us. later, reverend william barber onto the group's upcoming william -- oral march on washington. be sure to join the conversation with your calls, texts, and tweets. ♪ host: good morning. it is tuesday, june 14. the houses and at 10:00 a.m. eastern. the senate will meet at 11:00 a.m., and we aren't -- we are with you for the next three hours. we begin by getting your reaction to yesterday's public testimony. the hearings featured testimony from former trump campaign officials and william barr, who said following the 2020 election the former president ignored their advice and evidence in his effort to pursue false election

fraud claims. we want to know what you thought of yesterday's hearings. republicans, it is (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also send us a text message. that number, (202) 748-8003. if you do, please include your name and where you're from. otherwise, catch up with us on social media. on twitter, it is @cspanwj. you can go ahead and start calling and now. yesterday's hearing clocked in at two hours and five minutes, about 30 minutes longer than the thursday primetime hearing. it got off to a late start after a key witness bill stepien, former president trump's former campaign manager, skipped the hearing because his wife had gone into labor. another witness turned out to be the star witness of the day here

here's the headline from the washington post. william barr says trump was obsessed with fraud notions. this is some of the testimony from the former attorney general of the united states. >> i felt it was time for me to say something, so i set up a lunch with the ap reporter. i told him at lunch -- i made the statement that to date we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election. i had a later meeting scheduled at the white house at 3:00 with meadows. this was previously scheduled, so i knew this was going to come up. i went over and pull my secretary that i thought i would probably be fired and told to go home -- not to go back to my office. i said you might have to pack up

for me. i met with the chief of staff. he said the president was angry. he did not really get into the issue of the fraud and then i went up to pat cipollone's office and we were talking with each other. word came down that he wanted us both to go to the oval and the president was as mad as i have ever seen him in trying to control himself. he said this is killing me. you do not have to say this. you must have said this because you hate trump. you hate trump. then he raised the big vote dump, as he called it, and detroit. he said people saw boxes coming into the counting station at all hours of the morning and so forth. i explained to him -- at that point i knew the exact number of precincts in detroit. i think it was 630 something. i said, there are 630 precincts

in detroit and unlike elsewhere in the state they centralize the counting process so they are not counted in each precinct. they are moved to counting stations, so the normal process would involve boxes coming in at all different hours. did anyone point out to you that the people -- did the people complaining point out to you you did better in detroit than you did last time? there is no indication of fraud in detroit. and i told him the stuff is people were shoveling out to the public was bullshit. he was indignant about that. i reiterated that they wasted a month on these claims on the dominion voting machines and they were idiotic claims. i specifically raised the dominion voting machines, which

i found to be among the most disturbing allegations, disturbing in the sense that i saw absolutely zero basis for the allegations, but they were made in such a sensational way that they obviously were influencing people, members of the public, that there was this systemic corruption in the system and that their votes did not count and these machines controlled by somebody else or determining it, which was nonsense. it was being laid out and i told him it was crazy stuff and they were wasting their time. it was doing grave disservice to the country. host: the former attorney general during part of his taped testimony that was played at the hearing yesterday. we mostly want to hear from you. this is the second in a series of hearings this month. the third will take place wednesday of this week, but getting your reaction today two.

(202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats, it is (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. did you watch? what did you think? joe is up first, california, line for republicans. caller: the elite liberal media certainly showed their tail here. they are on record for heating trump 24/7 and they do want the democrats to win -- hating trump 24/7 and they do want the democrats to win. trump did not lose the election. he was up 800,000 between pennsylvania, wisconsin, and michigan collectively at midnight and there is no way that vote would turn around unless it was corruption involved. the elite liberal media now, the

same media that is so unfair that they would not even cover the hunter biden store the last month of the election, they would not even cover it, would not touch it as a collective force, but they want america not to believe there was no malfeasance. host: you are talking about democrats and the liberal media. what did you think of the former attorney general's statement? that was about 2.5 minutes of his statement in which he called those claims of election fraud b s. caller: 800,000 votes at midnight. you tell me. then these same people that hate trump want to turn around and say they did not cover the hunter biden store but want to say, by the way, trust us. we are not biased. trust us because we are not anti-trump.

he will -- was not ripped off in the election. host: another republican voice, the former acting chief of staff for president trump, a former republican congressman from south carolina, this was his series of tweets yesterday. i am not sure how today's hearing will establish that he knew that he lost. the evidence shows he never accepted that. i wish every person who thinks trump really did when watch what we just saw. i'm not sure democrats -- what democrats accomplished today. they had nothing to show that trump believed that he lost. in fact, they showed the opposite. they made the case he probably should have known, but that is different. caller: i am a teacher. there is no way anybody can tell me -- i have a degree in plug will science from ucla -- nobody is going to tell me he lost the election when he was up a

hundred thousand votes at midnight the night of the election. host: this is rob out of new york city, democrat. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. you do a great job. the caller just talked about how democrats hate trump. i cannot talk about the rest of my fellow democrats, but i can tell you i hate when people lie to my face or lie to me on television. i hate when people distort the truth. if you have ever gone out with a girlfriend or spouse who you know is lying to you, you are unsettled and you do not like it. you do not like people who give you wrong information. it is a shame that we have to even go through all of this.

it is important they go through all of this investigation and talk to all these individuals who were involved, the legal teams for trump. barr finally is talking truth. it is a shame we are spending this money and time. it reminds me of a hearing about trump's failures over the years, the bankruptcies in atlantic city and how closing a few major hotels really injured atlantic city and all the shenanigans and the costs and the expenses this man has caused this country. he had notions that any idiot,

myself included, could tell you we should have gone to iraq and all these simpleton ideas. i feel strongly about the myself -- them myself. he was full of one-liners and headlines from the news but he had no depth, no information. host: helen is out of greensboro, north carolina, independent. did you watch yesterday? caller: my name is helen and i watched bits and pieces. my problem is how come they don't subpoena nancy pelosi, the sergeant at arms? president trump did not cause this riot at the capitol

building. if you notice, chuck schumer, nancy pelosi, and all of that crowd, they knew what was going to happen. we need to get on with the people's business. why don't you ever cover something about joe biden and hunter biden? that needs to be exposed. this president that we have in the office today is not -- he is not qualified. when i go to my doctor for my hearing checkup, i have to take a cognitive test because of my age. why is this man not given it? he is in with china and nancy pelosi is a disgrace to our country. host: this is irene in california, line for republicans. caller: i am watching most of

it. the reason i am calling is i am very disappointed in c-span. my husband and i watched c-span and we watched all the way up to when they went to the capitol. all these older couples arrived at the capitol, and the guard opened the gate and they were in shock. they said, we can come in? i saw it on c-span. they open to the barrier and they start walking in and up the steps and another guard opens the door. people were just shocked that they were allowed in. people gathered in there and the guy with the animal outfit on

was goofing around in one room and the guard said, come on, knock it off. it went on and on. they gathered and it was crowded. i said to my husband, i have claustrophobia. these people are so jammed in there. host: did you see video people breaking through windows to get in? caller: that came later. sorry, john p you took that down. i was back on c-span and you cut that all out and all you did was put on breaking windows. that happened later. i am disappointed in c-span and c-span is very democrat and they do not show anything that goes on on the others. you are not even talking about the judge that almost got murdered and you will not talk about that or anything about donald trump's innocence on the russian collusion.

that is disappointing. i love c-span, but it is terrible. you guys have gone so hypocritical. host: keep watching. we have covered all those things, including the arrest that happened last week outside of judge kavanaugh's home. i hope you keep watching and we will continue to show you things in their entirety. you can go back and watch at our online archive. charles, washington, democrat. you watch yesterday? caller: i did. my thing is everything trump has touched has turned to dirt. we had mass graves.

host: bring it to what you saw yesterday and what you thought about what you saw yesterday at the hearing. caller: -- turned around and told trump there is no fraud in the election. his advisors told him there is no fraud in the election, but he was running the fraud scheme before the election even started. he was just using it to max out donations from followers so he could get $250 million in donations. he has no accountability. it is in his pocket. we should be starting a new fraud investigation. i hope the trump supporters realize that money they got and all those hats and banners, that

is just a big scam for him just like his casinos and everything else. not much else to say about that. host: democratic congresswoman zoe lofgren lead for a large portion of the hearing yesterday the questioning and revelations about what the committee has found. she described the election defense fraud as not just part of the big lie but part of the big ripoff, that fund that president trump and his campaign asked supporters to donate to an weeks after the election, raising someone hundred million dollars in the first week after the election in 2020. a question for our viewers this morning, did you watch yesterday and what did you think? that is the same question that reporters posed to her attorney general merrick garland yesterday at a briefing at the justice department. wondering what might be next

when it comes to his area of government and possible charges for the future. this is what he had to say. >> i wanted to ask whether you had a chance to look at the hearing or watch the hearing on capitol hill by the january 6 committee and if you have learned anything perhaps that could be useful for the justice department. >> i am watching and i will watch all the hearings, although i may not be able to watch all of it live. i will watch all of it and i can assure you that january 6 prosecutors are watching all the hearings as well. i will count that as your third question. i am not going to be able to give a response of how my own personal responses to this or that kind of evidence that is coming out. i want to just explain more.

although i did start explain more last time we were altogether two weeks ago or so's , the justice department -- or so, the justice department's position is we do not comment on ongoing investigations, both for the viability of our investigations and because it is the right thing to do with respect to civil liberties so people under investigation -- we have three reasons. they are all coequal. one is that our investigations generally proceed quietly and in secret so we do not tell witnesses where we are in we do not want them to know. we want to truthful answers as we approach. we want to be able to do subpoenas and search warrant without risk. eventually, that information comes out in the form of affidavits and eventually if there are charges, but for our

investigations to proceed in an official way, we have learned over many years this is the way investigations should go. this is what protects civil liberties of people who have not been charged. we do not impugn people until we actually charge them. this is part of the rule of law and america. there are people we have charged . we have charged over 800 people and connections january 6. some have pled, but others are facing proceedings. for us to comment about evidence , some of which regards them, some of which regards others, could affect their cases and our ability to proceed in an effective way, so that is the reason. it is the reason this has been the long-standing position of the justice department. host: members of congress certainly watching as well and commenting on twitter. here's a few of them yesterday.

a republican senator saying today gas is five dollars nationally. baby formula is impossible to find. 401(k)s are plummeting, and democrats are wasting time on their january 6 committee. from a republican congress men from arizona, the january 6 committee is a sham committee run by partisan recruits, and this from republicans on the house administration committee. once again come out they write on twitter, it is all about politics. the hearing is focused on attacking president trump instead of the security failure on that day. a democrat of arizona saying lying about voter fraud and political donations, lying about when he the election, trump was willing to tell any life it meant keeping power. he was willing to overthrow our democracy and must be held accountable. congress and rogers saying trump used the big lie to mislead supporters to donate to the official election defense fund.

no such fund existed. the former president lied to supporters and ripped them off. and a democratic senator from delaware says the hearing made it clear donald trump's advisors told him there was no fraud in the election. instead of telling the truth, he chose to endorse conspiracy theories and try to cling to power. some of the reaction from the folks who work in the building behind me. getting a reaction on phone lines as usual for republicans, democrats, and independence in this first hour of the washington journal. this is mavis. caller: i watched the hearings. to watch this hearing and to hear the republican folks -- i do not understand how this is a democrat or republican issue.

this is the lifeblood of the country. no man should be allowed to do what mr. trump has been allowed to do. democracy is failing. he was never fit for office and all the lies he has told since he has been in office and these folks will defend and defend every lie. they will try to cover up. it is craziness. then we go back to mr. trump and he did so well for the country. the man has put democracy on trial. host: this is kelly in north carolina, republican. caller: good morning. i was just wondering if you have

seen the articles about what is going on in arizona and wisconsin and michigan and pennsylvania and georgia at this moment, all that money that has supposedly been wasted has gone to many investigations and at this moment they have arrested quite a few people in arizona for voter fraud. you will not see it on mainstream media, mind you, but if you look at local papers and local media around those places like yuma, arizona, they have found -- they were stretching of the ballot boxes that were out there. host: do you trust the election system in this country? caller: now, i don't. host: how do you feel about the

midterm elections coming up? do you think your boat is going to count? caller: it depends. it depends on whether we can keep them from cheating again this time. what has happened in yuma is they have also been -- the sheriff there has been going around to the ngo's that were passing out ballots for biden to these people who stuffed them and they have gone and busted some of the ngo's and it is all coming out. in wisconsin, they have had a sheriff that went to old -- all the old folks homes and found out there were enough of people who went into the old folks

homes to turn the state and got people to vote who were not able to vote. host: on the issue of election fraud claims, there were plenty from president trump following the 2020 election. yesterday's hearing included state officials who were brought in to testify what they thought about those claims and key states that former president trump focused on. one of those officials was asked about claims of voter fraud in pennsylvania. here's the exchange with the congresswoman. [video clip] >> at the time of the 2020 presidential election, you were serving as the only republican member of philadelphia's city commission, which is responsible for overseeing elections through the city. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> president trump made numerous claims regarding fraudulent

voting practices in philadelphia, including the claim that dead people were voting. mr. giuliani told pennsylvania state legislators that 8000 dead people voted in pennsylvania. you investigated those claims of fraud. can you tell us what you found? >> not only was there not evidence of 8000 dead voters voting in pennsylvania, there was not evidence of eight. we took seriously every case referred to us, no matter how fantastical, no matter how absurd, and took every one of those seriously, including these. >> even mr. trump's campaign lawyers knew the dead voter claims were not valid. >> i guess the crooks in philadelphia are disappointed in this. they only cemented 8000 mail-in ballots from dead people.

it is probably easier for dead people to submit mail-in ballots than it is to vote in person. >> rudy was at this stage of his life at the same ability to manage things at this level or not and i think they publicly said they never proved the allegations they were making. >> on november 11, 2020, president trump tweeted about you, saying, a guy named al schmidt, a philadelphia commissioner and so-called republican, is being used big-time by the fake news media to explain how honest things were with respect to the election in philadelphia. he refuses to look at a mountain of corruption and dishonesty. we win. as a result of that tweet and the cnn interview you gave were you stated the dead voter claims

in pennsylvania or false, you and your staff were subjected to disturbing threats. can you tell us about that? >> the threats prior to that tweet -- on some level it feels silly to talk about a tweet, but we can see the impact they have. prior to that, threats were pretty general in nature, corrupt election officials in philadelphia are going to get what is coming to them, you are what the secondment meant is for, you are walking into the lion's den, things like that. after the president tweeted at me by name, calling me out the way he did, the threats became much more specific, much more graphic. and included not just me by name but included members of my family by name, their ages, are addressed cut pictures of our home, every bit of detail you could imagine. that was what changed with that

tweet. host: just some of the exchange that took place yesterday during the second in a series of hearings. it continues tomorrow. the focus tomorrow is on the role of senior justice department officials and white house advisors. we were told the preview got laid out in that first hearing thursday on issues that would be explored in this third hearing that is going to take place tomorrow, the effort by former president trump so the justice department would help when it came to stone election claims. the fourth hearing is set for thursday and the focus will be on efforts to pressure former vice president mike pence refused to count electoral votes on january 6 and the committee has said the fifth hearing will focus on pressure applied to state legislators and state election officials with a focus

on the state of georgia and then the final hearing focuses on president trump's actions that day and a look at the day of january 6 minute by minute or hour-by-hour by a half-dozen officials who worked inside the trump white house. that is some of the road ahead over the coming hearings. we are two hearings into this, getting a reaction on phone lines split by political party. michael is in new york, a democrat. did you watch yesterday? caller: i watched. of course i watched. it is history. first, it is fox and the right-wing media who expose these investigations come of this world will be in a better place. they talk about investigations

but not about the content of the investigation. they talk about the process and nobody's talking about what trump has done, which is single-handedly poisoned the democratic system in america. they spent $250 million out of their pockets and nobody seems to understand that on the trump side, that this is bad for this country. and barr's resignation letter came on december 14. yesterday, watching him with his testimony, all the stuff he said and exposed yesterday of what you told trump was not part of his resignation letter, which mentioned he would support trump and trump has been a great president. these people are terrible for this country. host: i wonder what you think of

this headline from the washington post editorial board. now they tell us. why didn't team a normal speak up more in 20 to counter mr. trump's lies? is that a sentiment you share? caller: of course. these people had a duty to their oath in this country to protect our country and they did not and everybody from trump to giuliani to every single person that was guilty to jim jordan, all these people, they belong in jail and out of the government of the united states of america. host: elaine is next out of connecticut, a republican. caller: i think the whole thing is very unfair because they have all democrats. why don't they have republicans on?

whatever they say about trump, people are not going to change their minds. we sat here in our living rooms and watched those trucks -- mail trucks go in and boxes brought in, boxes brought out. to begin with, pelosi and schumer, they knew something bad was going to happen. they did not want to the national guard in. when trump made his first speech, she ripped up his speech. that was disgusting. nobody gave her anything. and then another one was maxine waters. nobody does anything about her. she is not accountable. she gets on a plane and tells people to fight, don't let republicans in. the whole thing is so unfair. since when trump was in and when biting got in, everything went

down. he was a disaster and he still is. host: you say why didn't they let republicans in. it was two panels of republicans that we heard from and taped testimony from former trump administration officials, republicans as well. caller: i know. i think barr is lying too. they have ripped trump apart since the minute he got in there. i am 86 years old. it stinks. you can't buy groceries. you cannot drive your car. that is on account of biden and nobody blames him. they do not investigate him and his son with the drugs and everything else and getting money from china. everything is ok with biden. biden has big money behind him. host: that is elaine in

connecticut. a big name when it comes to election law in republican circles is benjamin ginsberg dating back to gorby bush -- gore v. bush. he testified at that second hearing. here is some of what he had to say about the former president's election fraud claims. [video clip] >> you served as the cochair of the presidential commission on election administration. i think it is fair to say you are the most prominent republican lawyer who has litigated in the election field. you analyzed the trump campaign litigation carefully. what is the normal process for election litigation? how is the trump campaign's different from the post election litigation you have been involved in and know about? >> in the normal course of

things, any campaign will do a couple different things. one is they will analyze precinct results to look for abnormalities in the results and send people to those precincts to ask more questions. secondly, all campaigns will have poll watchers and poll workers and observers in the polling place, so campaigns will talk to those people if they saw any irregularities that could cause problems in the election here in the trump campaign talked pre-election about having 50,000 poll workers come a super zoomable he they did have eyes on the ground in these places, so in the normal course of things a campaign will analyze the reports that come in. the trump campaign had a couple basic problems. number one, the 2020 election was not close.

in 2000, that was 537. in this election, the most narrow margin was 10,000 in arizona and you just don't make up those sorts of numbers and recounts. when the claims of fraud and irregularities were made, you have heard compelling testimony from mr. stepien, from alex cannon, about those claims and how they did not believe them, so that is what the trump campaign on sort of a process of bringing cases without the actual evidence that you have to have and which the process is designed to bring out. >> are you aware of any instance in which a court found the trump campaign fraud claims to be credible? >> no, there was never that instance and all the cases that

were brought, and i have looked at more than 60 come including more than 180 counts. the simple fact is that the trump campaign did not make its case. host: benjamin ginsberg yesterday testifying before the select committee. hearing from you this morning about that testimony and about day two of those hearings and looking for your comments on social media as well. here is a few comments this morning. this is lauren, saying if the former president is as innocent as he claims to be let him appear before the joint session of congress and answer the questions being discussed in these hearings, let both sides of the aisle question him thoroughly. and saying previous callers are an example how the big y works. keep pounding your narrative home regardless of actual facts introduced. and saying this is all one-sided, just really seeking a crime even if they have to manufacture one. democrats are desperate. what a sham.

duncan says democrats will regret this when republicans take control. then real crimes we investigated and punished. i can't wait, says duncan. i am stocking up on brimstone. caller: hello, c-span. thank you for taking my call. i have been listening to the hearing so far and i think the commission is being respectful and fair. it is sad to hear so many callers using this tired donald trump playbook of deny and deny. we witnessed what happened on january 6 with our own eyes and something i have never heard any trump supporter explained was what the president was doing for three hours while the police were attacked and people violently disrupted the peaceful transfer of power. what was he doing? he is guilty as hell.

host: carla in illinois, republican. i think caller: it is all a bunch of -- caller: i think it is all a bunch of bs. they have to have a diversion. when you divert attention from what is going on in the world now, we had another mass shooting. we had another school shot at, and here we are talking about january 6. it has already been investigated once. it is just the democrats. if you look at the panel, you have nothing but democrats up there, the same ones who tried to impeach him the first time and second time. host: when you say this has been investigated once, you are talking about the second

impeachment? caller: yeah. it has all been investigated. why are they going through it again? it is because they do not want him to be able to run again. it is just a witchhunt. host: do you think he will run again? caller: i don't now. i hope he does because i will vote for him. i like the man. i think he held to his campaign when he said he was not going to take money from the people. that is why i voted for him because i wanted to have somebody who is not going to take money from the public, the american people. he did what he said he was going to do. we got our gas prices down. he got unemployment down. now the democrats are upset and we have high gas prices. people are struggling to survive and cannot even go to work

because gas prices cut their paychecks in half. they cannot afford to pay their water bills or gas bills. it is just a big game to them. host: the former president speaking out in the form of a 12 page rebuttal to the testimony that has been presented so far by the house select committee, issuing that through his save america pac. this is a story from the hill newspaper, saying democrats are seeking to distract from a series of domestic issues facing the country. 17 months after the events of january 6, democrats are unable to offer solutions, the former president says. they are desperate to change the narrative of a failing nation without making mention of the havoc and death caused by the radical left months earlier. make no mistake, the former

president said. they control the government. they are hoping these hearings will alter their failing prospects. former trump yesterday -- former president trump yesterday. in wyoming, line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. i cannot believe these people go on defending a man, president trump, the ex-president. he had it all set up. i tried to say this last year to the republicans were this year in the beginning, but nobody does listen to just normal people. they have to be all loud. and this person and that person. no. we are all americans.

they got buffalo. i seen it. they went for it all. host: i know you're from wyoming. can you explain what getting buffaloed? means? caller: it means they got conned by one man who got into office being the president. if joe biden would have went to beach the president four years before that and went against hillary clinton, he would have won, but he was not because of family problems. but now they want to do all this thing about hunter biden. he is not in office. why are they going after him? he is not in office. it is so crazy.

host: this is greg in tennessee, republican. caller: i saw ben ginsberg say in arizona there was a 10,000 votes difference and that could not be made up. i watch the hearing with true the vote in arizona senate i believe last week or the week before and they have come out with evidence that it was stolen , and i believe they are supposed to have another hearing this thursday where they are bringing more proof. they are working in all the six states that had the irregularities, so there is going to be evidence coming out and i hope you all will cover some of these hearings. on their website, it gives a lot of information, and the mayor of yuma just pleaded guilty to

voter fraud, so some of the evidence is starting to come out. host: greg in tennessee. this is ruth in illinois. caller: good morning. first thing, liz cheney said trump -- great patriots and so on. she said he did not tell them to stop. she left off the last line of his speech and it was go home and law -- in love and in peace, but liz cheney left that out. that is how crooked democrats are and liz cheney has joined them. and what is coming out now is

what the 86 whistleblowers or 132, whichever one is right, that is what they reported. it is all now coming out because it was all shut up. host: dave in ohio come democrats. good morning -- dave in ohio, democrat. good morning. caller: talking about arizona, all this money spent was for trump and they could not find anything, so what is that about? as to the hearings, i did not watch them because it is not going to change anybody's minds. i did get from local news and late-night talk shows things you have not brought up at all this morning.

rudy giuliani been drunk all the time when all this was going on. i would like you to show some of that, please. host: the new york times leads with that point from yesterday's hearing in one of their stories yesterday. here is how it looks on the front page. the lead of that story, rudy giuliani seemed drunk and making a beeline for the president. it was election night in 2020 and president trump was seeing his reelection bid slip away according to video testimony prepared by the house committee. mr. giuliani, personal lawyer to the president, was spotting conspiracy theories. it was the former campaign manager who was speaking about yesterday -- about it yesterday in taped testimony. here is some of that. [video clip] >> do you remember rudy giuliani being at the white house on election night and into the next

morning? what do you remember about when he came? >> he was -- i had heard he was upstairs in the reception area and he was looking to talk to the president and it was suggested instead that he come talk to several of us. host: you said you had heard -- >> you said you had heard mr. giuliani wanted to talk to the president and he was directed your way. did you end up talking to mr. giuliani? >> a lot conversations were directed my way. a few of us, myself, jason miller, justin clark, and mark meadows gathered in a room off

the map room to listen to whatever he presumably wanted to say to the president. >> was there anyone in your conversation who in your observation had too much to drink? >> mayor giuliani. >> tell me about that. what was your observation about his potential intoxication during that discussion about what the president should say when he addresses the nation on election night. >> the mayor was intoxicated, but i do not know his level of intoxication when he spoke with the president, for example. >> did you hear discussions about whether the president should make any sort of speech on election night?

>> i spoke to the president. i spoke to the president several times that night. >> there were suggestions by mayor giuliani to declare victory and say we had won outright. >> it was far too early to make any call like that. ballots were still being counted . ballots would still be counted for days, and it was far too early to make any proclamation like that. >> i remember saying -- to the best of my memory, i was saying we should not declare victory until we had a better sense of the numbers. >> can you be more specific about that conversation and what mayor giuliani said, your response, and anybody else's response? >> mayor giuliani was saying we

won, they are stealing it from us, we need to go say that we won, and essentially that anyone who did not agree with that position was being weak. host: that is from yesterday's committee hearing, some of the tape testimony being played back. the committee interviewing someone thousand witnesses, we are told, 140,000 pages of documents obtained. and a series of maybe seven hearings by the time we wrap up at the end of the month. yesterday was day two. tomorrow is day three. john in virginia, line for republicans. did you watch? caller: i watched most of it. i missed the first part, which i wish i had not. i wanted to hear the guy from fox, actually.

covid caused a lot of problems in the united states, including all the changes made to election rules and things like that. the republicans had an opportunity in the senate to have a commission. they rejected it, so naturally nancy pelosi, being nancy pelosi, she took it vantage of it and set up this committee. she did not include any republicans who had a different view than the two on it who were in favor of the impeachment of the president. the way they are conducting the hearing now and allowing people who were working with the president to state what happened is pretty effective stuff. i have always felt the three hour period from when the president ended his speech until he finally came out with what was a weak statement is critical

and the guy was negligent. he should have contacted pants -- pence, pelosi. he did not do any of that. that to me is a key factor. finally, if republicans had this idea that you -- and i'm a republican -- that you have to look forward, i am fine with that. unless you take care of this other business where so many people feel isolated against the voting system, they will feel like their vote does not count because of what trump says about the election being fraudulent, that problem has to be solved. we cannot go forward until we solve that problem. host: are you a republican who supported trump in 2016 or 2020? caller: i almost sported him in 2020 but changed my mind and

voted libertarian. in 2016, i voted for a guy out of utah. i just could not for trump. he has some policies which i supported, but the supreme court stuff, there was some other stuff, and they did keep inflation down, all kinds of other stuff. there were some failures on covid, but really the organization of the companies to get the vaccine stuff out was terrific. it is a mixed bag. this cult of personality issue is dangerous stuff and i could not support that kind of thing. host: wayne in chesterfield, virginia, good morning. caller: i hear a lot of people

calling in who are still for trump and i cannot understand why they would be. he is not a decent person. we need a decent person as president of the united states. i hope mitt romney runs and wins it. i hope the justice department takes these people that broke their oath of office -- i hope they are convicted. i hope they serve time in jail, and if not i hope they run them out of the country. patriots of this country will hold them accountable and also the people that has been red flagged by c-span -- have a good day. host: that is weighing in virginia. this is kathy in albuquerque, new mexico. good morning. caller: i think the people that

try to say you are democrat are just trying to bully you, so i hope you do not fall for it. host: we get called everything up here. it is a sign that we are doing our job. caller: doing the right thing, yeah. i did watch the hearing and i do not think it is going to change anyone's mind. i have been listening to the callers. i do not understand how they still support a person who insulted his voters and they are still supporting him. and then learning from the hearing that he has taken money also -- i do not understand and it makes me sad that they still support him. he basically said he could go and shoot somebody. he says they would still vote for him. the thing that saddens me is you have republicans stand up and do the right thing and they get death threats. i think that is wrong. i think liz cheney -- i do not agree with her politics, but she is brave.

i would work for her for free to try to help her with that campaign. that is how much i believe what she is doing is right. host: that is kathy in new mexico. we have shown you a couple op-ed's this morning. here's one from the washington times. sex, lies, and gas lighting sparked the capitol riot. and focusing on adam schiff of california, saying he sits on the committee investigating january 6 even though he is perhaps the single most responsible person in all of washington for sparking the riot in the first place here and for five years before the january 6 attack, he lied to the american people, including his own supporters come about fantastical tales he and others conspired to spin up against mr. trump. he and fellow democrats in congress along with a handful of republicans colluded with the media to convince officials in

the federal government to launch an investigation into crazed fantasies about mr. trump. we know all the conspiracy theories were made up to destroy mr. trump cannot ruin his ability to govern, and cheat americans who had voted for him. his lies come he they were aimed at thwarting the 2016 election. east hampton, connecticut. republican. go ahead, sir. caller: i think it is disingenuous of you to say there are two republicans because they are never trumpers. this trial is a sham. you do not show footage of the guards letting the people in standing, and walking them through, you had bill barr saying how mail-in ballots are

logically, going to be fraudulent, and nancy pelosi from the day that trump got elected they have been trying to impeach him and they have been after him. they weaponized impeachment, the fbi, it is just -- they are after him, and i think this is all to stop him from running again, this is what they are about. host: it sounds like you watched the first and second hearing, is that correct? caller: i watched some of it, there is no rebuttal, it is like a witch hunt. host: do you plan on watching the any -- any of the next four or five of these? caller: i well. i like politics, but i think it will come out when the republicans figure out the big lie in the fraud that went on in this election. host: robert in connecticut. the hearings continue tomorrow, a focus on the justice department and white house actions when it comes to the

justice department. you can watch on c-span, we are the pool for the coverage of this hearing -- of these hearings. next we will be joined by cal thomas to focus on his thoughts on these hearings and the politics on capitol hill. later we will be joined by the reverend william barber, cochair of the poor people's campaign to preview the up coming moral march on washington this weekend. we will be right back. ♪ >> c-span has unfiltered coverage of the house january 6 committee hearings investigating the attack on the capital. no to c-span.org/anywhere he6 -- january6 to watch the latest videos of the hearings, briefings and all of the coverage of the attack and perception -- and investigation. we will also have reaction for members of congress and the white house as well as

journalists and art -- and authors talking about the investigation. go to c-span.org/january6 for a fast and easy way to watch when you cannot see it live. booktv every sunday on c-span2 features laid -- leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. new york magazine's lisa miller, author of "take up space" looks at the entry of alexandria ocasio-cortez into politics and what impact she is having. 10:00 p.m. eastern, washington post columnist christine, author of "rethinking sex" offers her thoughts on sexual consent and societal avenue -- attitudes and she is interviewed by donna. watch booktv every sunday on

c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide and watch any time at booktv.org. c-span shop -- c-spanshop.org is our latest online store. browse for our latest products, apparel, and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase help support our nonprofit operations. shop now or any time at c-span shop -- c-spanshop.org. >> washington journal continues. host: cal thomas marked his first appearance back in 1984 over the subsequent 38 years he has been back 67 times and joins us this morning after day two of the january 6 committee hearings. are you watching, do you think the committee members are making their case so far? guest: it is always a pleasure

to be on c-span. i think they are making their case from their perspective. one of the things that troubles me is that there is no cross-examination, there are no lawyers or members of the committee who are challenging anything that is being said. the script has been written. if you look at the large teleprompter, the big television set sitting in front of the committee, all of the members are reading statements that have been written either by them or for them, and as we know the former president of abc news was called into choreograph this entire affair. if the goal is to convince people who were trump voters and supporters that he was wrong about the outcome of the election, which i think he was. then there ought to be some people on the others to cross-examine some of these witnesses, but there are not.

the first soundbite used by liz cheney at the opening primetime session left out an important part of trump's urging of the people to go down to the capital. -- to the capitol. he said demonstrate peacefully and patriotically which was cut from the soundbite. i think there is a predetermined conclusion from this committee. now what bothers me are statements made yesterday by adam schiff and zoe lofgren, who both said that there was enough evidence to refer criminal charges to the justice department. i am writing in my column on thursday that this could set a very dangerous precedent. i am not sure other than the hard-core anti-trumpers how many americans would like to see a former president prosecuted and convicted and put in prison. i do not think that would be good for the country, and it would set a standard for republicans who might want to do the same thing to a democratic

president further widening the golf already wide in this country -- the gulf already wide in this country. i think if this goes to the justice and apartment, i think president biden should issue a pardon, perhaps a quid pro quo if trump aaron t never to run for office again. -- guaranteed never to run for office again. this poisons the atmosphere at the time when people are affected by gas, food prices, inflation and what looks like a recession around the corner. host: i wonder if you got that interested in -- interesting exchange with the justice department in which the reporters turned to merrick garden -- garland and he said are you watching and he acknowledge that yes he would be watching and those who are working in the january 6 cases are washing -- watching as well. guest: the initial ratings were 20 million on thursday night.

i doubt that they are that high for the one yesterday. but, 20 million in a nation of over 300 million is still relatively small. again, the goal of the committee, supposedly is to convince people that trump was in denial about the last election, and tried to change the results illegally. if you are trying to make that point, then i think that the public deserves to believe that the hearings are fair and balanced. but i do not see how a lot of trump supporters are going to view it that way. host: what are your feelings about the events of the day? do you think the former president bears responsibility for what happened? guest: people are responsible for their own actions. we hear a lot about gun violence. guns are not violence, the people are violent. someone can use a gun for good to defend themselves, target

practice or hunting or whatever, and the same gun can be used for people to shoot up a school or rob a school -- rob a score. we have taken a lot of the individual accountability, blaming other forces and other people for our own actions. yes, i think trump ramped up a lot of doubts, hatred, and anger, but whether he should be held accountable and this will be very difficult to prove if it ever goes to court that words alone incited a riot. you know the old line about crying fire in a crowded theater. there up in attacks on the capitol before as the guy with the heritage foundation wrote, he wrote a really good piece starting in 1954 starting with the puerto rican fanatics shooting up the house of representatives. one thing i would like to know is that president trump said that he offered 20,000 national

guardsmen to nancy pelosi and muriel bowser, but that they turned him down. and yet subsequently what it appeared that there might be another threat on the capitol, speaker pelosi ordered fencing put up around the capitol to protect it. fences up now at the supreme court in anticipation of the decision by the court on row voice -- roe v. wade. i think there are ways to protect and defend, what i think more have been -- could have been done to protect the capital from this incursion by a violent mob -- a violent mob. host: cal thomas with us. you can find all of his columns at calthomas.com or follow him on twitter at cal thomas. republicans can call in at 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. and independents, 202-748-8002. host: you mentioned the abortion

case before the supreme court, take us through how you think this plays out sometime in the next two to three weeks and what it means for that debate in this country going forward? guest: i think it is important to look at some people who supported the outcome of roe v. wade and who still oppose the legal reasoning. i think this was at the heart of the leaked memo. you have people like lawrence of harvard who is a noted liberal who argued against way that the case was decided. you recall, perhaps viewers will recall that harry blackmun who wrote the majority of penman found a penumbra found a right to privacy which included the right of a woman with no input from the man, by the way, the

father husband or boyfriend and gave her complete autonomy as to what to do with the unborn child. so the legal reasoning is what is under attack. i think there are demonstration -- there will be demonstrations, there already are. it is interesting that there are two federal laws that prohibit any attempt to influence a federal judge, and one of them even says that you cannot demonstrate outside of the supreme court, and yet attorney general garland is not enforcing the laws and his failure to do that has provoked people to show up outside of the homes of brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett who has seven young children. and i think this is a terrible thing. i would say the same thing if pro-lifers were demonstrating outside of the homes of liberal justices. we have to have confidence in our institutions, or they are going to be undermines and they

will not benefit the general welfare. host: we will get the other key debates taking place but plenty of callers already. tommy, virginia. the line for democrats. you are up first. caller: good morning. my question to you is my understanding is that the republicans were invited to participate in this committee, but they all refused, mccarthy and etc.. could -- how could you not say that it is a fair hearing when they turned down the opportunity to participate? caller: the way it went -- guest: the way it went was that mccarthy wanted to select members from his party, his wing, and nancy pelosi turned him down and invited two anti-trumpers kinsinger and liz cheney.

one who is retiring and one who is behind the polls because she knew they would take the same line. there is controversy about this. but republicans ought to be able to import -- ought to be able to appoint to a committee who they want and that would have increased the can -- the credibility of whatever outcome there was even if there was a majority democratic vote to do whatever they wanted to do. host: do you think a 9/11 style commission to investigate this would have been the right way to pursue this? and you think republicans in the senate were wrong to filibuster that, because that effort was tried and it did not succeed. guest: we had a warren commission after the assassination of john f. kennedy and a 9/11 commission. i think it is important for the public to believe the conclusions that come out of the congress on these and other issues. when you have people from the

outside who do not have a vested political interest or financial interest, or any specific outcome in mind, and he will just weigh they evidence and cross-examine witnesses, i think the can -- the credibility of the conclusions are greatly enhanced. when you have all of the members who clearly are against donald trump, and what he did, i like the caller earlier and this would be my position, prompted a lot of great things. we have low inflation, low gas prices, he did the covid rollout brilliantly, but his narcissistic personality did him in. i would agree with that caller. i am all for the outsiders and fewer of the insiders because i think it boosts confidence in the outcome. host: new york, tim. a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. mr. thomas, i was a longtime member of the twitter universe,

and to be honest with you, things just got untenable. i could not remain. let us put it that way. i was young, i was getting a lot of good views and everything like that, and i brought up something about these proceedings that are going on, and i got suspended. it was almost immediate and it was scary how fast it was. i am trying to understand what i did wrong. i brought up a couple of points about how these were republicans in donald trump's circle that were testifying, and on two socials. this is supposed to be the place for free speech and i thought i had found a respite in.

can you explain to me what is going on, sir? i do not think i like this at all. guest: i have read reports about that, and i think this is the stuff of censorship and propaganda. you censor things that do not ratify your own point of view, your worldview, and you allow and only those that support that worldview. what is truth? pontius pilate asked that, truth is the moderate -- is the motto of harvard and at the latest commencement they had a ream of liberal commencement speakers at a law school and at the liberal -- and at the regular school. the new york times and some of the harvard faculty denounced to spe -- his speech which was a critique of the west. i am with those that the answer

to speech that you do not like is not less speech, more speech, that is what i would endorse. host: what is your approach to being a syndicated columnist in today's world. what is your touchstone for how you go about your columns? guest: i am kind of worried about the future. a big company announced that it is doing away with most of its opinion pieces for the silly reason it said that we do not want to tell people what to think. i do not tell people what to think, i tell them what i think and i make up my own my -- and they can make up their own minds. i read a lot of liberal columnists and i do not use this qualifier, i do not agree with you all the time. i read other ideas from different perspectives were two region -- reasons, it helps me understand what people of a different point of view believe,

and it reinforces my own believes on many occasions. so how do i get my ideas? it is just the daily news cycle and washington alone, you never run out of material. it is going on in the public schools and the culture. i think there is just a wealth of material out there to write about. i write two a week and for 38 years, and it is a great privilege to be in the newspapers. i read columnists going up something like george willis, the only one at it longer than i am. robert novak, scotty reston, these were some of my mentors along with some of the people i worked with has a copy boy as a kid at nbc news in washington. those kinds of journalists are miraculously -- are rapidly disappearing and i think that younger people are no longer engaged with the newspapers.

they get their stuff off of social media and go to websites that basically reinforce their own opinions, that is not growth, that is reinforcement. host: did we used to do a better job of understanding what other people believe and when did that change? guest: i think watergate and vietnam where the major factors that contributed to the cynicism in this country about journalism, the media and the polls. for years they have shown that the media is down along the level of congress in its approval, and i think that is too bad. the press is the only entity mentioned in the bill of rights. and even though the press in the 18 century was very hostile to even people like george washington and thomas jefferson. the founders understood that a free press was key to a free society. and just as you cannot get in

shape by watching an exercise video, you have to work out yourself. you cannot get your mind in shape by just reading things for watching things, seeing a particular network whether it is msnbc, fox news, or cnn that reinforces your point of view. that is not growth. skepticism is a good thing, cynicism is a bad thing. i fear that we have embraced cynicism to our nasher -- national detriment. host: michelle, connecticut. line for independents. caller: hello. i just want to say, cal thomas, i think you are a well-rounded person and i am the same, i get my sources from different news so i am aware of what is going on on this or that side and i try to put things together and calm up with the answer. i really appreciate them putting this hearing on, but i do not

think it is fair, i think it is one-sided. they should have a majority and minority leader up there. i just think it is very unfair, and they are making a huge mistake doing it this way. it is not letting the country settle down. and i think we will get into a lot of trouble. caller: i heard some criticism yesterday, i think it was from zoe lofgren, a member of a panel and a congresswoman saying that trump had raised money off of this hearing. also has adam schiff and so has some of the others. every time you see something going on in washington, one side or the other sends out a fundraising letter. this is one of several reasons why i believe in turn limits. get these people out of washington before they become corrupted. they never -- the founders never believe that politics should be a full-time job and back up

until the early 1900s people came from businesses and farms and other professions and the legal profession to come to washington and do public service for a limited time and they would go home to real jobs but now they come and stay for 30 or 40 years or until they drop dead almost and get totally out of touch. their primary interest is not in promoting the general welfare, but their own welfare. not everybody. there are deeper and -- there are decent servants in both parties but the trend is towards a permanency and office where people never have to get a balance sheet. they never have to pay anything on their own or produce a product and if they retire, or if they are defeated they get a pension that lasts the rest of their lives, who would not want a job like that? we make it too easy for them to stay, we ought to make it harder. host: this is duncan from florida. the line for democrats. good morning. caller: ok, i would like to ask

you a question. i would like to know why it is that when you phrased the committee and the republicans that you put it in a way that the democrats did not let republicans on their, and that is not on -- that is not the case. they were offered and two of the people that they wanted to put on their, one said it was a stunt and the other said nothing would happen. you wanted people on there to be on this, -- would you say we would not really need him on earth anyhow, you would say no. guest: it is what the public things in the end, and the purpose of these hearings are to convey the image that they are fair to those people who

supported donald trump, and who supported his policies. i am just concerned about the outcome. if you are playing to your base, in this case the anti-trumper. i said earlier if you were listening, an outside commission would've had more credibility than just having elected officials. for whatever reason, senate republicans rejected that and they contributed to what they have now. i do not think they can have credibility in complaining that much. host: out of north carolina, the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i am watching the kangaroo court about january 6. keep this in mind, the election was clearly rigged, for every country has to be on board says the world bankers. as for adam schiff and jamie raskin they knew before that they ever walked up to the podium that hillary clinton paid

for the fake dossier and they covered it with a live. the guy playing biden is clearly a doppelganger. host: any thoughts. guest: i think one of the things that needs to happen to restore some credibility to the election outcomes is post-covid, one of course all of these mail-in ballots and drop boxes that were allowed, which helped foment the conspiracy theories that continue in the minds of some people. somebody said i think, in georgia, with a law that was passed down there made it easier to vote and harder to cheat. i have always been one with rare exceptions who showed up on election day at a polling place to cast my ballot with a legal driver's license and an id. if we got back to that is the norm and, for people who are either handicapped, sick, unable, out of or whatever, then you make an exception for them.

the norm ought to be voting in person with a proper id. i think that would diminish a lot of these conspiracy theories and put more confidence in the election outcomes. host: what are your thoughts on states and there are several who do all mail-in ballots a? do they need to rethink that? guest: i think so. we just had this pennsylvania supreme court ruling that allowed in contravention of the lawn pennsylvania, as i understand it, ballots to be counted that were not signed properly. there are reasons these laws are passed, and the reasons are to give confidence to voters that the outcome, even of somebody you did not vote for. if your person lost the election is legitimate and you can go ahead and ratify the outcome of the election. if you are going to have these laws in place that require

signatures and a dating of the ballot, and then the court says we do not need to do that at all, then i think that undermines the confidence in the election outcome. there are a lot of things i can be done to increase the credibility so that even people on the losing side said that ok, the next time. if you believe that the odds are stacked against you in the system is stacked against you and somehow there is a one world government conspiracy going on, these kinds of easy ways to vote and sheet will only -- cheat will only underscore those beliefs. host: about 15 minutes left with cal thomas. most of them -- all of them are available at calthomas.com and you can follow him on twitter @calthomas. pasadena, maryland on the line for democrats. caller: good morning, i just am

going to try and speak slowly. all of the people that worked for the former president are being interviewed by the committee, that is the other side. it is not the democrats saying what happened, it is the people who worked right next to the man who told them he lost, he lost the election. but instead he did something else. the other side is the people who worked with him, i do not understand when you are talking about there are no people -- that is the other side mr. thomas. those are the people. secondly, just for one second, where did you grow up? where are the circles where people are talking about voting and cheating? where does that happen? when do you ever hear let us go and vote and sheet? why is there something about

cheating and all of this is to make one type of voter feel comfortable, can you be honest about that? guest: first, i was born in washington, d.c.. i could not help it, my mother was there. i grew up, went to school, started out on the radio and then joined nbc news as a copy boy where i got my first instructions in journalism. that takes care of the personal thing. you are right about some of the other side being those like william barr and mike pence who somebody said he should be hanged and trump is on record saying that might be a good idea. i do not endorse the personality, this is not my kind of politics. we ought to have rigorous debate at the kennedy place in

massachusetts with a real old-fashioned debate between senator bernie sanders and senator lindsey graham. instead of these dog and pony shows with one dozen candidates and getting one minute to answer and 30 seconds to rebut. those are not real debates at all. we need to get back to basics and you asked about mail-in ballots and the rest, this was during covid and a unique period . what i am arguing for is that in order to increase the credibility of our elections, we need to reduce the perception that many people have that people going into nursing homes and getting these ballots and voting for people and all of these other things need to be reduced or eliminated so that the credibility of the election outcome, whether it is a democrat, republican or independent is restored. it is not my kind of politics or the kind of politics i grew up with. it is always been

rough-and-tumble, but never quite like this in my memory. host: this is silver spring, maryland. victor, a republican. caller: good morning, i enjoy listening to you with larry o'connor and i look forward to hearing you tomorrow. guest: i will be out of the country tomorrow so you will have to wait until next week. caller: ok. anyhow, i am legally blind and it turns out that my father had a similar personality to donald trump. i am one of those rlf babies, i weighed a pound and a half when i was bored and my father insisted that i learned to live in a cited world and do stuff for myself. i had to do chores like my sighted friends dead and i went to public school the most of my life and on the last three years i went to the maryland school for the blind. and then he told me starting at age 10 that you are going to be

working when you are 21 and when i did turn 21 my rehab counselor and d.c. tried to put me in a sheltered workshop and i told them i was having none of that, i wanted a regular job. i worked for the national library service for the blind for 44 years. i made out ok, but on the other hand i have seen blind people whose parents over protected them and cannot do anything for themselves. i guess i like donald trump because he will push for what he wants. guest: that is a remarkable personal story, and i am sure that the audience is greatly blessed and encouraged by it. we used to tell more of those stories. when i was growing up, i believed in inspiration followed by motivation followed by perspiration improves any life. now we flipped that into greed and entitlement that some he makes more and we heard this from bernie sanders yesterday.

the millionaires and billionaires, the amount of money is not fixed. you are only limited by your own desires. and, i think people like you are a tremendous role model for everybody, and not just blind people. but anyone else with or without a handicap. we use to encourage those kinds of things. we encourage success and penalized slothfulness. now we penalize success and we are shocked to find we are getting less than -- less success and more slothfulness. so you know, i really appreciate your sharing your story. i hope you have written about it and it will be a tremendous book to read and i will buy the first copy. host: i wanted to get your thoughts on this bipartisan framework on a gun deal. we do not have the full text of the legislation, but the majority leader chuck schumer promising to put that on the floor as soon as possible and

president biden saying he will sign it even though he does not think it goes far enough. guest: i think there are reasonable things that can be done on gun sales. i understand the second merriment -- amendment adhered to believe that any kind of compromise opens the door for eventually seizing guns like beto o'rourke said that he would do and biden said that he would be his point man on gun control but we have limits on purchasing alcoholic beverages and driving cars and on things that can be dangerous to yourself and other people. i do not think that an 18-year-old ought to be able to go in and on the same day buy a weapon of the kind that was used at a school shooting in uvalde, texas. i think that is a reasonable thing. i think the background check is important. if someone had interviewed his schoolmates or his parents, or if somebody had looked at his

social media webpages they would have seen that this guy was a potential bomb ready to go off, that i think there are things that can be done. -- consistent with protection of the second amendment, reasonable which you cannot prove a negative or say that because of this law i did not go shoot up a school. i would give more confidence to people that something is being done to at least to deter if not prevent these horrible things that have gone on for so many years. yes, i think we need to harden the schools, as we say. host: why is america so unique in the frequency of mass shootings? guest: i think it comes out of the gun culture. i would say that some of the hollywood people, the people that produce entertainment are guilty of promoting it. every night if i turn one of -- on one of the three broadcast networks for an entertainment show that is not comedy or action-adventure people are

shooting each other all of the time. it is more graphic than it has ever been. you see blood on the floor, you see people faking dying and then in our news coverage you see people with twisted minds who think they are never going to amount with anything in life say this is my one chance to become famous and to make something out of my life so i will kill other people. so i think the people who produce our so-called entertainment are guilty for contributing to the poisoning in our culture that leads to so many of these shootings. host: woodbridge, virginia. roosevelt, an independent. good morning. caller: hello, good morning. host: you are on. go ahead. caller: can you hear me? host: go ahead. caller: i want to say that the last caller really had it. trump is pushing for what he wants. he wanted to win an election that he lost. he had people march up and riot

at the capital to try to get himself to win. i do not understand why you are sitting up your, your guest is sitting up here like pushing this thing like trump did not just try to force an election to his side. this was an insurrection. i do not know what they have on you. guest: well, i have been investigated by some pretty high profile people and so far they have not found anything so i think i'm ok. i am not taking any book -- money from anybody and i write opinions in a column. i am not beholden to anybody or part of any political organization. i do not send money to political candidates. my opinions are my own, as i say. host: out of maryland. dorothy, a democrat. caller: good morning. it is not funny, but it is funny to listen to you all talk.

this is going to be written history, and this is going to be visual history with the words coming out of the people's mouths. the people up there now, what are they going to say? trump could send the national guard and just like when the riots happen. guest: he cannot. caller: hold on. let me finish and then you can answer this because, number one is there is no more republican party. there is not. there is something else now. and i want to talk about the guns and january 6. people do not understand that not the republican party, whatever the republican party is as they do not want a ban on the assault weapons is not because they so much want them to defend themselves in their house, they want them because they are going to do an uprising and they need them to fight the people.

host: you bring up a lot and i want to give cal thomas a fair chance to respond. guest: the laws that a president cannot order in the national guard without the acquiescence of elected officials. whether it be the governor, we saw this during the flooding in -- and a hurricane in new orleans, louisiana several years ago where the governor of louisiana refused -- i think it was george w. bush's offer of national guardsmen to come in. that just happens to be the law and he could not send in troops without the acquiescence of mary a bowser and the speaker, -- muriel bowser and nancy pelosi. i made my case about my position on done troll -- gun control. there is a republican party. the radicals on the left and the progressive have taken over the democrat party and the trump forces have pretty much taken over the republican party i

think that is about to change. we have an important primary and south carolina where two candidates who are opposed by trump, one of whom voted to impeach him and the other who said that he was responsible for the january 6 riot, trump has endorsed other people, interestingly he has contributed less than $60,000 according to roll call to the ones that he has endorsed. i am not sure out of all that money has raised how serious he has raised how serious he is about the candidates he is supporting. host: you bring up tom rice the republican running for reelection and nancy mace, we will be talking more about primary day and it is primary day in several states and a lot of eyes are in south carolina. we will have this conversation in about five minutes or so. a few more calls. jim, in new york. a republican. caller: good morning, am i on? host: yes. caller: if you have a pen i want

you to write this down. town hall meetings, 4/5/22, see where i talk and where other people talk at the meeting. the last of the mohicans in this town. they say they do not have you anymore. that paper is no longer carrying what is really going on around here. the places an illegal immigration mess. there are 70 cars all over the place. there are -- there are so many people here. i do not know where the money to have all these babies are coming from. since biden got in, it was like night and day. guest: my friend the talk show host likes to say the greatest power of the media is the power to ignore the stories they do not cover. and only fox, to their great credit has covered the live --

the illegal immigration thing in great detail. our laws are not being supported. congress under both republicans and democrats have passed immigration laws in the past. but they are not being enforced. these members of congress take an oath to uphold the law. all they are so preoccupied with what donald trump since the last election process they are doing nothing at all to fix the border problem. we have hordes of haitians about to come in and thousands are being sent out across the country, supposedly told to show up for an immigration hearing two or five years down the line, having babies in this country who become automatic u.s. citizens and therefore make it difficult for the parents to be deported. no nation can sustain itself.

it is not discrimination or losing white majority. uncontrolled immigration without assimilation have been a disaster for countries who have experienced in the past. host: this is barbara on the line for independents. morning. caller: i have three points and please let me finish this time. i will be quick. first on the border, well. the fox news report, the three times that trump has been sued and lost in court, and it was while he was president for hiring illegals who hired illegals and did not pay them and they sued him and finally got through, they finally won. but we do not talk about that on c-span or we had never had anything about that or his phony university. we do not talk about that, that is normal for republicans.

and trump put 13.5 trillion, we went from 20,000 in debt to 33 with that garbage and not worried about that. biden puts $1.2 trillion on there, oh he ruined everything and that is why this has happened. $5 trillion did not heard anything. host: mr. thomas. guest: i am not sure that she had made her third point but i think i got it. the major response to that is that trump began to build a wall. when he built the wall the signal went out that illegal immigrants were not going to be tolerated anymore. we happily -- we have a legal immigration system that deals with people who are being harmed or threatened with death in

their own countries that we can let in. but having an open border does not look -- does not work and to say that trump hired a few illegals, but other hat -- others have as well. we are not talking about that, we are talking about the hundreds of thousands pouring over our border. gas prices were far less under trump. we were energy independent. we are not energy independent and now biden has to go to saudi arabia. he claims he will not beg for oil but why else would you go after calling so what saudi arabia a pariah state. again, as a previous caller said. trump's policies for the most part were very good, but his narcissistic personality that did him him and is doing him in. i do not pick -- people do not like it. ronald reagan was great about self-deprecation and george w. bush was as well. and i thought that we really

appreciate that and if we did present by the will of the people and you are not in oligarch or dictator. host: on the front end of that visit to the middle east july 13 through 16th you mentioned the travel to the president will be -- you mentioned the travel. the president will be going to israel to reinforce the commitment to its security and prosperity. i wonder your thoughts on how this administration is doing while navigating middle east politics? guest: president biden when he was vice president under veronica -- barack obama sent a team to undermine the election a benjamin netanyahu. so i do not know how much security there is especially when biden and many democrats one israel to create a palestinian state. while the palestinian side and

several muslim nations, most notably iran have declared that they want to eliminate the jewish state. i think you should take them at their word and they have a design -- they have a divine mandate to do that. this is another one of donald trump's great accomplishments, the abraham accords. you had nations that would -- you had nations that did not have agreements since israel was created and now they are having trade and agreements back and forth. nobody else has done that and trump gets no credit for it. host: steve in sheridan, illinois. line for democrats. go ahead. guest: thank you for the talk this -- caller: thank you for the talk this morning. you mentioned something about the ordering of national guard troops to the capital -- the

capitol. i was wondering what your feeling was asked to the prior incident with the president where during the george floyd protests where the national guard were deployed to the white house, and at that point mr. esper said the country was a battleground to be cleared and general milley came out with the national guard and they were -- that was quite a forceful event. i do not know who was able to order those national guard troops to that location that day, but the fact that esper is calling america the battle space , would that not make people and the protection of capital on january 6 to be reluctant to call in national guard troops

because president trump was saying shoot them in the legs and they were being extremely aggressive with the crowd. and since the president, esper, and general milley are wanting to start a civil war would not pelosi and other people, the mayor of washington be reluctant to order national guard troops? guest: well, you have a lot to unpack. i do not believe that general milley wanted to launch a civil war. one of the things about these demonstrations that the media never asked was who are these people? don't they have jobs. who paid for them to come to washington, who paid for their signs? are they getting a stipend for being there? they show up on buses and fly

into washington, who is paying for all of that? is it george soros or other left-wingers or the type who support these district attorneys around the country that they are for low and no bail and let criminals out of prison and never send them there in the first place. there are a lot of questions that need to be asked and this is what i meant earlier when i get back to the idea of the other side or people cross-examining some of these people. there is a lot of stuff not being asked and a lot of answers not being generated as a result. host: syndicated columnist available online at calthomas.com and twitter @ calthomas. thank you so much. guest: always my pleasure. thank you. host: coming up in 25 minutes we have -- we will be joined by the reverend william barber, the cochair of the poor people's campaign and the preview of the moral march on washington. until then some time for open

forum, any public policy, political or state issue that you want to talk about. the phone numbers are on the screen so start calling you now and we will get your call after the break. ♪ >> c-span has unfiltered coverage of the u.s. response to russia's invasion of ukraine bringing you the latest from the president, officials, the pentagon, as well as congress. we also have international perspectives all on the c-span networks. c-span now free mobile app, and c-span.org/ukraine. our web resource page where you can watch the latest videos on demand and follow tweets from journalists on the ground. go to c-span.org/ukraine. >> now available in the c-span shop, the 2022 congressional

directory. go to order a directory -- to order a copy of the directory. it is your guide to the federal government with contact information for every member of congress including bios and committee assignments and contact information for state governors and the biden administration cabinet. your copy at c-spanshop.org or scan the code. every purchase help support c-span's nonprofit operation. ♪ >> booktv every sunday on c-span2 displays authors with their latest nonfiction books. new york magazine's lisa miller author of "take up space" looks at the entry of alexandria ocasio-cortez into politics and what impact she is having. 10:00 p.m. eastern on afterwords

christine amp up author of " rethinking sex" offers her thoughts on sexual consent and societal attitudes toward sex in the 20th century. watch booktv every sunday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide her watch online anytime attv.org. >> washington journal continues. host: it is time for open forum, any public policy issue or political issue that you want to talk about this is a chance for you to call in and lead the program, we are turning the show over to you and your thoughts. republicans, 202-748-8001/ democrat 202-748-8000, -- democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. we note that it is a tuesday and another primary day in this country. the voters heading to the poles

in south carolina, south dakota, and maine. "the washington times" story putting an emphasis on the republican story in nevada. adam wax salt, a trump-endorsed he is leading a field of eight candidates. sam brown has picked up new support. the winner of that race will face democratic incumbent senator catherine cortez masto in what notes will be the most closely watched races of the year as republicans seek to regain the majority in the evenly divided senate. in south carolina a lot of focus on a pair of house raisins. -- races. nancy mace in south carolina, one of the house members faces katie arrington in the first congressional district. she is the first graduate of the

citadel who verified the 2020 and voted to hold steve bannon in contempt of congress for refusing to testify in front of the january 6 committee. mrs. arrington won the gop primary for the first district but lost to joe cunningham who nancy mace then defeated in 2020. in the seventh district primary, trump backed candidate russell fry, a state represented it will try to unseat congressman tom rice who voted in favor of impeachment following the january 6 capital right yet. five additional candidates on the ballot as well, but those are two key races in the palmetto state that are being watched tonight. with that the phone lines are yours, this is barbara out of newport news, virginia. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning how are you doing? host: yes.

-- god. caller: yes. i said i watch the hearings, every inch of them and this is unbelievable about how these people see something and still do not believe it. trump campaign manager and all these people that we are listening to, and these people are still in denial. trump was not a decent person when he went into office. he was a thought when he went in. he was a thug when he was in the office and when he was coming out of the office. he already told people that he could walk down fifth avenue and shoot somebody and they would still be on his side. donald trump, set up this whole scheme and his followers would say that was not donald trump following -- talking, that was

some else. host: this is out of cincinnati, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i just moved here because i have two college students and it is very confusing for me to get across the importance of local elections for congress and those that are most direct to the voters, the elections that are coming now. when washington, d.c. is distracting them with this show type thing for donald trump. donald trump is obviously something that the republicans want to get rid of like a bad tumor. he will never be an issue again. there will be a big switchover from one party to the next. we are seeing donald trump brought up in a show trial that

is reminiscent of what used to be in the communist countries. it is so one-sided. if you remember in the first presentation, the questioners where finishing the thought the witnesses were rambling too much. it is crazy and i cannot believe this could happen in the united states. host: you recently moved to cincinnati or caller: the united states? caller:cincinnati. the young people should realize the united states is in their hands and they should take care of it. meantime, republicans don't want trump again.

they just want to go on and on. a kind of entertainment. it is disappointing. host: this is dottie in griffin, georgia, independent. caller: how are you? i just wanted to make two points. judge thomas said the governor of d.c. has the authority to call out the national guard. there is no governor. host: i believe he said the mayor. caller: the mayor does not have the authority. i looked it up. i just typed in google, who's in charge of the national guard in d.c. it said "the commander-in-chief." then it said "the joint chiefs of staff, nancy pelosi has nothing to do with that. everybody's talking about a trial. this is not a trial, this is an investigation.

if they have anything that they can take to a trial, then they can have to cross-examine the witnesses. in all of the people who are testifying right now worked for donald trump. i don't see why they would have any reason to lie. i am just tired. i just don't understand people. you can show them something, you can put it to their fast -- their face and instead of them saying, i might be wrong, i need to look that up, they just assume that somebody told them. i heard it and they say and who is "they?" host: are you tired of the politics and if so, when was the last time you weren't tired of that? caller: most of the time you just listen.

so-and-so won and so-and-so lost , maybe they will get better the next time. this time, i have never seen anything like this in my life and i have been watching presidents since eisenhower. because i am not old. but this is her addict -- i am that old. but this is ridiculous. host: maria, tennessee, republican. caller: hope you're are having a good day. a couple points i'd like to make. first of all, nobody may not have liked what donald trump said, may not have liked what he did, may not have liked his mean tweets, but life was a lot better when he was president than what we are going through now. that's my first observation. i just hope that the country can withstand the next two years until we have another presidential election.

second point i'd like to make is that i feel that the january 6 committee was doomed for failure from the get-go. the reason i say that isn't the commonly stated point that there was disagreement about who should be on the committee on the republican side, but that the scope of the investigation is so narrow and so limited. they are looking at the obvious. they are not looking at what's not obvious. i think that's where we are going to find where the actual truth about what happened may lay. it's a shame our tax dollars are being wasted on this because i don't know that we will ever know since they are only looking at the obvious and not the not so obvious. that was pretty much all i had to say. host: leanne, buffalo, new york,

democrat. caller: i'm calling in with some very deep concerns about the limit of political speech these days and the limit of -- in general. cable news shows are allowed to give opinions and take them appear to be news. i'm starting to have concerns about this program. i've always enjoyed c-span and i'm so happy that you present us with the hearing so we can watch and real-time, not only the january 6 hearings but all the congressional hearings i find most interesting. but when people come on programs such as yours or right wing radio and they are allowed to just spew nonsense, conspiracy theories, and they go completely

unchecked, and i understand what your job is but when things like that are said, allowed in the public forum and go completely unchecked, that only adds fuel to the fire of the lies and misinformation that are perpetuated in this country. we see where that leads. we had an insurrection. host: are you talking about guests or callers? caller: i'm talking about both. the guests not quite so much because you do push back to a certain extent but the callers that are just allowed to say the most outrageous and inflammatory things and there is no fact checked afterwards, no pushback, it is starting to concern me but maybe it is doing more harm than good. host: this is tony out of sugarland, texas, independent. caller: good morning, john. i would like to ask you two questions before i make my comments. please don't cut me off.

do you ever cover the book about the bible family -- the biden family were slaveowners and number two, ashley bidens diary says that the president -- she says it was highly inappropriate and she was abused as a child. host: i haven't heard about. caller: you can fact-check me if you want but it's there. my comment is that i find it surprising that csis puts out a report june 3 about a week before the hearings and if you read the report it doesn't say there were vulnerabilities in the dominion voting machines. it's a one page report. number two, the state of texas denies the dominion vote

machines and there's a pdf file you can google of about five things why they denied the dominion voting machines because they have vulnerabilities. host: did you watch the hearing yesterday? caller: i didn't watch none of the hearings until about 10 to 6:00 this morning my time and i think i seen zoe talking about the report and not about the hearings. i believe the hearings are set up that just after trump, you have no rebuttal. even if they interview somebody -- take barr for instance -- there is nobody to rebut him. or the guy that said giuliani was drunk, was this guy a doctor? there is nobody to rebuke what is going on. host: this is becky out of

massachusetts, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. i have two topics i'd like to discuss. i tried to call yesterday. first topic is hunter biden. every time it gets brought up by you guys, you seem to say you have an extensive library and i would like to know what date i can look it up because i spent hours trying to find what i was looking for and so what date it was discussed, whether it was the date it was exposed, the date of the letter of the officials that said it was russian information, or the date it was determined that it was real. also, -- host: i've got two for you. the book "laptop from hell"

covered that book, i believe a bookstore in d.c. on april 3 of this year. it was a full segment we did on this program with "the wall street journal" looking at what the justice department had done so far in the hunter biden administration. those of the two off the top of my head i can give you. host: ok. the next one, i don't know if it -- caller: ok. , i don't know if it was you but david hogg was brought up as a survivor of parkland shooting. he was not a survivor of parkland. his first interview, and i couldn't make this up, he stated that he was at home, he heard about the shooting, he got on his bicycle with a pen in hand

and pedaled as fast as he could to parkland. host: he was one of the organizers of march were our lives which we covered yesterday and i believe we covered a clip of him speaking about the issue of school shootings in this country. he was one of the main speakers at that event that drew thousands. if you want to watch that event you can do so on our website. that was just on saturday if you want to watch david hogg's speech. cabin in plymouth, mass, democrat. -- kevin in plymouth, mass, democrat. caller: i'm calling about your last guest cal thomas. he should never be allowed again on c-span. he made so many misstatements that it was incredible. the first one most important is

one that c-span has already covered and i was surprised that he wasn't immediately corrected. nancy pelosi does not have the authority to call out the national guard. in the district of columbia. it's right on their website. as i said, c-span covered it and went through it just several days ago. the authority to call in the national guard in the district of columbia lies at the hands of the president of the united states. the only national guard that reports directly to the president. the president has delegated that authority to a department of defense so the only one that could call out the national guard on january 6 was the department of defense. host: this thursday hearing, that first hearing we saw video played with the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff mark

milley in which he indicated it was the vice president mike pence who was much more interested in getting federal troops down here to capitol hill on january 6 then president trump and the folks at the white house that day. did you see that? caller: yes, i did, and that is correct. general milley testified at his deposition that mike pence called him three times. he never heard from the president. but getting back to the point, dismissive dust misinformation -- misinformation about trump ordering guard and pelosi rejecting it is out there and talked about all the time and when someone makes a misstatement like this that is covered by c-span it is incumbent that it be corrected. trump, at a meeting of the vaccine commission, threw out, this is an hour meeting about the vaccine having nothing to do with the national guard, threw

out maybe i should call in 10,000 people. he threw it out. he never called in 10,000 people as billy indicated and the department of -- millie indicated. host: russell ian d.c., -- russell in d.c., your next. caller: go ahead -- host: go ahead. caller: i want to get everybody to respond to this, maybe not the host but the listeners. just imagine if trump had called in any number of troops. on january 6. supposedly to provide extra security at the capitol. biden was already the president-elect and on january 6 congress was going to certify the election officially as trump having lost. everyone already was accusing

trump i was saying that he is trying to overturn the election, trying to overthrow the government. so what would it have looked like if trump had called in troops to the capitol grounds on january 6? all of those people already accusing trump would have said, yes, look at this, trump is truly trying to overthrow the government. trump brought in troops on a day congress was going to certify he lost the election. biden was already the president-elect. so i think it was smart for trump to get pelosi involved. you've heard the option to say yay or nay bringing in troops. get other people involved so that trump wouldn't be accused of making a unilateral decision. host: this is barbara out of durham, north carolina, republican.

caller: thank you for taking my call. i thank god i can think for myself and not believe everything somebody tells me. also, that i have the ability to discern truth overlies. i did not vote for trump because i researched him prior to the election. he switched from democrat to republican after obama was elected. and i objected to his housing policies, shocked from his so-called university and his moral character is abysmal. based on my own integrity i couldn't vote for him. we have to be able to discern truth from lies. we have to look at what's best for all, not just the party. i think that a lot of these

listeners need to think for themselves and truth and what their own character and integrity brings forth. host: in just a few minutes we will be joined by the reverend william barber by the poor people's campaign -- of the poor people's campaign. i did want to note that issue that we've been talking a lot about in recent weeks, the gun legislation that came together on sunday and is now expected to be put on the senate floor once the legislative -- finalizes. "less than democrats wanted but more than expected." chuck schumer talked about that legislation and the path ahead. [video clip] >> my colleagues to continue working with the same good faith and urgency that has brought us to this point. certainly, yesterday's agreement does not have everything democrats wanted but it nevertheless represents the most

significant reform to gun safety laws that we have seen in decades. if an acted, this legislation will make it harder for mass shooters to access assault rifles by enhancing background checks for those under 21. it will prevent tragedies before they happen by helping states with their red flag laws. it will prevent gun violence at home by closing the so-called boyfriend loophole and establish new penalties for gun traffickers. and it will make our neighborhoods safer by investing in mental health and community violence intervention programs. the lions share of gun violence happens outside the national spotlight and these intervention programs are some of the most effective ways to reduce crime and make our community safer. altogether, this framework is a good and necessary first step towards changing the reality of gun violence in america.

it will lay the foundation for future action. host: the majority leader chuck schumer yesterday on the senate floor, we've got a few minutes left in our open forum talking about any topic you want to talk about, letting you lead the discussion as we often do. linda out of the keystone state, democrat. caller: january 6 insurrection, the committee is after the truth. trump lost. cal thomas, who is he to answer these questions. that's free publicity. he is a trumpster. trump belongs in prison. he was trying to overthrow our election on january 6. host: mike in bessemer, north carolina, republican. caller: this january 6 committee stuff is all basically to take away from attention from the

last 14, 15 months of the biden administration. the oil prices, look at the food prices, look at the massive invasion that is fixing to hit the sudden -- southern border. he called saudi arabia's prince a pariah. now he's going to beg for oil. one of the main reasons saudi arabia don't want to do that is because they are still trying to go into this farce of any raw nuclear deal. -- an iran nuclear deal. look at the crime in this country. last year there were more registered african-american blacks that registered to get guns to protect their selves and a lot of them on the left said the blacks are getting guns to

protect themselves from white supremacists. no. they know they are protecting themselves from young black males. host: that is mike in north carolina. some news as we wrap up our open phones in this segment. we've been talking about the select committee hearing schedule and had been telling you that the next hearing will be tomorrow, wednesday. that has changed in just the past few minutes. the select committee announcing this morning via press release that the wednesday hearing has now been postponed and that the next hearing of the select committee will take place on thursday. thursday is the day we expected the fourth hearing would take place. more information expected to follow, perhaps explaining why that postponement is happening. the next hearing will now take place on thursday.

lettie and alexandra, virginia. -- alexandria, virginia. caller: thank you for showing the american public what really happened on january 6 by showing the hearings. i just have a simple message. the fact that you were fooled or conned doesn't make you an idiot . what makes you an idiot is blatantly refusing to look at the truth and make the conscious decision to believe the lies. america needs to open their light -- open their eyes. this is happening in front of us and people denying what happened is ludicrous. thank you very much for honestly stating the facts. when you have wacko doodles calling in lying and you are not pushing back that is also a disservice. host: amica in washington, d.c., democrat. caller: i just wanted to add onto the lady that just spoke.

as a service number who serves in the military, it was something i never expected whatever happened to this country but unfortunately did. it is an embarrassment that i'm glad you guys are showcasing and trying to help people understand about it. the only thing i would add that the lady mentioned, we should not allow or encourage people to come on your show and try to make last -- make less of the impacted january 6. the truth is there. you have shown a lot of them. the media has shown them so you can understand that. host: is it worthwhile to hear callers who have a different opinion on this? caller: absolutely. that's what makes this nation

special. you are entitled to your opinion but i don't think it is fair to come on your show which is access to many residents and citizens like myself, to be gas lighted by someone trying to miss represent -- misrepresent the truth for his own selfish interest. that's what i feel about it. host: amelia, westbridge, mass, independent. caller: i just wanted to say about donald trump, and his followers, he is a fascist autocrat that is and was willing to burn down the republic it -- republic for his own on a tear again. this is all about keeping power and getting money from his own people which is very sad. people in america have the right

to support trump whether he is in autocrat. that's the beauty of america, but they can't change the facts and i wish they would watch the january 6 hearings because it is his own people. where does trump get his information? his own people. who does the investigating? his people. they came out after they were subpoenaed and said it was all a lie, the big lie. that had to name it the big lie because the man tell so many lies. host: do you think there's a lot of americans who haven't made up their mind about what happened or didn't happen on january 6? do you think there's a lot of people to be convinced one way or the other? caller: i believe that they could be convinced if they see that his own people over and over, you have bill barr saying he did this and that but i'm still going to vote for him. that's not sending the right message.

they should have come out when it was time before the sixth and said he did this and it was wrong, joint statement. even mitch mcconnell saying, he was responsible for january 6 that i'm still going to vote for him. host: you think this committee is doing that job of laying out the evidence? caller: absolutely. host: how do you get people to watch that? how do you force people to watch that? caller: the beauty of america is you can't force anybody to do anything and they have the right to a -- they have the right to their opinion but they cannot change the facts. they aired it at 10:00 a.m. yesterday but i wish they had done it during prime time. you can't force anybody. that's the beauty of america, i can still appreciate that you are american and have your own opinion but i'm not going to respect you if you can't look at it from a different side.

i don't know how to force people to do anything but i really do wish, i plead with them to just watch and then give an opinion. watch the brutality of these police officers getting smashed in the face and losing eyes and toes. it is just horrifying. host: this is michael, pasadena, texas, republican. caller: good morning. listen, buddy, this is putting up a really big fuss over january 6 and that's understandable. what's not understandable is that they put up a fuss over the george ford roylance -- george floyd riots that killed police officers, tore up cars, millions of dollars worth of damage, and it was like a bunch of damn

crickets. no. that was just the peaceful protest. the january 6 committee is a dog and pony show. host: are you watching it? caller: i watched the first part of it and i thought what the hell is this? when you have a party that they are accusing and no one defending, that's not right. in a court of law you have a prosecutor and you have a defense lawyer. i see no defense lawyer anywhere. all i see is this big production of trying to keep trump off the ballot 2024. host: one of the previous callers said these are all trump campaign officials, these are all republican state election officials. the caller saying this is the other side.

you are hearing from republicans on the inside or who were intimately involved in the election process that this is both sides. what would you say? host: i would say i am not doing the editing. they don't show him. they show a picture and then the lettering of what could or could not have been said. i didn't hear it coming out of their mouth. i heard it coming out of production's mouth. nobody cares in reality about what happened two years ago. they are concerned about today. they are concerned about the president we have today that is tearing this whole damn country apart. host: it is former president trump who made some of those same points in a 12 page rebuttal to the january 6 committee investigation,

releasing it yesterday through his save america pack, reading and part -- "17 months after january 6 democrats are unable to offer solutions. they are desperate to change the narrative -- the deaths caused by the radical left just months earlier. they control the government, they own this disaster, and they hope it will help their failing prospects." part of his statement that he released yesterday. this is mary out of harrisburg, cap -- harrisburg, pennsylvania, democrat. caller: i would just like to clarify a point that even cal thomas got wrong. the national guard operates under their respective state or territorial governor except in the instance of washington, d.c. where they operate under the president of the united states. on that day there was all the

angst about him putting off calling the guard and finally virginia called up their guard and some of the other states. but it is the president that controls the d.c. national guard . nancy pelosi controls the capitol police for the house only. which mcconnell controls the capitol police for the senate. and mayor marielle bowser called out the match are mere -- metropolitan police. host: this is james in mission, texas. caller: good morning. two quick points from this previous caller. what people forget is that the intelligence had already determined there was possible danger about three days before so let's forget about national

guard and all that. if it was offered and turned down. with that intelligence, nothing changed so what exactly then did nancy pelosi do to secure the house? you can say he refused the national guard but that doesn't negate the danger so that's a big problem. the other problem a lot of us are having is that it seems like over the last three years we've had nothing but chaos on the border. i live right on the border and we have a flood of illegals coming in daily. yet when washington, d.c., all of a sudden their house gets overrun they get all upset and are concerned. what have they been doing to protect us down here being overrun? that's the problem, the hypocrisy we are having to deal with. i just wish washington would be fair to everybody in the country. host: this is joan in cleveland,

ohio, republican. caller: i just want everyone to know if you are a donald trump person that voted for him, that loved the way he did the job when he was president, i found a clock that you have to go off every hour and his saying "make america great again." i just think it is fantastic. i drove 60 miles to get this clock. the other thing i want to say is that years ago there was a show on tv, "dragnet," and if anyone is as old as i am they will remember when i think his name was joe friday said, "just the facts, ma'am, that's all we want," so with this parade of

people sitting at a desk and looking at a teleprompter, just give us the facts. you are taking us through everything that really to me, it's like you want to put me to sleep. i tried to listen to it but it is so boring. it is just boring. since they didn't let the republicans put their guys on or ladies, i think it is a shame. the other thing i wanted to just comment on is nancy pelosi's husband. i understand nobody could get the film to show his accident and to get the information out. they are having a terrible time. the attorney general is not cooperating with everybody. everyone knows anyone and everyone, here local, national, they hurry up and put it on tv

so everyone can see. host: jim in warsaw, indiana, democrat. caller: good morning. i enjoy watching "washington journal" as often as possible and i appreciate your professionalism. he mentioned the fact that trump was able to control the gas prices and they were far less then they are now. what would he -- be his, your hit -- your impression, other than the pandemic and the lack of demand brought those prices down. did trump actually have a policy that kept the prices down? host: what do you think? it comes up a lot, how much does any particular present --

president, how much control do they have on gas prices. caller: absolutely none, i totally agree. they can put in policies to control production or whatever the case may be with this bs about keystone xl pipeline. it was never under production so they are smoking something. the exorbitant price of oil, the refine on, they are sent -- refining, they are saying it is hard to get production up because of the labor. they stopped investigating leases because of the pandemic had dropped them down. there is so many things but it is definitely not a single thing that can cause it but it is

certainly not anything to do directly with the president setting prices. our last -- host: our last caller, the house is set to come in and about 25 minutes and we will be joined by the reverend jim barber joining us next to preview the upcoming moral march on washington this weekend. stick around. ♪ >> the january 6 committees public hearings continue as they release evidence gathered. tune in wednesday as the committee -- trump -- pressure by trump and his allies to overturn the election. watch live at 10:00 a.m. eastern, c-span, our app, or online at c-span.org.

is it our website c-span.org/january 6 to watch previous hearings and other videos related to that day. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. these six presidents' recorded conversations while in office, here them on the podcast. >> you will hear about the 1964 civil rights act and presidential campaign, the gulf of tonkin, march on selma and the war in vietnam. not everyone knew they were being recorded. >> certainly johnson's secretaries knew because they were tasked with transcribing many of those conversations. they were the ones who made sure that the conversations were taped as johnson would signal to them through an open door

between his office and there's. >> you will hear some blunt talk. >> i want a report of the number people assigned to kennedy and assigned to me now and i want it quick. i promise i won't go anywhere. i will stay behind these gates. >> find it on the c-span now mobile app or wherever you got your podcast. >> books tv every sunday on c-span two features leading authors. new york magazines lisa miller, author of "take up space: the unprecedented aoc" looks at her introduction into politics.

the washington post columnist christine ambala offers her thoughts on sexual consent and societal attitudes toward sex in the 21st century. she is interviewed by donna freda's. watch books tv every sunday on c-span two and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at oaks tv.org. -- books tv.org. c-span has unfiltered coverage of the january 6 committee hearings investigating the attack on the capitol. go to c-span.org/january 6, our web resource page to look at the hearings, briefings, and coverage on the attack and subsequent investigation since january 6, 2021 as well as reaction from members of congress, the white house, journalists, and authors. go to c-span.org/january 6 for a

and easy way to watch when you can't see it live -- for a fast and easy way to watch when you can't see it live. host: we welcome back to the program the reverend william barber ahead of the poor people's moral march on washington taking place on saturday. remind people what the poor people's campaign is and what you are marching for. guest: tens of thousands of people, over 500 buses coming to the mass poor people's low-wage workers assembly march on washington and to the polls. what the campaign is saying whether it is people from appalachia, alabama, massachusetts or mississippi, we cannot have a country where we have 140 million people living in poverty. over 60.9 percent of black people, 30% of white people but 66 million white people, 52% of

children, 44% of adults. when we are the wealthiest a sure -- nation in the country, if we just raised the minimum wage 32 million people would rise up out of poverty. 87 million people are uninsured or underinsured and this creates a level of death. 700 people die a day from poverty before the pandemic. the pandemic exposed the fishers. we -- fissures. we put workers on the front line but treated them like they were expendable. let's get account on policy, stop the lies about scarcity, let's have the wealthy pay their fair share. billionaires made $2 trillion during the pandemic while 18 million people fell into poverty. let's do the things that not -- that make sense.

not radical, universal health care, living wages for people working. let's do what is right by all people. host: let me give the phone numbers to the callers, republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats, (202) 748-8000, independents, (202) 748-8002. the house is coming in in about 20 minutes but until then you're questions in this conversation. i want to focus on the end of the name to this march, "and to the polls." what about their voting habits and ability to get to the polls? guest: we did a study called waking the sleeping giant and most americans don't know that in the last election, voters who make less than $50,000 a year voted higher than normal and

they were critical in at least four to five key states. their votes alone. second people, poor and low wealth voters make up 32% of the electorate now and 45% in battle grounds now. number three, in 15 states, if poor wealth -- poor and low wealth people vote like they did or higher in the last election they could close the victory of any candidate and decide who sits in the senate, house, and presidency. we can no longer ignore 34 -- 32% of the electorate. saturday is not a day, it is a declaration. regardless of party, we have people from appalachia to alabama, white folk in appalachia and black folk in alabama, our vote does not support this demand and we will mass mobilize through the summer because poor people can shift

the electorate. host:p pooreoplescampaign.org is that website. i know leading up to this march, there has been some effort on your part to have a sit down with president biden. will that happen? guest: i believe it's going to happen and i think it is more the president's handler than the president. he said ending poverty was a good -- the level of poverty is so extreme. whether they are from massachusetts or california or mississippi, i believe it will happen and in fact it must happen.

if we don't change the way we do public policy mcconnell versus the president, how does this piece of public policy establish justice? how does it lift all the people? you have to put a face on it and we have to ask a question that joseph stiglitz raised, not how much does it cost to fix cubberley and low wealth but how much does it cost not to? it costs $3 trillion a year to let poverty stay where it is. we have lost that money because two democrat senators and 49 republicans blocked raising the living wage to $15 an hour. many people may not know, the march on washington 1963 fought

for two dollars an hour minimum wage which today would be $15. so at some point america has to say we cannot accept 140 million people living in poverty and low wealth and a quarter million people a year dying from poverty and the effects. host: florida, mitch, democrat, you are on with the reverend. caller: good morning and god bless your heart. i want to know if you have a phone number that i can reach out old school if i need to communicate sometimes by phone. i want to talk and i am proud of you and i pray to god to always bless you and keep you in good health. i need that phone number, please. guest: first of all, thank you so much. i just want to say to callers like you, i know the website -- but if you dial information, they will give you the numbers.

what i would like to say to this man i am hearing, there are thousands upon thousands, we have traveled all over this country, appalachia, upstate new york, the bronx, california, arizona, on saturday you will see black and why it and native american -- white and native american and gay and straight and saying we are the 140 million poor and low wealth people and we will not be silent with our voices and vote. we are calling for a third reconstructed -- reconstruction agenda that has been laid out and vetted by some of the best economists in the world. it says this will make america better. we are not begging. we are saying to america, you can't sustain this democracy and its fundamental foundation when you have again, i keep saying the number, 140 million people

living in poverty and low wealth. i want people to hear that number and say why? that's the point. you are going to see yourself, your uncles, your children and say, this has to turn from political fighting to a moral discussion in this country about what we are really going to be. host: where are you gathering? guest: third and pennsylvania. it is an assembly which is different than a march. come to third and pennsylvania, although by -- all the way back to 14th street. friday night we are going to the national mall at 5:00. we are having a communal feeding of anybody we hope can come. the reason is to show how much hunger exists two blocks from the capital. then on friday evening at 7:00 we are having a service of morning bank -- mourning because

a million people died from covid and we haven't stopped and just cried. poor people died at a rate of two to five times higher. essential workers were sent out on the front line but weren't given health care, a living wage, and it was almost like they were expendable. we are going to have a mopurning -- mourning for those dying from the pandemic, war, and saturday morning, everybody should come and hear the voices. can i say real quickly, all of the upstart union movers like the dollar general workers and giddy workers, they are going to have their voices that every union will bring forth the speaker. this is a different rally. i'm not going to do a big keynote. we are putting the voices of the

people. this is the people gathering. you will hear from real people and people you normally might not have seen together because folk are realizing whether it is in eastern kentucky or eastern south carolina, we better come together and address the issues of systemic racism, poverty, ecological devastation, the denial of health care, the war economy, and the false narrative of religious nationalism. host: rebecca, republican. caller: i would like to make a couple points. i would like to know when the investigation is going to include the democrats hand in this riot. nancy pelosi is in charge of the capitol police. why was there only five guards posted? they knew at least two weeks later there would be problems yet they let it happen. they did nothing.

host: since you are on with the reverend william barbeau, do you have a question for him? -- barber, do you have a question for him? caller: just pray for everybody. we need to get rid of these guns. this is a smokescreen to cover the issues that affect everyday people, food, gas. they need to take responsibility for their part in this. host: let you jump in. guest: thank you for your call. she raises a powerful question. when the riots first happened, people first said it was a bunch of poor folk and we found out it was more middle-class and up. poor folk have not rioted. poor folk are trying to make it. one thing we are saying to this country is if you keep allowing 100 40 million people to live in poverty and they lose hope, that is the breeding ground for all

kind of discontent, the breeding count for desperates and autocratic leaders. we don't need that. we need to live out our constitution which says we have to promote the general where -- general welfare of every person. that would mean everybody has universal health care, living wages. universal health care in 25 of the wealthiest countries, we are the only ones that doesn't offer it. host: for folks who have lost hope and they do call in and will say that, what do you say? guest: it is interesting what rebecca said when she said this inflation is a smokescreen. she is republican. i want to agree with her and say, the lie of scarcity is a lie. that's what we are going to show. you cannot say in a country where you have some 20 to some billion gross domestic product that they cannot deal with these

problems. we have a lot of scarcity and don't know what to do, but the problem is we always start at the wrong end of the debate. how much is it going to cost, how much will it raise taxes? we scare people rather than how much is it costing us for poverty, denial of health care, ecological devastation, and what would it benefit us if we changed those realities? hope is when you come together, recognize the power that you have where people represent 45% of the battleground states, we refuse to accept this but we will not accept violence. we will be nonviolent but we will register our voices and vote and stay at this as long as it takes. it took 10 years to win the battles of the civil rights movement. this movement is committed to as long as it will take to change poverty and low wages.

host: westchester, democrat. caller: one of my most favoriteest programs in the world, you are absolutely correct. i love watching you. i watched you on msnbc. the poor people's campaign is awesome. i could fill a whole two hours show asking you questions and you are absolutely awesome. i've got to tell you, i think our policies -- we are supposed to be trying to form a more perfect union in this country and we are just going backwards unfortunately. the republicans are really pulling us that way. the policies, big corporations, they just take way too big of a chunk. you wonder why we have such a huge deficit besides our spending and why the middle

class is being choked from taxes. the rich people pay very little because of loopholes and the poor people by definition can't pay it. that leaves the onus of most of the taxes or a darn good portion on the middle class. our policies are just crazy. they are not meant for poor people here. things should be skewed more towards poor people as opposed to corporations but it is the other way and always has been and probably will be. guest: i'm going to declare war always because people will stand up and fight back. i also want to say that poor and low wealth people, because sometimes people want to isolate, republicans want to say that poor people are their own worst enemies, their personal morality. sometimes moderate democrats don't even want to talk about poverty.

the reality is we have to. when you look at the policies, it wasn't one or two policies. it has been over the years. even the pope talks about neoliberalism and trickle-down economics are bad policies that take us backwards. what we need to do in this country is center the 140 million poor people and low wealth in our public policy and lift from the bottom up and declare everybody has a right to live and move policies to that direction. everybody benefits. some years ago, there was all this clambering, if you raise the living wage it is going to run prices up and then some economies won a nobel peace prize in their study said that is absolutely not true. part of what we have to do in this society is get over the lies. our gathering on saturday, the low-wage and poor people's assembly is about truth telling.

we will put out an agenda and say what we are going to do and put the real faces in front of the american people, challenge the lies of scarcity with truth and facts and footnotes. until we can have truthful debates and moral debates, what we end up having is likely had this year, two democrats and 49 republicans say no to 32 million people. they literally said no. even though 100 some cities since 1994 have raised their minimum wages to living wages, 49 republicans and two democrats said no to 32 million people. they said no to 43% of the black community alone that would have come up out of poverty with one vote. they said no to millions of white people. this is the kind of conversation we need to have and what we say to congress people, when you have these debates, bring people

to congress. bring religious leaders, bring impacted people, bring economists and put a face on these policies so we can have a real moral debate and not the normal stuff. host: in our last minute, when did we last have moral debates in washington? guest: we have never had them without a force. we had them during the first reconstruction between 1865 and 1898. we had them in the civil rights, the second reconstruction, forced by the people making it happen and now we have to have a third. it will only happen if the people make it happen. our movement is saying we are declaring we won't be silent, we won't be unseen anymore. saturday is not an end, it is a beginning. it is not a commencement, it is a commencing. it is not a date, it is a declaration. we invite everyone. host: reverend william barber

with the poor people's campaign co-chair, saturday beginning at 9:30. tell folks again where to meet? guest: find your way to pennsylvania and third the 14th. join us as we declare we won't be silent anymore and these realities do not have to exist. host: the poor people's campaign can be found online. what is it on twitter? guest: go to the .org. i am not as good as i should be with twitter but you will also see the text number -- at unite the poor. host: always appreciate your time. that will be our program for today. the house getting ready to gavel in and of course we take you there live for gavel-to-gavel coverage.

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 room, washington, d.c., june 14, 2022. i hereby appoint the honorable tony cardenas