violent or harmful whether weapons. we need police to control guest: i will respond to that

which is one to confirm that most people who own guns are nonviolent, that is absolutely true. is this all about drugs driving our violence? city after city that undertakes very careful examination of the shootings and the meetings -- and the motives for those shootings find it is not drugs. far more commonly, these are just conflict people get into for a whole host of things, often having nothing to do with drugs. some more individuals who are shocked or did the shooting have a history of drug use or selling. the typical events do not have anything to do with drugs. it has to do with evinces and problems individuals have and

they cannot control their responses and have access to a firearm. host: daniel webster is the director for johns hopkins's center for gun violence solutions. you can see their work on their website. thank you for your time. guest: thank you for having me. host: up next we turn to the issue of immigration and we will be joined by denise gilman at the university of texas at austin. we will be discussing two other issues. stick around for that discussion. we will be right back. ♪ >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span two. explain the people and events

that tell the american story. at 1:00 p.m., discussion on the advanced placement u.s. history exam with co-authors of "fabric of a nation." they will explain how this year's exam is structured, provide strategies for answering questions, and analyze historic documents. at 2:00 p.m. eastern, scholars and political experts at the bipartisan policy center look to see how the presidency changed in the first two decades of the century under president bush, obama, trump, and biden and a look at the presidency of bill clinton. exploring the american story, watch american history tv saturday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> at least six presidents

recorded conversations while in office. here many of those -- hear many of those on a new pad cast, residential recordings. >> season one focused's on lyndon b. johnson. you will hear about the presidential campaign, the gulf of tonkin incident, the march on some, and the war in vietnam. not everyone knew they were being recorded. >> certainly johnson's secretaries new because they were distressed -- because they were tasked with transcribing those conversations. they were the ones who made sure the conversations were taped as johnson would signal to them through an open door between his office and there's. >> you will also hear some blunt talk. >> i want a number of people assigned to kennedy the number -- to kennedy the day he died and the number of men assigned to me right now.

if i cannot go to the bathroom, i will not go. i won't go anywhere, i will stay behind these black gates. >> residential recordings on c-span now or wherever you get your podcasts. >> washington journal continues. host: a discussion on the immigration policies you have been hearing in the news. our guest is denise gilman, law professor at university of texas at austin. one of those policies if the migrant protection protocol known as the remain in mexico policy. mind viewers watch that is or was -- remind viewers watch that is or was. guest: it is a policy adopted by the trump administration where individuals seeking asylum in the u.s. and arrive at our southern border are processed into the asylum system but are

returned to wait for their hearings in mexico. they come back and forth across the bridge on the days of their hearings and those are held in tent courts at the border. host: why would that policy -- why was that policy before the supreme court yesterday? caller: -- guest: the biden administration has attempted to end the program because of all of the problems it causes in terms of diplomacy with mexico, put strain on that relationship, and because of the danger it places on asylum-seekers who are living in difficult circumstances in northern mexico while they await hearings. there are thousands of hearings of kidnapping and harmed by cartels kidnapped -- and harmed by cartels kidnapping asylum-seekers.

then the administration was sued over halting the program so that is what is before the supreme court. host: the report from usa today, they write "the supreme court appeared divided over the remain in mexico policy." could the biden administration be forced to continue a policy started by a previous administration and how unusual is that? guest: that is the question before the supreme court. how much latitude will in new president have to adapt to new policies and modify policies put in place by prior administrations? it would be pretty unusual for the supreme court to weigh in and say there was a policy choice made weighing different factors by our president and now you must continue with it. the way it is working out is that some of the focus is not

just whether or not this is a proper policy being made but whether policy is required use of the remain in mexico problem. if congress did require the program, it would be back in the past relevant laws in 1996. no president before trump had adopted this policy. host: a policy decision the biden administration was to make is ending title 42. that was expected to end in may. guest: title 42 is related to the remain in mexico program but it is different. what title 42 does is under

alleged authority of cdc, it alleges that during the pandemic , people could be expelled entirely at the southern border without access to the u.s. asylum system. they were sent back to mexico or all the way to their home countries. with the pandemic waning, the biden administration decided to end this program on may 23. a texas court weighed in and said you cannot make that policy change either. the program must continue at this point. host: the relationship between the cdc's role and the white house role into gets the final say, can you clarify this? guest: the cdc issued the order

saying there was a reason to expel people under this public health provision under the statute, even though there were high-level officials at cdc who said this was not necessary or even a wise policy and terms of pandemic control. the orders in place were through the cdc. the president's authority was to make it possible to ask whether the cdc would be issuing such an order to allow for exposure. host: the push and pull on this, the department of homeland security saying the lifting of title 42, they will provide the resources needed to deal with the expected influx.

explain what the projections are right now, what title 42 does and if it is allowed to end, what happens on the southern border? guest: we will have a situation of a large number of asylum-seekers who need to be processed. what we are seeing is two years of like each of the southern border. this has not deterred asylum-seekers fleeing from egregious situations of violence and human rights violations from coming, it's just meant they have in trapped in northern mexico. if the border is open to processing asylum-seekers, this does not mean wholesale allowing people to come into the u.s. without any processing of proceedings that will happen after they get here. certainly, there will be large numbers of asylum-seekers who

need to be interviewed and placed into the system and who need to be traveling to their family members willing to host them and he likes. we will see significant numbers and coming months. the department of homeland security has been making plans on how to process asylum-seekers at the border because the biden administration has said whether or not we need to keep expulsions in place, that is up to the cdc. the cdc says we don't need the expulsions anymore. so now we go back to normal loss and the department of homeland security will be assessing these cases and has plans in place to do so, including regulations that streamline the processing. host: that is the latest on these two key immigration policies in the news. viewers, we want to hear your questions, thoughts, and comments. we are with denise gilman. phone lines, republicans,

202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. a line for border state residents, 202-748-8003. call in with your questions and comments. the immigration clinic at ut austin, what do you do there? guest: we supervise cases with law students in their second and third years or handling before immigration courts and asylum offices. we were at the asylum office with individuals who had been evacuated from afghanistan seeking permanent asylum in the u.s.. that is the kind of work we do. host: how hard is that asylum process for someone who shows up on the border? how much does that require given the folks on the side of it? guest: it is an extremely

challenging process. there are numerous players of vetting and security checks. the law is quite complicated and quite restrictive in terms of who actually qualifies for asylum. the attorneys in our clinics spent hours developing stories with clients who could not explain how the violence they fled fits within the asylum definition. with together volumes of supporting evidence. if all of that is put together effectively, then we have a chance at gaining permanent protection. host: what determines whether somebody who shows up at the border gets a student attorney, a public defender, or nobody speaking for them? guest: that is a great question. in the immigration system, because it is a civil system,

there is no right to government funded counsel. the only options are organizations like my clinic or other nonprofit organizations that provide legal services for free or paying a private attorney or the majority of migrants go through a complicated system on their own. those seeking asylum who present at the border are allowed into the process are in an adversarial proceeding. they are appearing before judges within the department of justice. they may be doing so on their own without representation. it is a very complicated and challenging area of the law. it is not the case that this is a loophole, a quick way to get into the u.s., to seek asylum. host: what is the demand versus supply of folks like your law

students and other pro bono representatives? guest: we cannot meet the need of all of those who need legal services. i cannot give you an exact number but the through this process completely on their own. different administrations have put forth numbers suggesting that the numbers of those granted asylum are quite low and that could justify restrictive measures at the border to bar people from entering. it should be clear that the grant rates might be low in part because the law is very complex and a good number of those applying for asylum do not have representation and don't know how to present their cases and

navigate this complicated adversarial system. might ask questions about whether the law is being interpreted in a way that is more restrictive than should be the case given our asylum laws are. it from international law, from the u.n. refugee convention and the like. some of those denials of claims might be really different, might have a different result if the law were interpreted as it is meant to be to provide protection to those fleeing violence. host: it is the immigration clinic at ut austin. this is tom in harvest lake, pennsylvania. first caller, democrat. good morning. tom, are you with us? caller: yes i am. host: what is your question or comment? caller: i have a question.

the way i understand it is immigrants fleeing their country from abuse and seeking asylum, don't they have to register in the first country -- the first safe country they come to? guest: no, that is not part of our asylum law. there were measures that tried to make that a portion of the law. even in those instances, it was not an absolute bar on being able to seek asylum in the united states. they law adopted by congress in 1980 that is bringing down u.s. law and terms of the refugee can engine does not require you seek asylum in the first place you go

through. that is for good reason. refugees, while they are fleeing the country they have experienced harm or danger also need to try to settle in places where they will be able to make a new life for themselves. that is often a place where there is existing family or where there are systems in place to receive and integrate. and in many instances, the u.s. is the better option for ensuring there is a real any four-way -- a real meaningful way to establish a way of safety in the new nation. host: -- to danny in kentucky, good morning. caller: good morning. my question is, trump started that wall and tried to get it

from one end all the way. my question is, why did they not finish the wall? why can't people in congress and the senate finish the wall themselves? host: ms. gilman, on the wall. guest: there have been several attempts to build a southern border wall further that the trump administration. almost always what ends up happening, while the wall is expensive to build and in some places almost impossible to build because of our terrain, ranging from extreme mountain

and desert terrain to winding river terrain with floodplains involved, such that it is an incredibly expensive and complicated effort to build a wall, the effects of the wall are really almost entirely symbolic. the wall does very little to control migration. it just really isn't a common sense approach to continue to build a wall rather than to look at other measures, such as recognizing that the issue is this other -- at the southern border is preparing for migration flows that are normal and putting in place systems providing -- provided for under the law in the u.s. to process individuals approaching our southern border. host: lauren on twitter wants to

know how many asylum-seekers is the u.s. allowed to receive each year? guest: there is no cap on the number of asylum-seekers or the number of people who can be granted asylum in the u.s. in a given year. typically, the number of those granted asylum in a given year is quite small. it is probably only about 50,000 or so. even if you combined the number of individuals given asylum and that is people seeking refugee protection at our border or within the u.s., if you combine that with the people who are settled abroad as refugees, you are still only talking 120,000, maybe. in large number years, closer to 150,000. in any given year we admit about one million lawful new

residence, green card holders within the u.s. who qualify for their green card. it is a pretty small number overall. in terms of those seeking asylum , we have seen larger numbers of asylum-seekers in recent years. there is no doubt about that. the world is on the move in terms of people fleeing file in situations. this is something united nations has recognized and something we are seeing here. we are still looking at numbers in the hundreds of thousands. given the u.s.'s resources and overall population, these are not numbers that are unmanageable. nor are they that different from presidential migration flows in the past. we had similar numbers in 2000. host: to the lone star state in

anderson, texas, good morning. caller: good morning. i am from texas as well. my niece is a schoolteacher. one fit of the kids in the class don't speak english. the idea that the wall doesn't work is ridiculous. it is a ridiculous statement to make. the wall was almost finished. it is not being built across the entire state. these asylum-seekers are supposed to be coming in through normal places of entry. they are coming across everywhere. title 42, when that is removed, we will not have to have a single extra person come across in order for the number of people that will be let in. if they're sending back 60% and then without it they will have

to lead them all in, that will more than double the number coming in right now before the anticipated increase from 17,000 to 18,000 per day. they marched to under 20,000 people, that was the highest number in history. 2000 was any unusual year, i did a lot of research on this. it is like they make it difficult for people to understand. the year 2000 was a crazy year. there is a reason that happened that way. the problem is we will never get immigration reform. host: let me let denise gilman jump in on some of that. guest: the data on entry, i agree they make it obscure.

but you can find the data for every year and 2000 was not an outlier. for the end of the 1990's and the beginning of the 2000s, you were seeing high levels of border crossing apprehensions. this is cyclical. there were higher numbers this march. you are going to see that happen for the next coming months because of the backlog of individuals who have been stuck in northern mexico for recent years. there are plans in place to address that. that something we are going to have to do to get back to a state of rule of law where we are following our u.s. laws because title 42 was an exceptional measure of questionable legality which was in any case only justified during the pandemic and there

cannot be any explanation for using that any further. in terms of border crossers versus presenting at port of entry, the asylum law is very clear that this is a law adopted by congress. it says that it is lawful to seek asylum, whether presenting at a port of entry, a bridge, or an air or whether you have crossed into the u.s. and without regard of status. that is because those fleeing violence or targeted persecution are entitled to receive a decision as to whether they should given protection in the u.s. under u.s. law. that is because we as a nation believe it is important to protect refugees, particularly after world war ii when we saw massive refugee numbers around the world. it is also because we have committed to do so by signing the u.n. refugee convention and

because we need to do so as good neighbors and leaders of the world by sharing some of the burden of refugee flows. and by showing leadership to ascend -- to send the message to other countries that they should do the same. in terms of integrating children into classrooms, that is certainly a challenge that is presented around the country. i can assure you that many asylum-seekers are interested in moving to areas of the country where they have family willing to receive them at help them integrate into the u.s. if we can change up our border policies and make it more possible, i think you will see in many instances quicker movement away from the border to communities around the country so that we can spread out migration and allow for greater integration.

host: to mountain home, arkansas, this is tim. independent. caller: elon musk is planning on building a city on march so let's get the wall done. who pays for these millions of people that come across the borders and what asylum? is it social security, state, local? do they have housing or are they let go to rome the street homeless -- to roam the street homeless? guest: there is no state or federal money put towards asylum-seekers during the process of seeking asylum. even for those granted asylum, there is only a short period of limited financial support, basically health care and some limited benefits for a period of eight months.

this is not a huge spinach or of public benefits by any means. the understanding is that most asylum-seekers will engage and implement in the u.s. i have worked with asylum-seekers for 30 years and my experience has absolutely been that most asylum-seekers are quick at securing work and make important financial contributions, including xp or contributions to this country -- including taxpayer contributions to this country, including the ability to teach in schools or engage in health care. many are involved in health care professions. much rather than being a draw on the nation, they are often making very important contributions. there are some costs come of course, to processing the cases. just some normal bureaucratic

costs, just like there are significant costs in building a border wall which all of the data shows, including numerous government studies has very little impact on immigration flows. host: let's get one more call in. david in albuquerque. democrat. caller: yes or. -- yes sir. host: go ahead. caller: every time they say these people are coming here to get away from a hard life and persecutions and all of this kind of stuff, does that not exist for americans here in america? trust me, i have sympathy for these people. i honestly do. but my wishes are for my bike and white rather stash my

black-and-white others and sisters. for the others, i feel sorry for you but if you do not want to wait in line and come in a legal manner, that is not helping anything. host: any thoughts. guest: i want to be clear that u.s. law explicitly divides -- exquisitely provides for the opportunity to seek asylum at the bridge. in recent years, people have turned away so they had to cross , but the law does allow for seeking asylum for those coming across. in terms of if this takes away from those who are u.s. citizens in the u.s., i would implore everybody to think about the extent to which this is not a zero-sum game.

it is not asylum-seekers versus americans, but rather that if we show our compassion and help to integrate new workers, those who contribute to the economy, we can grow the economy significantly to the benefit of existing best citizens and newcomers, asylum-seekers who come, fleeing agree to situations but come with an incredible will to contribute. host: a question from twitter, from elizabeth. since your students deal with these asylum-seekers, elizabeth wants to know, "do people trying to enter the u.s. think our southern border is wide open?" guest: absolutely not. let me be very clear, with the obama administration and the

trump administration that has continued during the biden administration, the border is anything but wide open. that is even under existing law before the remain in mexico program, before title 42. there are strict screening processes in place. immigration detention, to my mind, has been used widely with asylum-seekers who do not need to be detained because they have every incentive to appear before their proceedings and they have family willing to receive them and support them during the process. that has been a common reception that those who appear at the border get. they are sent to a detention center. the border is anything but wide open and people do know that. that is why cartels have been able to use these restrictive border policies to charge people to be the prey on those who wish

to seek protection and asylum because they are able to create a profit center out of these border policies that allows them to amp up their criminality when if we engage in a prepared, calm process rather than creating crisis and brought asylum-seekers and process them with our resources, we would not be creating that profit center. host: denise gilman is a law professor, director of the immigration clinic at the university of texas at austin. thank you for the time and the conversation. guest: thank you for having me. host: about 25 minutes until the house comes in and we will end our program as we often do, in open forum. letting you lead the conversation. any policy issue or political issue you want to talk about. phone numbers, republicans,

202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. we will get to your calls right after the break. ♪ >> at least six presidents recorded conversations while in office. hear many of those on c-span's new podcast, "presidential recordings." >> season one focuses on lyndon b. johnson. you will hear about the 1964 presidential campaign, the gulf of tonkin incident, the march on selma, and the war in vietnam. not everyone knew they were recorded. >> johnson's secretaries new because they were tasked with transcribing those conversations . in fact, they were the ones who made sure the conversations were taped as johnson would signal to them through any open door

between his office and there's. >> you will also hear some blunt talk. >> jim, i want a number of people assigned to kennedy the day he died and a number assigned to me now. i want it right quick. i will not go to the bathroom if i cannot go, i will stay behind these packets. >> presidential recordings, found on the c-span now app or whatever you get your podcasts. >> live on "in-depth," very cuddly will be our -- larry kudlow will be our guest. he served as director of the national economic council under president trump.

join in the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments, text, and tweets. sunday at noon eastern on the tv on c-span two -- on c-span2. host: it is our open forum, letting you lead the discussion in these last 25 minutes. in 20 five minutes, the house will come in for the day at 10:00 a.m. eastern. they will be back at noon for legislative business. at 2:00 p.m., descendant will convene. there's plenty of action, including 10:15 eastern, a focus on the budget west for health and human services. hhs secretary xavier becerra will be testifying. that is on c-span3, c-span.org, and on the free c-span video app.

2:00 p.m. today, the homeland security a la hundred mayorkas will be in front of the house homeland security committee testifying about the budget request for that agency. c-span3 is where you can watch it, c-span.org, and the free c-span video app. what is on your mind this morning? what topics do you want to focus on? the phone lines, republicans 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. arnold, brooklyn, new york. for democrats -- the line for democrats. caller: the implementation of vaccine mandate continues to be used even though it is shown that the vaccines do not prevent

transmission and do not prevent a person from actually coming down with covid. i cannot understand why nobody mentions this is one of the sticking points that is constantly going to lead to a decrease in democratic votes in the upcoming election. host: do you mind if i ask if you are vaccinated? caller: i am not. host: new york is one of the first places to require proof of vaccines to go to different events. are those requirements still happening in the city of new york? caller: yes, they mostly are. most restaurants have not forced it -- have not enforced it and

there are a few beginning to change in the future. i have not been to any performance in a few years now. host: have you ever been turned away as someone who is not vaccinated and not being able to present proof of vaccination? caller: i would like to do volunteer work in a food co-op, they won't even accept my volunteer employment because i am not vaccinated. host: that is arnold out of brooklyn. this is joan from cleveland, ohio. good morning. caller: i want to say something in regards to immigration. they love person you had on did not say she had ever been down to the border to see what is actually going on.

the border should have been closed automatically. we have trouble in our own cities and all this does is add to it. people are out of work, people don't have a place of their own. you have hobos and everything, we are trained to keep them and now you want to bring these people in. everyone else is to come through a system. this is not a system at all. nobody seems to realize that those guardsmen every day -- if you watch tv, you will see how bad it is down there. everyone is sugarcoating this whole thing and it is ridiculous. host: jim, little valley, new york. independent. caller: good morning. i used to live in janesville, texas in 1978. i was working down there.

thursday night to monday morning, you could not get through any area because of the illegals they had jailed down there. this has been going on since then. the government needs to step up, stop illegals from coming in here. there are cardboard boxes under bridges -- we don't seem to care anything about those folks, especially veterans and i am a veteran myself. it also seems to me that your organization cuts anybody off who has anything bad to say about the democratic party. i think you are little bit more a democrat supporting

organization then the country as a whole. host: i recommend you keep watching. we get about 60 phone calls every day from folks on the right and on the left, focused on the middle. keep watching. i promise you will see and hear all of it. philip in minnesota, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. the previous color makes a point about people in this country. all of the money, i think we can do better for the people who needed it on the other hand, have job shortages, decreasing birth rate. we could do better in this country. i watched 60 minutes and they said the wall does help at certain points. let's listen to people who work on the border.

this country needs more people coming in to sustain our system, people who want to work and improve our education system, take care of our own people. follow the money. i believe a lot of people are benefiting from this country withdrawing my -- this country with drug money. host: we should note the president's schedule, president biden is scheduled to speak at madeleine albright's funeral at the national cathedral in washington, d.c. this is the u.s. today right up, "prominent friends and from the members of madeleine albright will gather at washington's natural cathedral -- national cathedral to celebrate the woman who arrived from war-torn czechoslovakia before becoming a

diplomat and icon. president is set to deliver the eulogy. bill clinton nominated her secretary of state in 1996. former secretary of state, hillary clinton, will also speak along with madeleine albright's three daughters. it is scheduled to begin at 11:00 a.m. eastern." mark in illinois, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i am curious the immigration lawyer, how much money she has made over 30 years. my next comment, isn't america a life boat for all of these immigrants trying to get in? we all know what happens to a life boat when too many people get in. host: she was talking about the worker lost does do pro bono down at the border. i don't know her salary the, if

that is what you are asking. misty in tennessee, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to know why there is nothing done to the corporations that harbor illegals. if they could not get a job, they would not come to begin with. the republicans or democrats are never going to do anything to change the laws because they would have nothing to run on. host: you are talking about the e-verify system? caller: yes. mcdonald's uses it, but construction companies, lawn service companies, they don't use it. if they could not get the job to begin with, they would not come. they are coming because they want to take care of their families like we do. they have just as much of a right to take care of their families as we do.

not far from where i am at, there was a meatpacking place and they deployed every worker they had. they were back in business the next morning. they did not skip a beat. they got like a $5,000 fine and that was it. they employ them by the thousands. host: also in tennessee, this is gloria. on the line for democrats. what is on your mind? caller: i wanted to speak about the borders. i think everybody is a will. it does not matter what color you are, what religion you are, we are all human family. that is only -- there is only one race, the human race. i feel at the borders, these people need help. we have to limit it.

i don't know how many border crossings we have across the u.s., but at every border crossing if they would allow 100 people a day as long as they are documented and everything and let in first, -- and let in first the children and elderly, or those who have family and friends who can help them, because most people i have met are from argentina. i have met people from many countries and everyone has come here looking at seeking work and a better life for themselves. i don't think the people like me naturally born in this country should be any different or treated any different from the people who want to come here to help their families.

it is not right that these children and babies that come to school would be bullied and forced into drugs and all sorts of different situations that are absolutely deplorable for children to even know about. america, for the most part, there are always people who love and hate. but for the most part, a majority of americans are loving and accepting. i am a great grandmother, i have 13 great-grandchildren. i have seen this world enough from so many different angles and positions. i have looked at major cities of chicago. for the most part there is good

and bad and everyone. host: denise in minnesota is next. republican. good morning. caller: i ask all americans to call the white house until the biden administration to shut down the border. this is terrible what is happening to our country. also, it if you can open up the pipelines. god bless america. host: what is gas at in the soda? -- in minnesota? caller: almost four dollars. host: this is ron my democrat. caller: i would like to know if there is going to be a study on who is proposing all of these people from different countries to come to the u.s.

a lot of these people are poor and don't have the money to come here. who is footing the bill? host: from denver colorado, independent. good morning. caller: as i see the illegal immigrant population, there are three categories. one our asylum-seekers, the second are immigrating for financial reasons, and the third are illegals. the dominant number of people are here illegally. the problem of building a wall really won't stop his problem of visa over stays. under the bush and obama administrations, the increased border controls.

we have to beef up the vetting policy and these immigration courts. building the wall is minimum benefit and is a major talking port -- talking points that gets people riled up. the real problem is processing people who are truly seeking asylum. we don't have enough courts to do that. also to seek control over people who are visa over stays. this is driven by the drug industry. host: it is 202-748-8001 four republicans. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. it is our open forum. just a few minutes before the house comes in at 10:00 a.m. the senate is in at 2:00 a.m.

2:15 p.m. eastern, javier becerra is testifying on his agency. those hearings are also on c-span.org and the free c-span now you app. at 11:00 a.m. this morning, president biden is heading to the national cathedral in northwest d.c. to speak at the funeral for the first secretary of state, madeleine albright. a lot of events taking place in washington. before the house comes in, it is time for you to lead the discussion. phone lines for republicans and democrats, as usual. one story they got a bit of attention yesterday, speaking of president biden, giving the

starkest indication yet in a private meeting with house democrats that he is poised to take action to relieve student loans, a move that could include canceling tens of thousands of dollars of debt for some individuals. that story is in the washington post and other papers. a story that got a lot of attention from the unit -- from the new york times, more tapes being released by alexander burns and jonathan martin of house minority leader kevin mccarthy and his meeting days after the january 6, 2021 attack on the capital. audio recordings of his comment raising alarms about statements made by his gop colleagues and even talking about hoping they would be blocked on twitter. those comments are getting a lot of attention after that new york times story posted with new audio clips with leader mccarthy

talking to members of the house minority leadership. those are stories from yesterday. steve in dover, florida. caller: i want to talk about this crisis at the border because my understanding is we close the borders around 1907. i am 73 years old and there has been a crisis at the order for as long as i have been alive. we are just going to target joe biden and say all of the sudden it is his problem, it is insane to me. the border is the problem but the wall is not the solution. these people have the right to

knock on our door and ask for help and we have a responsibility to help them. that is all i would like to say. host: -- in your recent years? caller: it seems to me we have already -- we have always had 20 alien to 30 million -- 20 million to 30 million illegals in this country at any time and i still think we have that many. host: the official stats are in the 11 million range but plenty of discussion about those stats. donna is in nashville, tennessee. good morning. donna, good morning. are you there? caller: yes. host: go ahead. stop listening through your tv

and talk through your phone, please. go ahead with your comment. caller: my comment is everybody wants to know who is paying for these people coming across the order, us taxpayers are paying for it. host: that is donna in tennessee. this is salvatore out of massachusetts, independent. caller: i have a suggestion for the border. if you watch the news in the morning, you have a webcam to see the traffic. if you want to see how the local beaches are doing for the population, they have webcams there. i think there should be webcams along the borders of the american people can really see what is going on.

thousands and millions of people are flooding into this country with no control. that is my suggestion. it wont be very expensive to initiate something like that and the american people would see what is really going on. host: martin out of san francisco, democrat. good morning. you are next. caller: [indiscernible] host: are you with us? caller: hello. host: what is your comment? caller: everybody has got a problem with immigration, but -- is making money off of these people.

[indiscernible] another thing, too, they need to go down and give some kind of earth control because they are having babies down there. host: mohammed in tampa, florida. you are next. caller: i'm going to begin quick comment. i am an immigrant myself and i used to vote democratic all the way until the last election. i will tell you why i am not voting democratic again. host: 30 seconds before the house goes in. caller: democrats see this country as people at its core and i do not. the democrats are engaged in demographic change in the u.s..

they want to open the border so they have more of what they call their people coming in and overtake and outnumber white people. host: we will end the program there. the house coming in for the day, gaveling in momentarily. we will be back here tomorrow. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. april 27, 2022. i hereby appoint the honorable bonnie watson coleman to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 10, 2022, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority