morning on "washitojournal," frank clemente and grover norquist join the proam to discuss the future of tax policy under the new gop led hse valentina sader of the atlantic council will discuss the antidemocracyiots in brazil's capital and the parallels to th january 6 attack. pace browning will join us fm seattle to discuss the mental health crisis among young people and the related lawst challenging social media's role. join the conversation with your calls, text messages, facebook comments and tweets. "washington journal" starts now. >> i strongly believe the processes of this department can handle all investigations with integrity. but under the regulations extraordinary circumstances require a special counsel for

this matter. ♪ host: attorney general merrick garland yesterday announcing robert heard will investigate classified documents found at president biden's office. yesterday, it was revealed more documents were at his home in delaware. this morning, your reaction to the justice department's decisions. democrats, we want to hear from you at (202)-748-8000. republicans, we want to hear from you at (202)-748-8001. independents, your line is (202)-748-8002. text us with your first name, city and state to (202)-748-8003 . you can also post your thoughts on facebook.com/cspan or send a tweet with the handle @cspanwj. we will get to this conversation in a minute.

first, more from the attorney general, walking everyone through the timeline of when these documents and how the justice department was alerted. [video clip] >> on the evening of november 4, 2022, the national archives office of inspector general contacted a prosecutor at the department of justice and informed him the white house notified the archives documents bearing classification markings were identified at the office of the penn-biden center in washington, d.c. that office was not authorized to store classified documents. the prosecutor was advised those documents had been secured in an archives facility. on november 9 the fbi commenced an assessment consistent with standard protocols to understand whether classified information had been mishandled in violation of federal law. on november 14, pursuant to section 600.2b, i assigned the

u.s. attorney to conduct an initial investigation to inform my decision whether to appoint a special counsel. he served as the u.s. attorney in chicago since 2017. before that he spent more than a and a decade assisting that same office. i selected him to conduct the initial investigation because i was confident his experience would ensure it would be done professionally and expeditiously. on december 20 president biden's personal counsel said additional documents were identified in the garage of the president's private residence in delaware. president biden's counsel advised us those were among the records of the period of the president's service as vice president. the fbi secured those documents.

on january 5, 2023, i was briefed on the initial investigation and advised me further investigation by special counsel was warranted. based on this initial investigation i concluded that, under the special counsel regulations, it was in the public interest to appoint special counsel. in the days since, while the investigation continued, we identified special counsel. this morning, mr. biden stated additional documents bearing classification markings were identified at his personal residence in wilmington, delaware. host: the attorney general yesterday in washington. now we go outside the u.s. capitol to hear from all of you. john in bridgewater, new jersey, republican. what do you think? caller: good morning. it is sad we have so many

special counsel's. it implies justice is not impartial. if we have to have special counsel's all the time, it goes back to clinton. i think president biden is going to regret say, they are in a locked garage and i keep my corvette there. let's see what happens. it is fair, obviously, because of the trump situation. in fact, they may even come out clean if they are not lying about how he got the documents. host: as you were talking, you mentioned the president's corvette. there is a picture of it on the front page of "the washington times." harry in pennsylvania sends a

text saying, doj has long been politicized. it is official. agents and employees bringing biases to work. all that matters is if americans believe in the fairness of its actions. i suspect that is a big lift now. ellicott city, maryland, democratic caller. caller: thank you for taking my call. i agree with the first caller. there has been a lot of special counsels and what i think that indicates is we have an incompetent and perhaps corrupt government. certainly, trump has committed grave acts of malfeasance in office and after leaving office. i think with president biden this could have been just incompetence on his part. you know, this is a major

distraction because there is so many fundamental things our government must address and we are dealing with this silly stuff. i would like to see the united states deal with the issue of reparations for african americans. but we can never get to that because we are distracted by all of these things. i think biden should not run a second term. i think he should leave office and we need someone young and sharp, whether democrat or republican, but who can work in a bipartisan fashion and in a just fashion. host: would you put the special counsel investigating the classified documents at mar-a-lago in the same category as silly and a distraction? caller: um,, no because i think there was something else going on with our previous president and the possession of those documents. while the american people will neve discover the ul

truth, whether he was trading secrets or some other act of treason, i thi there was something more sinister end of various taking place with president trump. by the way, all of this is distraction. we have so many fundamental issues to become better citizens and we cannot get to it because of these issues. host: look at the reaction from capitol hill yesterday on twitter. representative jim jordan, who will lead the judiciary committee in the gop majority house, tweeting, remember how it was when trump took classified documents to his home? they are quiet now. scott perry, why were the american public not told about the documents? they were found prior to the midterm elections. the doj is in shambles. that is why we are investigating the investigators, he said. congressman ben cline, the vice

president has no authority to declassify documents. why haven't the fbi and merrick garland rated the biden garage yet? that was congressman perry referring to the new committee on capitol hill on the house side, a subcommittee looking at the weaponization of the government. paul in charleston, south carolina, independent. caller: good morning. this is blatant hypocrisy. you have to be blind that you do not see the democrats, you know, with the liberal media getting out, they are taking biden down and he is going to be removed -- i don't know if he will be removed from office -- but they will keep him from running a second term. that is what i feel about it. host: let's listen to the president yesterday talking about the economy and then asked by reporters about this latest

revelation. [video clip] >> classified materials next to your bed? what were you thinking? >> i will get the chance to speak, god willing, soon. my corvette is in a locked garage. they are not sitting out in the street. >> they are in a locked garage? >> as well as my corvette. people know that i take classified material seriously. i also said we are cooperating fully and completely with the review. as part of that process, my lawyers reviewed other places where documents from my time as vice president were stored and they finished last night. they discovered a small number of documents with classified markings in storage areas at my home and my personal library.

this was done in the case of the biden-penn center. the department of justice was immediately notified and the lawyers arrange for the department of justice to take possession of the documents. we are going to see all of this unfold. host: that yesterday to the news more documents were found at his home in delaware. here is carlos in the president's home state, delaware. what is the statute of limitations on possession of these documents? it is a moot point if it has expired. mark in st. paul, minnesota, republican. what do you say? caller: it is my recollection during the brouhaha with the

mar-a-lago classified documents former president obama exemplified how it should be done. given the fact these documents president biden has would have been obama's classified documents, i think we need to reassess whether former president obama actually handled his classified documents properly. as president obama once said, never underestimate the ability of joe biden to f things up. seems there should be reassessment of the legacy of president obama's treatment of classified documents. host: springhill, florida, democratic caller. you are next. you have to mute your television.

are you ready? caller: i am ready but somebody else is talking. host: that is because you are listening to your television. you have to mute it. caller: it is muted. host: it is your turn. caller: all i got to say is now they want the republicans to be bipartisan and they want to work with us when the last two years they did not want to have nothing to do with us. now the republicans got the power and they want to work with us? you know what i am predicting is joe biden is going to resign and they're going to come up with some trumped up charge for a misdemeanor and keep him from running so they can get them both out. i would like to see him resign but are we going to be any better off? we are going to have cackling kamala harris running the show

and she is as bad as he is. if we do not get back on track, we are in trouble. listen up, everybody. you need to wake up and one day i hope they do away with this word "woke." host: are you a democrat? caller: i am an american and i am not for the republicans. i am going independent. i hope if trump runs, he goes independent. anyone who is a registered republican can change to an independent and they will know how many independents there are and it will be harder for them to cheat. everybody, keep that in mind. host: ed in myrtle beach, independent line. caller: good morning. host: morning. caller: thank you for taking my call.

i have sat in this chair 70 years and everybody called trump everything but a white man. joe biden is as dirty as a dump truck and the only reason you're hearing about these documents is because the republicans took over. i think the chinese have got biden in their back pocket. we are going to see what happens but that is my take. joe biden is a piece of white trash. host: earl in california, republican. caller: good morning. god bless c-span. there are two things i want to say this morning. get your hand off the button. i see you already moving. [laughter] one of them is the difference between a protest and an

insurrection and i am glad you are covering brazil later on. on a protest you do not put 1000 people in prison without charges. and the second, and then i will get off the line -- comment and then i will get off the line. this is the way to get rid of two past presidents, not one. host: andy in florida, democratic caller. good morning. caller: good morning. back to the subject. let's talk about classified documents and what happens when they are not handled properly. first, the security people who know what they are doing, they hold it closely because they do not know what was compromised and they do a spill assessment. that can take days to weeks

where we figure out whether or not something bad has happened. yay! 37.5 years i have watched this. fortunately, the bullet did not hit me. you lose your career if you lose your clearance. second, once the spill assessment is done -- they have already reached back for the documents and that is where we have this dichotomy between what trump did and what biden's team did. once they found the documents, and there are a lot of them, they tried to retrieve them and trump did not respond well. he knew they were there and after the spill assessments, which we still do not know which ones were -- and i have a problem with their system because we knew where our documents were. every damn one.

we would do periodic searches and look through and catalog the files. the bottom line is a spill assessment and if it is an internal matter where the corporation or security team or government rep assesses how bad things are, action will be taken appropriately. we found there was intent. you are screwed. if you do this deliberately, that goes toward espionage. host: what happened? caller: they will pull your clearance if you are found -- you have to prove intent. but if you intended to mishandle it, whether you intended to sell them or keep them as tokens, you are going to lose your

clearance, you are going to lose your job, you will never work in defense again. period. that's all. that person has made a stupid, stupid move. i understand high-level officials get certain special treatment. i am glad they have special counsel. as you can imagine, in my situation, i am irritated more than just a little bit with them taking classified material out of its proper storage location, which is inside the facility or a secure area where they are safe. and i do not mean cute safes you can drill through. these have a certain number of hours before you can break in so personnel can become aware. it is a controlled area, that is how secure information is handled. whether it is top-secret, secret or even confidential.

there are different measures you have to take. host: i am going to leave it there. you may be interested in the " wall street journal" opinion this morning. two presidents, two special counsels. when mr. garland approached jack smith to investigate president trump, including his mar-a-lago document horde, the political insulation is mere perception. whatever they find out about the classified material that wound up in mr. biden's garage, mr. garland shoulders the responsibility for the investigation, including deciding how to conclude it. apparently, not as seriously as the feds usually do. last year a former employee was sentenced for three months in prison by keeping handwritten notes, of meetings including classified details. that was categorized as confidential and secret.

to compare, mr. biden and mr. trump reportedly held onto documents rated as more sensitive than top-secret. prosecution for mishandling the nation's secrets are not rare although many involve high risk of exposure. former cia director john deutch was set to plead guilty to a misdemeanor of mishandling classified information on a computer at his home. president clinton pardoned him first. although mr. trump was an explicitly muleish on handing over his documents, there is no reason making two presidents for improper handling of material. mr. trump was on a limb by himself. this was less obvious to some of our media competitors. terry in cleveland, tennessee, independent. caller: hey. how are y'all doing? host: morning.

caller: first up, i know this is in the past and it will never happen. biden promised an extra $13 a month if he got in. you can forget about that. everything that the democrats blamed the republicans for, it was the democrats. they want to play the blame game and i am looking toward republicans better than the democrats. host: carol in panama city, florida, says, amazing how republicans are excited about this conversation but serious trump is being investigated over documents he stole and refused to give back. it is entirely different. diane in butler, missouri, republican. do you agree with carol?

caller: about what? host: she says the scenarios between the two, former president trump and current president biden, are entirely different. caller: yes, i agree with that. president trump have the right to take and declassified any documents he wanted. he was sitting president. biden was not. he was vice president. he had no right to take any documents at all and he should be prosecuted. that man should be put in jail. he has screwed our country up. he is terrible, horrible, the worst president that ever lived. thank you for my call. host: monica in california, kentucky, says, why did the archive folks not notice the documents were missing for six years? must not be that important. do not compare this with 45.

ricky in philadelphia, what do you think? democratic caller. caller: yes, ma'am. good morning. this is what i think. there should be some form of law or policy for any politician, vice president, president, when it comes to classified documents. it is starting to get ridiculous now with trump taking classified documents. president biden had classified documents. there should be a law put out in congress when it comes to classified documents. if you do not put no laws out, the situation will keep on continuing.

and i believe it is a waste of taxpayer money. we have to get our special counsel for these situations. we should put laws on the floor. host: understood. cj in baton rouge, louisiana, independent. caller: good morning. host: morning. caller: i do not know if you noticed when you showed biden giving a speech, the man cannot even read from a freaking note card. that is not him. that is his puppet masters who wrote that card. he cannot speak, folks. he is president of the united states? no wonder we are the laughingstock of the freaking world. host: delia in miami,

republican. caller: good morning. one thing nobody has talked about biden, all of those documents they found, that place was paid for by the chinese communists. that is where they found those documents. also, a garage is not great for documents. the difference is in trump's mar-a-lago, there were secret service people. he had been talking to the fbi. the documents were behind doors that were locked. biden has a big problem. now that the republicans are in

charge, they are going to go and record all of those documents about the chinese giving all that money after biden opened that office. host: john from minnesota, nobody is talking about why, as vice president, he had any right to take documents. look how long he possessed them. the timing of this discovery and when it was made public was part of yesterday's white house briefing with the press secretary. she was peppered with questions. here is an exchange between her and cbs reporter ed o'keefe. >> you talked about, we are being transparent. who is "we" and what is the definition of transparent? are they being transparent with the justice department?

or the white house being transparent with the general public? >> number one, and i have said this multiple times, we take this seriously, the president takes the seriously. he was not aware the records were there. he does not know what is in the documents. again, classified information, classified documents he takes seriously. when they were discovered -- and this is the right thing to do -- his lawyers reached out immediately to the archivists, the department of justice to let them know the documents sat there. >> the attorney general this morning said they reached out to the archives. it was only in december when the second batch was -- >> i will leave it to what the department of justice is laying out. we are saying we reached out to the archivists and the department of justice. that is the right thing to do in this case.

and -- and, so i can finish -- what has been transparent is the white house counsel has laid out, in detail to all of you -- >> they have done nothing and you know that. >> i cannot talk about this because the department of justice is reviewing. there is a review happening, ed. you know this. there is a review. i am limited in what i can say. >> [indiscernible] >> i think you reach out to the white house counsel. >> we are reaching out on a constant basis. >> ok. we have put out lengthy statements and you can reach out to them as you have been doing. i believe that there. go ahead. >> why not answer the question? >> they have been talking to you all regularly the last couple of days. we have put out, they have put out lengthy statements.

i just read what richard had to say and i would refer you to the white house counsel. i am limited in what i can say because the department of justice, we see them as being independent when it comes to these issues. i am not going to go beyond what the president said and i am not going to go beyond what the lawyers say. host: from the white house press secretary briefing yesterday. you can find that on c-span.org if you are interested in watching the entire event. here is the statement from the special counsel to the president she was referring to, telling reporters that they should talk to him. as was done in the case of the penn-biden center, the lawyers arranged for the department of justice to take possession of these documents. we are fully cooperating with the national archives and doj to

ensure that any obama-biden records are appropriately in possession of the archives. mary in st. paul, minnesota, democratic caller. what do you think? caller: good morning. host: morning. caller: i am appalled at the attitude so many people have when they are discussing these matters. we know the former president was accused of having these classified papers and they were visible and, am i correct, hundreds of them? we know what has happened with president biden's there have been less than a dozen. i am not sure about that number but they should both be treated equally in terms of trying to find out the truth. we know the department of justice is now in charge of this investigation and i think we should let it remain there. but the animosity and the anger of so many people who have phoned in and have to make this

a personal thing and the references to president biden as not being able to work again -- run again -- i think that is despicable. they will not just listen to the facts and they have them all screwed up as to what they call themselves. it is sad we cannot get to the point again where we where people who could disagree without being disagreeable. thank you. host: tracy is an independent in arkansas. caller: hello? host: hi, tracy. we are listening to you. caller: ok. it was really a question. who carried the papers over to his garage and put them there? i have been watching but i have not heard that. he said he really did not know

what was in them or anything like that. but who carried them to his garage? host: that is the scope of the investigation for this special counsel. how the documents got to where they were discovered is part of this investigation. i do not think that is known yet, and we will have to see what the special counsel finds. cindy in connecticut, republican. caller: hi. good morning. i don't -- there was a caller who said, how did the national archives, you know, did they know what was missing? i do not know if they know what is missing for any president. i think all the presidents have taken classified documents. you know, all i have to say is

$54 million donated to the penn -biden center. if that does not pique anybody's interest about how that came about, and yet, you still have a lot of democrats believing trump, you know, was putin's lackey and he is a russian. it has been proven all of that was paid for by the clinton campaign. but yet, people still believe that. so, you know, the hypocrisy and i do not think anybody is angry. we had one caller called biden white trash but we had to listen to six years of trump is a nazi, he is a fascist. i would argue who is more angry. i just want the swamp cleaned

up. a locked garage? that is supposed to be ok but it was not ok trump had a secure room with secret service? that was not ok? there is just so much garbage out there. i cannot wait for it to stop. thank you. host: cindy referencing the biden-penn center. the new york post say, p enn-biden center is a dark money nightmare. the university of pennsylvania received more than $30 million from chinese donors after the penn-biden center, which functioned as an office for joe biden four he was elected president, was announced in 2017. that is the reference i think many callers have made so far

about the chinese donation to this personal office of president biden after he served as vice president. david in vermont, democratic caller. david? caller: good morning. host: morning. caller: i would like to say i am 65-years-old. i have always been involved on the periphery of politics. i think america is embarrassing. i think what goes on is disgusting. the name-calling, it is like being in grammar school. secondly, i do not understand how the paperwork gets transferred without anyone knowing about it. it is as easy to take classified documents as it is to take a library book out and not put it back. the vitriol, the language your callers call in and the filth

they say, dirt bag, scumbag, it shows america is a bunch of uneducated idiots. we are so embarrassing to the rest of the world and ourselves. host: i will leave it there, david. the speaker of the house, kevin mccarthy, yesterday held his first news conference. here is what he had to say about the treatment of discovery of the biden documents compared to former president trump. [video clip] >> the new the documents were there. they asked president trump to put another lock on. you look at president biden. he was not president. he was vice president. he had these out in the open. he criticized president trump. did he utilize the justice

department to raid trump? do you think that was right? they knew this happened to president biden before the election but they kept it a secret. he goes on 60 minutes knowing what. he. has done. now we find another location it is at but he refused to answer his press secretary. you watched them leak photos of setting out files of president trump. where are the photos of president biden's documents? he knowingly knew this happened going into election, going into interviews. this is what makes america not trust their government. you cannot have one form of law because somebody has a different opinion of you and you cannot use the justice department to go after people that are politically different. host: speaker of the house kevin mccarthy yesterday, before the justice department announced special counsel. we are getting your reaction to

the appointment of the special counsel to investigate the biden classified documents. emmanuel in d.c., good morning. caller: thank you for giving me the opportunity. i appeal to the attorney general to take hold of this issue. it is naive. all of these republicans and democrats, he should get hold of his office. there should be a provision -- [indiscernible] -- they should find any documents. america should know former president trump -- they should not compare him with the current president.

this man has made an honest mistake. they have gone through all these offices and they should search for any government documents in their possession. host: here is roger in georgia who says, as for the documents, the level of classification and/or the caveats is extremely important. like the difference between 10 speeding tickets and a murder charge. vince in florida, republican, let's hear from you. caller: hi. first-time call i have made. this is like a morning soap opera. it is so dysfunctional what is really going on in this country. we are just all spectators watching this special, so to

speak. but my biggest concern is these documents that have possibly been exposed to some of the members of his family. he has a son with major drug addiction issues. he is making money and i find -- there is so much going on with his family and it is concerning. the whole thing is a big mess. i think this is a conspiracy of some type to remove both trump and joe from future elections and they want to start fresh with a whole new chessboard. but that is all i really got to say. host: we will leave it there. let's listen more from the attorney general yesterday when he talked about why he was appointing the special counsel for this probe. [video clip] >> i will ensure he receives all

of the resources he needs to conduct his work. the normal processes of this department can handle this with integrity. but under the regulations the extraordinary circumstances require a special for this matter. this underscores the department's commitment to accountability and sensitive matters. and making decisions guided only by the facts and the law. i am confident mr. hur will carry out his responsibility in an evenhanded and urgent matter with the highest of this court. host: you can find that on

c-span.org. robert hur, who is he? graduatef harvard university and stanfordaw school. ben clerking for william rehnquist. in 2017, served as the deputy joe rosenstein -- to rosenstein. in 2018, he became the u.s. attorney for the district of maryland appointed by former esident trump and unanimously confirmed by the senate. in 2021. , he resigned to work in private practice in washington, d.c. let's hear from our caller in georgia, democratic caller. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call.

somebody already took my question. who are the people carrying these documents? how did these documents get to biden's home? biden said he is not aware of this. i am of the opinion it was planted. why is this coming out now? you cannot compare this to trump. trump carried it to mar-a-lago. it was planted by the republicans. i do not trust jim jordan. i do not trust some of the fbi people. host: got it. one of our viewers tweets to say, i want to see the national archives procedure review.

we cannot be cavalier about these documents. our cia and foreigners could be killed if exposed. stop taking this as a partisan issue. we have to protect american assets from exposure. roger in milwaukee, wisconsin, independent. caller: good morning. how are you? thank you for taking my call. i give a big thumbs up to the guy from vermont who happens to be my age, 65. we are becoming a comedy of errors on the global stage. putting that aside, it is hard to believe people choose to take sides when it comes to this biden-trump issue and documents. you have to ask yourself, who came forward? biden, let's be realistic. regardless of all the criticisms people may have about him and

all the suspicions, it was self-discovery and he immediately brings it to the public eye. and then you compare that to somebody who spent a year and a half or more, multiple subpoenas, multiple requests, and he is caught on videotape moving documents? i mean, it is obstruction of justice. it is deceitful. host: many republicans are questioning why, when these documents were discovered before the midterm elections, why the discovery was not revealed to the public until after the midterm elections. kevin mccarthy is speaker of the house with the republican-controlled chamber and saying they will investigate. here is more from his news conference. [video clip] >> not once but we are finding

it in two different locations, classified information out in the open. it goes to prove -- and we are finding out now that this was discovered before the election. another faux pas by the biden administration. but treating law differently based on your political beliefs. treats president trump one way but president biden a whole different way. that is why we had to provide a new entity from our church style to look after the weaponization of what has gone on. if you want equal playing of the law to all americans, i think congress has to investigate. here is an individual in office more than four years. he sat on 60 minutes that was so concerned about president trump's document locked and now we find, as vice president, keeping it for years in different locations. i do not think any american believes justice should not be equal to all.

whatever comes out that the utilized to try to falsify it, tried to have different standards for their own beliefs, that does not work in america. host: from capitol hill, the speaker of the house. you can also watch his news conference on demand on c-span.org. tracy in cleveland, oklahoma, republican. caller: yes, ma'am. i believe democrats have done things illegally. they hide things they know before elections and they hide things from the american people. it seems they are in control of the media and they do not let the media tell what is actually

going on. the media tells only what they want them to. i also think that joe biden is in the pocket of the chinese government. he took millions of dollars from the chinese. the laptop that hunter has and was known about before the presidential election, that would have had an effect on it, and had proof of a lot of this. this stuff should come out. mr. biden has an agenda that is part of the chinese government to actually destroy this country. look at our southern border. we are the only country in the world that does not even have control of our border.

this is insane. host: i will go to aaron, in a text, as independent voter, i ask how vice president was able to leave the white house with classified materials? not just mr. joe biden, who else had knowledge biden had such documents? michigan, david is calling on the line for democrats. david, your turn. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i am glad to hear what the other people said because i thought i was the only one thinking it. i think the point is not republicans and democrats or biden and trump. there is plenty of cases to be made on both sides. but the real question is, who is in charge of documents and how are they getting out? the second question in my head is, who else has these if it is that loosey-goosey?

which senator has them? who else has them? i think that is the point. we should be investigating ourselves and ask, who is managing the documents and how can we fix it? i cannot believe it. this is the first time i ever got in. host: i am glad you did so. thank you for that suggestion. perhaps that is something we can dig into on "washington journal ." have a guest talk about the archives procedures, as one of our other viewers said. we would like a review of that to see how they go about deciding which documents they want back after a president, or vice president, leaves office. hank in south carolina, republican. caller: thanks.

thanks for taking my call. i cannot understand what a vice president is doing with classified documents. i was under the impression the vice president was not even in the white house that much. [laughs] why did they wait? they knew this before the midterm election. why did they wait until after to say something? thank you. host: ok. elle in kentucky, independent. caller: hi. thank you for taking my call. i wanted to say a few things. i am an immigrant to this country. i came in 1995 and this is the worst i have seen the state of the union. i have been watching and participating in politics since i arrived and this is disappointing. my major concern is that there

is no right or wrong, in a way. both things can be right. there could have been money from the chinese -- the chinese have been investing in this country and all over the world for many years. people are just catching on to it. it is linked to russia because the chinese communist party has been linked to russia for centuries. separating out russia from china, you know, it is neither here nor there. at the end of the day, both things can be true. we need better accountability for the documents, so let's look at that archival process. but it is rather convenient to me to say these documents were found and to assume that biden took them. i think to find them in two places, the same way it happened

with trump, and to conveniently say, this is not a fair process. i think the whole thing smells fishy. host: cnn wrote about this online. this is what they said. this happened in the closing days of the obama administration. here is a quote from one of the aides that was part of the packing. that made the process very disjointed. not because people were not capable, because it was not some straight line out of the white house. a source with direct knowledge said. the day to day on mystic celebrated. people were insuring he still had what he needed and trying to pack in moments he was not there. the packing was carried out by members of his staff, including lower-level aids and assistance that were provided boxes to store the vice president's things.

it says classified documents ended up in folders that said "vp personal." you can find more on cnn.com. kathleen in new york, democratic caller. caller: hi, greta. good morning. you are awesome. i love you. a few callers back this woman knows exactly what time it is. i truly believe biden was set up. hello! it could be laughable if it was not so sad. sad because biden is nothing like trump. laughable because look how it went down. no, kevin mccarthy. no kevin mccarthy until trump ripped them a new you know what and that he was elected? and this is when all of this comes out? host: can i ask you, why jump to

the conclusion it is a conspiracy? caller: because trump is mentally unstable. he still keeps talking about the big lie. he is corrupt and he is evil. he wants to bring biden down. are you kidding me? everybody has a price. mccarthy, jordan, the people in the republican in congress. they were part of that insurrection, honey. now that he is elected house speaker this news comes out? all of these trump -- not trump -- mccarthy you have been showing, trump, trump, trump. he keeps talking trump. come on. host: some may wonder or think listening to you you have made the conclusion because it fits

the narrative that you have about the former and current president. it happens on the other seida's well. -- other side as well. what do you think if people are at home saying, that fits her narrative so that is why she is concluding it is a conspiracy? caller: because trump is mentally unstable. he is narcissistic. it is all about him. he wants to bring biden down. host: john in d.c., republican. caller: good morning, greta. trump derangement syndrome is an incurable disease, but anyway, my question is, are these documents originals or copies? if they are copies, how many copies are scattered around? shouldn't the special prosecutors seize all of biden's

computers and scrub them for more information? host: mike in indiana, independent. caller: i do not understand. are you there? host: yes. you do not understand. caller: why common sense -- i do not blame trump or biden. i blame the justice department. they are the ones that let them take the documents. there should be a law that a top-five is responsible. they get put in jail for 20 years and, you know, just like these investigations, they are a waste of money. that trump insurrection, that is a waste of money. all they had to say was there will be no gosh darn people at

the white house for two weeks before or two weeks after. host: i will leave it at that because we are going to take a break. when we come back we are joined by frank clemente of americans for tax fairness and grover norquist of americans for tax reform. they are going to discuss the future of tax policy under the republican-controlled house and the party's vote to rescind funding for the irs. later, valentina sader of the atlantic council explains the riots that unfolded in brazil earlier this week and the parallels to the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol. ♪ >> there are a lot of places to political information. only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or

where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word forward. if it happens here or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. ♪ >> be up-to-date in the latest in publishing with book tv's podcast about books with current nonfiction book releases plus bestseller lists, as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews. you can find about books on c-span now, our free mobile app or wherever you get your pots.dc ♪ >> on august 24, 19 55, 14-year-old emmett till visited ryan's grocery and meat market in mississippihere he was accused with flirting with a

white clerk. his cousin, wheeler parker junior, was with him when the incident happened and four days later when emmett till was abducted. sunday on q and, reverend parker , co-authorf few days for love trouble, recounts the event that led to emmett till's murder and efforts to it justice for his late cousin. >> nothing happened while i was in there. shortly after, he was 14 and i was about 16. came in with him. nothing happened while they were in the store. they came out of the store. once they our -- they were out of the store a short time later, ms. bryan send comes out of the store. never had a bowl day in his life. he had those laughs. he did that because you had to

have the atmosphere in 1955. in mississippi. a black man whistling to white woman. >> reverend wheeler parker junior with his book, a few days out of trouble. you can listen to q and a on our podcast on our free c-span now app. ♪ ♪ >> start this year off shopping our new year's sale going on now at c-span shop.org, c-span's online store. shop now through monday and save up to 20% on our collection o c-span sweatshirts, like its and more. there is something for every c-span fan. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. scan the code on the right to shop air deals through monday on c-span shop.org.

♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back for a discussion on tax policy in a republican-controlled house. joining us is frank clemente, the executive director of americans for tax fairness. we also have grover norquist, the president for americans for tax reform. frank, let me begin with you. actually, i will have both of you answer this question and show our viewers what the house passed this week. the bill on irs funding. it would rescind 45 point $6 billion for tax enforcement. it rescinds $25.3 billion for operations support and leaves in place 3.2illion dollars for taxpayer services, $4.7 billion for modernizing the irs dated systems and technology. frank, your response to this bill. guest: first of all, it repeals

nine dollars for every $10 passed last year. last year, congress passed a $80 billion 10 year package. most importantly, to give it the staff it needs to go after wealthy and corporate tax cheats. we lose $600 billion a year in taxes that are legally owed. much of it because we do not have agents and audits at the irs to enforce the law, to make sure people are complying with the law. this house bill, the gop, the first bill they voted on is to repeal most of that new funding to go after tax chiefs. we figure that is really wrong. host: grover norquist, your thoughts on the bill. guest: a lot of people claimed this is to help you, only 25% of

the time when people call into the irs, are they likely to get them to pick up the phone. 53% of irs folks to not work in the office. they are at home. covid is over, but they put in their labor contracts they do not want to back to the office. the other 50% when we asked how often they come into the office, the answer is sometimes. they will not tell you how any people come and how often. the challenge they have on not answering people's questions, not answering the phones are not knowing what to do, their own investigators found that in utah alone, in one place, they destroyed 30 million documents. that is a stack to miles high if you put them on top of the other. when asked by congress, why did you do it and how did you destroy them, they said, we will not tell you because it will reflect lordly -- poorly on us. in one office in utah, you know

what happened to 30 million documents because i got caught that they destroyed they are calling out and saying you did not send your stuff done. 30 million documents destroyed, they do not know what that is and cannot tell you what it is. they cannot tell you how they destroyed it. they are turning around and saying, we should have more documents. they want the 1099 k's, which would be tens of millions of more paper documents flying around not being reported being destroyed by irs agents maybe. it got caught because internal investigators happened to get leaked to. we do not know about the other places. we have a problematically run agency. obama's appointed head -- when asked about this said, i am not sure you will be able to efficiently use that money in 2021. that is a lot of money. here you have obama's guy who

ran the agency saying, there is no way to intelligently spend this money. what republicans are saying, this is an agency that needs to be reformed, not throw money at. host: i want to have frank respond. i want to add to it from the debate, republican representative adrian smith of nebraska, who spearheaded the legislation. here is his argument on the floor. [video clip] >> the primary purpose of that funding is hiring auditors and support staff to expand irs capacity. not just audits on wealthy americans. with expanded capacity, irs can bring in more revenue by auditing lower and middle income families and small businesses. families and small businesses are struggling under the weight of record inflation and supply chain shortages. small businesses are struggling to find workers at any wage. the overwhelming majority of americans, about 85%, follow the

law and pay their taxes. the last they need is irs agents knocking on their doors to conduct audits. exponentially more american -- more americans, requiring online payment services to report them when they split a dinner check with friends or pay their babysitter after a night out. target them using 87,000 new irs employees. americans deserve to know their government is working for them, not against them. host: frank clemente. guest: the irs agents, that has been debunked by every fact checking, independent fact checking organization in the country. republicans use that in the last election campaign to run tens of millions of dollars in ads to defeat, democrats, claiming they were putting 87,000 irs auditors on the street to go after middle

class and lower income folks. it is not true. every independent fact checking agency said it was a pacifier type of claim. somebody on the floor can make that speech, but it is not true. how often they make that speech, it is not true. the fact is, since 1991, 30 years ago, the irs staffing level is down by 40,000 people. 40,000 people. at the time when we put a lot more burden on the agency, there is a lot more taxpayers than there were back then, you cannot exist in the modern age. john coston, former irs commissioner, former democrat, we have former irs commissioner's who are republicans. they have signed letters to congress, pass this legislation passed last year. the agency needs this money to get in the modern age to be able to do a great job of helping

taxpayers get their refunds on time and answer the phones. one out of 10 phone calls gets answer now. one out of 10. i spent an hour on the phone trying to find out what happened in terms of the letter i sent a year ago. i just gave up. we cannot run a agency like that. it is the auditing. we are losing $600 billion a year because wealthy people are avoiding taxes. two thirds of taxes being avoided -- legally being avoided. there is a law that says you ought to pay it and they are not paying it. two thirds of those taxes are owed to the people in the top 10% of the income. if the irs audits to many people who are low income, -- they do not have the lawyers to protect them. the irs is going up to the low hanging fruit. the only way to go after the big

fat cats like president trump, the only way they can do that is higher a lot more people. it takes four to five years to train an auditor to go after a wealthy person. you need people. you need bodies to throw at that. host: grover, i want youtubers -- to respond to the resident yesterday. he was asked talking about the irs and tax policy. >> [video clip] like many americans, i was disappointed the first will republicans in the house of representatives passed was to help wealthy people in big corporations cheat on their taxes at the expense of ordinary, middle-class taxpayers. and would add $114 billion to the deficit. their very first bill. house republicans cannot tame down inflation. they did not say if elected, their plan was to make inflation worse. house republicans introduced another bill, blocking action that would help lower gas prices and help consumers. on top of that, house

republicans are preparing to vote on a national sales tax bill. that is a great idea. it would raise taxes on the middle class by taxing thousands of everyday items of groceries to gas while cutting taxes for the wealthiest americans. if i am not mistaken, it would eliminate the irs. feels good, except all going to be sales tax. go home and tell your moms. they are going to be excited about that. come on. is this how house republicans are starting a new term, cutting taxes or billionaires? raising taxes for working families? making inflation worse? let me be very clear. if any of these bills make it to my desk, i will veto them. i will flat veto them. i am ready to work with republicans, not this kind of stuff. host: grover norquist. guest: that is the president and modern democratic party's

position on class warfare and saying they are going to tax rich people. bloomberg was in one of these discussions where the irs was talking about what they are going to do and reported in 2020 they said they would increase audits on small businesses. they say one thing, biden wants to say it is going to be rich people. when they say where are you going with the money, it is small businesses and ramp up audits of that, mom and pop stores, things like that. they say that in private. it gets reported by bloomberg, which causes problems. you have a problem with the irs lack of privacy. you have people in the irs give audit data to a left-wing group, pro-republic. these were rich people. they were supposed to find as they left always says, they are billionaires and didn't pay taxes. they didn't find that. they dropped that the same day democrats wanted the tax bill.

stolen personal data illegally, five years and jail, even to look at the stuff and show it to somebody because they were supposed to have privacy at the irs. thousands of documents that, only if you had access to that information -- they didn't just break into one lawyers list and steal their data or taxes for five people, they have access to everyone. thousands of people. they pulled that out illegally. no one at the irs has been punished for this. they keep telling congress we are investigating it. that was a year and a half ago. it is a secret. they will not tell congress what is going on. what biden is afraid of, they will be going after the irs and saying, no, no. you can tell the democrats, we are going to look for it and not find anything after a year and a half. when republicans control the house, we will insist on getting the information. you have a legal stealing of people's data and information, privacy. if they can do it to mr.

bloomberg himself, they can do it to you. he's got more lawyers than you. they can spit at him, they can spit at you. they can steal his data and handed out to left-wing groups to go out and attack them. they didn't find these jillions of dollars. they found the opposite, even trump's taxes. he paid the taxes he owed. this myth there is free money out there if we -- high income people is not true. we know that because the stolen data from the irs that pro-republic has, why do you have democratic senators and people stealing from the irs working together at a press conference the same day? this attack, going after people's privacy, not just high income people. they do it to individuals who make contributions somebody doesn't like and they get attacked. host: let's get to calls. stephen, tennessee. democratic collar. caller: good morning, greta.

always nice to talk to you. i have a couple comments and a question. back in the 1990's, i was in the real estate business. i worked with two or three homebuilders. everyone of them cheated on their taxes. it is the american way. it is wrong. second thing is, if you are not cheating and you get audited, there is no issue there. if you are being unfair, -- if you are being fair, you will not have problems. i have a question for mr. norquist. i know that years ago, in order to get funding from you, be senators or congressmen had to sign a pledge that they would not raise taxes. is that still true, and thank you so much. guest: thank you for bringing up

the taxpayer protection pledge. we share with everybody who runs for president, house and senate. house republicans raised the pledge to raise taxes. we had some democrats sign the pledge. the biggest difference between the two parties is, the republicans cut taxes when they get in office and democrats raise them. they say they only raise them on rich people. the tax increase democrats passed last year supposed to fight inflation by raising taxes, they raised taxes on crude oil. they raised taxes on natural gas, on coal, which is everybody's energy. they razzed -- raised taxes on everybody's life savings and for one case by taxing the value of what they save money and stocks and bonds and so on. they say they only tax the rich people, but they have not sentenced -- and if the sentence. they tax them first. they tax energy, the big efforts on energy.

my group doesn't make contributions to candidates. we simply say we would like, if you want to make the commitment to american people, sign the pledge to the american people. not as obama said, but to the american people. we will help publicize that so people know who has taken the pledge and who has not. we put it on the website and let people make their own decisions on how they vote. that was the question you had for me. host: we go to nikki in new york. independent. caller: good morning, folks. i have a comment and question for mr. norquist. mr. norquist, i have seen you on fox news that i can recall. you are a spreader, in my opinion, of disinformation and propaganda. we have far fewer agents than we

had in the 1950's. this is 50 years later, and you do not want to find people who work in the republican party, donald trump's taxes. you did not audit him. my comment, sir, is -- isn't it true that any bills that come out of the house go to the senate to die? that is all. they go to the senate and they will die there. thank you very much. guest: well, for a bill to become a law, the republicans have passed a bill undoing much of what the democrats have tried to do in getting more small businesses audited. as the irs tells themselves and you reading their material, they are not going to get the money from rich people. they are going to get it from small businesses. they say it privately please -- privately and bloomberg expose

that. you have to pass a bill in the house and senate. the president has to sign it for it to become a law. every democrat voted for getting more money to the irs. they gave them $400 million more for the irs internal people who look at their books. they cannot show they use their cars forward. they do not do it, you and i have to do it if you have a small business and you have a car for your company. you have to show mile by mile how you use it for the business, not personally. the irs does not do that themselves. irs agents do not do that. they have more cars than people are supposed to be using the cars. the government just gave them 400 million more dollars to buy more cars even though inspectors say they've got more than they can use or can justify and do not justify. you are in trouble if you get audited and you do not prove how you use your car for your business. the government is not doing

that. they are giving them more money for offices when half the people at the irs do not go to the irs -- do not go to the office and the other half go there other time. the money their union contributes goes to democrats. the irs is a one-party political operation that funds the democratic party through its union, but also through 350 hours of work for government employees we all pay for. they are supposed to be working for the irs. under their contract, they take 350 hours out and use that to work with the democratic party and for democratic candidates and they use government offices to do politics. this is not something we should be subsidizing with your tax dollars. host: frank, i will have you jump in your reaction. guest: grover is saying all sorts of stuff here. this is not what the issue is about. i do not know what anybody is

saying is accurate. guest: these are government studies, sir. guest: they are losing $600 billion a year. $600 billion, with a b. 700 -- trillion over years because people with taxes are not paying them. you are basically crying uncle and let the irs not have the resources it needs to go after these people. essentially, it is most of this money is not being paid by rich people. and by big corporations. you keep talking about small businesses. i want the listeners, the viewers ought to note there are a lot of small businesses that are million, 10 million, bigger businesses. this is not go after mom and pop stores like you claim. this is money to go after wealthy people. donald trump is a billionaire.

he gets his money from his trump organization. that, by your definition, is a small business. he has about 500 entities under his trump organization. the reason the irs cannot audit it, who is going to audit 500 entities? the irs under the republicans. under trump himself, when he had the government and the irs under him, his taxes were supposed to be audited every year. a put one guy -- not even in the first two years. by the 30 are, they put one guy to look at his tax returns. the guy cried uncle, threw up his hands and said it was too complicated and said he could not figure it out. they asked trump's accounts to verify the accuracy of these statements. we are trying to fix this kind of stuff. you through out a lot of junk. let's get to the heart of it. rich people and corporations are avoiding hundreds of billions of

dollars a year in taxes. we want a fair share tax system. to get that, you got to have a strong irs. when it comes to the inflation reduction act that passed last year, there are three ways revenue is raised. one, put a 15% -- tax on corporations. only the top 100 or so corporations are going to pay it, that is where most of the money is coming from. two, put a one percentage point on stock buybacks. stock buybacks are when rich corporations buy back their own stock to jack up the prices of that stock. most of that stock is owned by rich people and the ceos. they will pack -- pay more taxes on the stock buyback. the third way, the $80 billion they gave to the irs to give to rich and corporate tax cheats. that is what this is about. i am sorry, you do not want any more money going to the government. that means when we've got big deficits, if you want to do anything, we are going to have

to cut the kinds of programs folks who are listening do not want cut. social security, medicaid. that is your strategy, your theory, your government leads us to. all those programs are going to have to be massively cut. host: i'm going to have you respond, grover. frank, respond to this viewer first. sue in ohio, we do not need more irs employees to investigate which taxes. congress needs more laws dealing with the rich, but they will not because it would affect them. guest: i absolutely agree, we need to change the tax laws. we need to create a much more fair tax system. we put out a report, you can raise $10 trillion over 10 years if we tax the rich rarely and tax corporations fairly. billionaires, for crying out loud. we cannot get a billionaire tax -- it is our top priority.

there are a lot of billionaires out there. mike bloomberg, billionaires are not paying anything in taxes. zero. trump in two years, 2016, 2017, paid $750 in taxes. that is virtually less than all taxpayers pay a year. most pay more than that. we need to close loopholes. we need to have a billionaires income tax. we need to make sure most rich people make their income off their wealth, off the stock a hold, the businesses they own, the real estate they invest in. when they sell those businesses or their stocks, they are paying a 20% tax rate. whereas on wages, salaries, it is a 37% tax raise. there is no rationale why folks who make money off their assets and wealth are paying almost half as much as somebody who is making money from wages and salaries. that has got to go. we have huge offshore tax

loopholes to close because the multinational corporations, drug companies, high-tech companies are so powerful, so influential in congress. if we closed some of those loopholes, which would prevent them from shifting their profits offshore because when you shift it offshore, they pay a fraction of the tax rate because it is going into a tax -- the incentive to shift jobs offshore cuts lower tax rates offshore. we've got to close those loopholes. i agree with the caller. that is a very important focus, the main focus of my organization is to close those loopholes and pass their tax laws. in terms of members of congress do not want to do it, frankly, democrats who vote to close these loopholes and vote for legislation that would raise the corporate tax rate from 21% to

28%, they close the offshore tax loopholes. if the republican party did it against the line, a lot of it because of grover's pledge that they all signed which was not to raise taxes. that is where we are stuck. really, i think it has less to do with personal, financial circumstances. in some case, it does. ron johnson, senator for wisconsin, he himself -- the trumpet tax cuts when it was debated in 2017, he held up the law for passing because he wanted a tax break unique to business owners. he personally benefited from it. most importantly, he had two business owners from estate. billionaire business owners. by getting that loophole protected, it insured they raised -- they saved $40 million a year from forward.

they funded his campaign, his reelection campaign in 2000 16 and funded it again last year. there is that stuff that happens in congress and it is wrong. most folks are doing this for ideological reasons. host: interesting debate between the two of you. our viewers want to join in. stephen, california, republican. caller: i think a lot of times, it is the almighty tax dollar. everybody once to hold what they owe in taxes, whether republican or democrat. i do not want to take sides on this. i, too, was -- i paid my taxes as a worker. i was what you call a "middle-class person." there is no such thing as middle-class, there is me, you and donald trump. and bill gates. do they pay as much taxes as the little guy? obviously, everybody tries to get over on their taxes.

accountability needs to start somewhere, either with the judicial system or a fair tax, how much every person makes a year. host: grover norquist. guest: it is true. the modern republican party is the party that will not raise your taxes since 1994. 96% of republicans took the pledge never to raise taxes. they have cap that ever since. taxes have only been raised when democrats have the house, senate and presidency. they did that in the first two years of clinton. he was only going to tax the first -- the 2%. the democrats always promised only to tax rich people, but then they tax everybody. you saw this with obama. i am only going to top -- tax the top 1%. most families do not pay taxes under $250,000 a year.

there were taxes in obamacare that went after middle and lower income people and energy taxes. biden has the same thing. one of the things that is important to keep in mind, some people like hide and are older -- biden are older. his memory is in the early 1960's when maybe 10% of americans shared stock director. today because of individual retirement accounts and or one case, 60% of americans have their life savings in a 401(k) or ir way. -- ira. they are talking about looting your retirement. you have seen the collapse in the value of your 401(k), your --somehow these taxes on companies are taxes on your retirement. they know that. they do not care. they think you are stupid. they say, if we tax general motors, those of you with general motors stop in your

401(k), your pension, yes, you, it makes you poor were -- poo rer. listen carefully. when you tax the grocery store, who pays that? when you go in and buy carrots and cereal and milk, you pay the corporate income tax and property tax of that store. even liberals understand the vast majority of the corporate income tax is individual -- hits individuals directly through lower wages, higher prices, inflation and higher prices. this is a very, very key issue and we should keep in mind when politicians say they will only tax rich people. every time they have said that, clinton, obama, biden, they lied and went after you. it is nice of them to say that. it is selfish. that is just to fool you. people are tired of being fooled. host: wisconsin, democratic

color. good morning to you. caller: thank you. i have a question. most people, 50% of people in this country paid no taxes, especially in a lot of red states for a simple reason that their wages have been so suppressed the last years. about their iras and stuff, i beg to differ. 60% of them people have them, the only income they have is their social security, which they do not have to pay taxes on in the first place. it is disingenuous about the irs. the irs is not going to go after these people. he knows this, i know that. they are going to go after the talks -- top taxpayers. another thing. host: go ahead, real quick. caller: these red states, a lot of them are getting far more back from the federal government .

in arkansas, it is four dollars for every dollar they sent to the federal government. for every dollar they send, they get four back. i do not hear anybody crying about that. if you would be willing to spend a dollar in, a dollar out. thank you. host: frank clemente. guest: the callers, one thing i would like to point out, most people pay the taxes they owe because most people are getting wage income. your employer is taking your taxes out. if the folks not getting wage income, the business owners and small business owners, you can be a small business owner but the a rich, small business. that is where the money is. a lot of it is in the kinds of organizations trump has, called pass-through businesses. business doesn't pay the taxes. the taxes are paid by the owners

of the businesses. they do not do wage, w-2. there is not where the federal -- is paid up. that is an honor system. that is why you need auditing to make sure these people are being honest about it. the caller noted who has stock. 90% of the stock is owned by the richest 10% of people in america. folks -- most folks who have -- the class of folks grover is talking about, they may be at $7,000 or $10,000 in their ira or 401(k). it is not something they can retire on. they are dependent on the social security system, the medicare system there to pay their bills. or medicaid that will pay their retirement, that is going to pay for your nursing home if you need it. we have an explosion.

the baby boom generation is retiring. a chief number of people are retiring every year. costs are going up on things like social security, medicare and medicaid because that is where the population is exploding. they have big medical costs. very big prescription drug costs. we know how big a price gouge is on prescription drugs. the only way we are going to be able to take care of -- i am a baby boomer. in retirement, is if we raise revenue to do it. republicans want to cut it. president biden a while ago was talking about the fair tax act. kevin mccarthy, to get his speakership, one of the things he agreed to do was put up for a vote the fair tax act. the right wing, crazy tax proposal to basically get rid of the income tax and enact a

national sales tax that would be at least 30%. some expert analysis says it will be more like 50% or more. that is how we would be funding the government in the future. the way the tax system works now, it is lower income people who pay more in sales taxes as percentage of their income then they pay in income taxes. i do not know if grover's organization supports this fair tax, but republicans are putting this up for a vote to double down on how much more lower income in middle income folks are paying taxes than the rich. the rich do not pay that much in sales taxes as they should of their income. it is the low income folks that pay the bigger share. host: grover norquist. guest: the idea this fair tax idea that we should ship from an income tax to a sales tax is one of the stupider ideas that has been put forward. it is nonsense. the concern is that we tax

people saving in investment too much. which is to, we want saving and investment to flow in the united states. we saw -- when you cut the corporate income tax from highest in the world. we had the highest corporate income tax under obama in the world. 35%. french -- france was at 25%. why do we have trouble competing with china, we were taking 35% of earnings of american companies and they were at 15%. we shoot ourselves in the food. that was brought down to 21%. the medium in -- the corporate income tax damages people's wages and you saw it when we cut the corporate income tax and wages shot up. we had their week -- the reaction to covid, which shut everything down.

we have a lower corporate income tax, tony one -- 21%. we have a serious challenge now in that, the government is spending too much money. it is spending poorly. the irs is part of that. one of the things i try to walk through, they do not tech your privacy. -- protect your privacy. they are legally required to do a study every year. going back to 1998, i served on the commission for structuring the irs. the things coming up now, the incompetence, the poorly run management, the billions they wasted on computer programs that have never worked, this is a sad situation where you go every five and 10 years. we need more money, they get the money, it did not work. the new york times and washington post are going, once again, the whole thing collapsed.

this is a very poorly run operation that needs to be reformed internally. you have probably heard the ridiculous story. 4600 guns, 3000 pistols, shotguns. 15 fully at a medic weapons. -- automatic weapons. what do they do with that? one of the things that came out in the hearings -- what is important is this discussion. we are going to have hearings about the irs and this idea perhaps they should given more money because that ends up with labor union dues which goes to the democratic party. the democrats are not fooled. they know when they get $80 billion to the irs, a certain amount of that comes back in free time of workers not doing their job for the government working for the democratic party through the union or money that is given. these are real challenges. they are required by the law that was passed to every year,

do a study of how complicated it is and ways to make it less cop located. they have done it twice. they are not doing things they are required to do to luke -- look after your interests by law. why throw more money at that? host: steve in illinois. independent. caller: what this guy just said, there is too much -- in the federal level. state and federal. what scares me, this inflation is a tax. you are setting $30 to $35 trillion -- in new york city, the account is running all the time. we are going to destroy our children, our children -- gran dchildren, our great rand children. if you and i did not pay our taxes or have enough income, we are living on the street.

correct? correct. what they are doing, they are spending more money than the average working man in this country could afford to pay. host: all right. i'm going to hear from -- next in california. republican. caller: hi. i would like to say on my behalf as, american, republican. what retirement, what 401k. i am getting poorer every year. grover norquist, you have been known to say that the government should be small enough to take it to the bathwater and drown it in the tub. i do not see that happening at all. in fact, our constitutional rights are being taken away. look at the department of education that is huge, probably huger than the irs. 45 million people are without

encryption protections. that is hypocritical. shame on you. but the bankruptcy protections back in student loans. stop destroying our children. this is not student loan cancellation. this is a constitutional right. the department of education and the irs is poorly run. i pay 100 times more taxes than donald trump did. host: i'm going to leave it there. final thoughts on both of our guests. grover norquist, go ahead. guest: we are looking at a irs not protecting your privacy, politicized. for three years, when the tea party movement that got going after obama became president and started raising taxes, the irs did not allow conservative groups -- one conservative group in three years was allowed to incorporate so they could set up a political group and say we want to talk about this. you have the irs, which 95% to 100% of their contributions to the union go to democrats,

deciding to shut down a political movement in america by making it illegal for them to incorporate and for three years, it was not done. they hid it. the woman who organized it was given a bonus who walked out the door, even though she apologized for what she did. the irs is going to make political decisions to attack people. the one thing that was said that i think people should focus on, if you pay your taxes and you are honest, you should not fear a audit. a small business or large business or individual who is audited by the government, and you know one of these people, talk to them. maybe you have been there. that takes thousands and thousands of dollars out of your life to pay lawyer to get going. it takes a lot of days and weeks and months out of your life to deal with that. an audit of somebody who has no problems on their taxes is still an incredible sink on your life. the irs auditing someone does tremendous damage to that person or business they run or work

for. the irs does not need more money. they need reform. they need to get people into work and answer phone calls, not ask for more money while they are staying home and not answering your phone calls. host: frank clemente. guest: the debate over the irs and whether to give it more money or not to give it more money is -- it represents the larger debate happening in our country. it has been happening for years. that is fundamentally, which side are you on? most of your listeners today are on the side of average working people. who are struggling to make ends meet. cannot afford health care, maybe. have student debt problems. i think they want a government who works for them, is on their side and is not on the side of corporations and the rich. not tilting the scale on the side of corporations and the rich.

the irs, we know we have -- a not fair tax system. it is under taxing big corporations. some of them pay no taxes a year. a amazon can go years not paying a dime in taxes. more less than one person on this call today. we've got to rebalance things. we have to have a system where the economy is working for all of us. that means having a tax system that works for all of us, not one favoring the rich and corporations. it is the same for the tax collector, the internal revenue service needs to be working on behalf of average american and not letting people like donald trump go unaudited, pay nothing in taxes some years, pay $750 some years. it is both the irs if they can collect the taxes that are out, but fix and close loopholes, make operations pay what they should be paying, make

billionaires -- you've got billionaires paying nothing in taxes some years. that is the big battle. it gets obscured by this fight over the irs. the irs is a microcosm of the bigger fight. i asked your listeners, are you on the side of average folks playing by the rules, or are you on the side of the rich corporations who are not playing by the rules? host: our viewers can learn more about americans or tax fairness. go to americans for tax fairness.org. go to learn about americans for tax reform at americans for atr. we appreciate you two coming on the program together and having this debate together so our viewers can hear both sides. thank you both very much. guest: thank you, take care. host: when we come back, we will be joined by valentina sader, who joins us to discuss the riots that overtook brazil's

capital earlier this week. we will be right back. ♪ >> preorder your copy of the congressional directory for the 118th congress. get your access to federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member, important information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governments. scan the code on the right to preorder your copy today for spring delivery. every purchase helps support our nonprofit organizations at c-spanshop.org. ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with today's biggest events with live streams and for proceedings and hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events, the court, campaigns and more from the world of politics

all at your fingertips. stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span's tv networks and c-span radio. plus, a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. downloaded for free today. c-span now. your front row seat to washington. anytime, anywhere. ♪ >> book tv every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors is cussing their latest nonfiction books. at 9:15 pm, ph gramm of texas and jn early take a critical look at economic disparities in the united states and how they are measured wittheir book, the midst of american inequality. at 10:00 p.m. on afterwards, talkshow host armstrong williams and civil rights attorney ben croft, co-authors of crisis in the classroom share their

concerns about the education system in america. they are interviewed by politico edge acute -- education editor. watch book tv every sunday on c-span2. find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at book tv.org. ♪ >> there are a lot of places to get political information. but, only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here or here or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us this morning as valentina sader, with the atlantic council, the director

for latin american center associates. for the latin american center, the associate director. there we go. joining us to talk about brazil's riots we saw. let's begin with what happened, and was this unprecedented? guest: good morning, greta. good morning to everyone. thank you for having me today. yes, sunday we saw brazil, the capital city be attacked and have demonstrations, riots that were very violent and invaded both congress, as well as the presidential palace and the supreme court in bra there was destruction. no one was injured, cessarily. there was some violent attacks agjourlists and some police officers. was sunday, so congress was not in session. however, the destruction in terms of the federal state was massive.

it was not necessarily a surprise, but it was definitely something that we were all looking into of the potential of these january 6-like events happening in brazil, the lead up to the election day on october 2022 as well as around the inauguration on january 1. host: give us the history of democracy in brazil and the state of it leading up to sunday. guest: democracy in brazil is young, but resilient. this was proven in the democratic institution, proven to be resilient in terms of how they responded to these riots on sunday. we saw questioning over the stability of the democracy of brazil. we saw questioning over the intellectual property, and to let joel processing to lead up

to the campaign -- intellectual processing lead up to the campaign in 2022. this has put a lot of doubt into the process itself. having said that, the democratic institution in brazil were strong and quick to respond and unite in terms of the narrative that they were putting out and condemning these riots, condemning these violent attacks in brasilia, making sure there was a strong unity in terms of the statement being put out. in a way, democracy has been cracked. this is a sensitive moment for brazilian democracy, but i believe it will come out stronger than ever. host: what were the protesters demanding or arguing, and what was the response like? guest: we saw mainly these protesters really, they are former presidential supporters, but from a extreme side.

they have been protesting everything when the electoral announcements were announced. they had been in front of military headquarters across the country, not only brasilia, but across the country. there was movement for them to go to brasilia for a bigger protest on january 8. they were protesting in favor of bolsonaro, not believing the results of the election and requesting grievances, but nothing to justify the violence we saw take place. in terms of the response that we saw, they were able to overcome police barriers and go inside the headquarters of the three branches of government. congress, the presidential palace and supreme court. we saw a delay in terms of how the response was from the police

and the federal district police and to control the situation to the point that president lula had to request security and the federal district. host: we want our viewers to join in on this conversation. for democrats, (202) 748-8000. for republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, it is (202) 748-8002. john in michigan, your first. caller: good morning. i think the riots are terrible and remind me of january 6. i see your test is from the atlantic council, i feel like that is a frequent institution appearing on c-span. i am not a fan of -- i have never seen a war i didn't like, aside from the brazil issue, the atlantic council is to overrepresented and it is to warmongering. thank you. host: we will take that criticism.

valentina stated, his first thought was his comparison to january 6. guest: john, thank you for your comment on january 6. i think there is a oversimplification in how people have been comparing january 6 in the united states to january 8 in brazil. there are parallels that could be drawn from both of those rights, but at the same time, there are key differences that must be taken into consideration. one is the fact that both -- bolsonaro was not present at the time it took place. he was not in the country when that happened. i wanted to point out on january 6, we saw the invasion of congress. in the case of brazil, we saw the invasion of the three headquarters, the three buildings of government. the congress, the presidential palace and supreme court.

in the case of brazil, this took leigh's on sunday. congss was not in session. it was not a harmful threat to the lives of policymakers themselves. president lula t athe time in the state. there are key differences to be pointed out there, especially on the responses. when we see this potential next step tha we will see, in a way, this has not become necessarily a partisan issue or politicized or polarizing in brazil. we have seen a unity in terms of the heads of both congress and judiciary and executives and having this pro-democracy unity and narrative, being able to condemn those having politicians from across the political set -- political spectrum in brazil. the vocal and condemn these attacks. host: valentina sader, what

about language used by protesters on january 6 and language used by those in brazil, the protesters there? guest: we see similarities, especially in the sense of -- i watched multiple videos of what happened january 8 in brazil. mainly, they had this urgency of, this is our last chance. had this indication of being destructive, which i think is also something to point out. obviously, there are some similarities in terms of how these protests, these riots were organized. through social media platforms, for example. in brazil, we knew these were happening. the calls for the protest, they called for people to come and protest were public. we saw them on social media. we saw them on whatsapp groups, telegram and the republic. there was enough time for brazilian police to organize and

make sure this did not culminate in what ended up happening in brazil. host: aztec tweets and, how many months, weeks, years has the protests have gone on before there was any violence? wasn't the violence by the state prior to any major violence by protesters? guest: in a way, the protest has been happening for a while. there were instances of protesting across brazil. like i mentioned at the beginning. especially, we have seen these protests happening at military headquarters across the country, particularly after the results of the second round of elections. which was in late october 2022. they were not violent then, there was no violence from the police at least that i am aware of. no instances of violence from police to those in headquarters.

what we saw in these attacks in brasilia, we saw the police taking a stronger -- in terms of controlling the situation. the following day, we saw the police going in front of a military headquarters, particularly in brasilia where the federal government understanding the beginning of the organizing for these attacks ended up happening. in a way, to dismantle that group in particular. many people were arrested. guest: we saw the police going into -- front friend of the military headquarters. the federal government understands from the beginning of the organizing for these attacks and of happening. we know to dismantle that group

in particular. many people were arrested. we will see what the next steps will be. host: joe wants to know, how do you know the former president of brazil had nothing to do with the riot? guest: we do not. it is what we will end up seeing in the investigation. there is an investigation put in place to see whether people responsible for this. they should be judged accordingly. host: john in minnesota. caller: a couple quick points. i agree with the earlier gentlemen about the council.

i have not heard any real facts or anything. at this point, it sounds like talking points. i have not seen anything about riots or c-span -- on c-span. she says that been going on for a long time, i have not seen any of the major networks or the news. there is nothing on there. my third and final point, the supreme court left lula out of prison who was convicted of corruption. from what i seen so far, -- host: let's get a reaction. guest: this is something that is you facts, these are some things that have been on the news. the process i've mentioned that have been happening six october, they have not been -- protest i

have mentioned have been happening six the fastest october -- since october. in terms of, lula was not convicted and it is important. he has been under investigation for corruption. it has been a topic of conversation and much debate in the electoral -- electoral process. he was not convicted. he was considered innocent. we saw in 20, this vote against president lula because of up

corruption. love what -- a lot of is -- his campaign promises were around corruption and against corruption and against president lula. is is an important concern. corruption is a problem and should be taken into consideration and will be a priority for this administration. being extra careful about any kind of corruption within the government because that will be a big problem. may brazilians aware of how big and problematic corruption can be and i do not think brazilians will be for any kind of corruption again. host: from steve, explain what you know about putin involvement in destabilizing brazil.

guest: there has not been any indication of foreign interference in brazilian elections. host: from david in florida, republican. caller: i had a couple of questions. one of mine she just answered as far as no outside foreign governments. i was under the impression, china and u.s., were involved in the 2022 election. my second question, from what i understand, though scenarios -- bolsonaro was a right wing

politician, whereas lula is a diehard communist. host: some have called bolsonaro the trump of the tropics. is that fair? guest: to answer your question, we need to understand the difference in terms of politics in brazil and u.s. u.s. has a bipartisan, two parties. in brazil we have a multiparty system. it is difficult to split it into far left and far right. the media has been comparing bolsonaro to trump calling him the trump of the tropicals. it is an oversimplification of the fact.

there are comparisons to be made . there are many ways throughout that administration is some topics and i've been able to -- been able to move policies boards. in terms of lula, this is his third term in office and he has proven through the two terms we have seen, he is not an extreme left politician. he has shown on the economic front, he prioritizes but he has been this priority in businesses and making sure we have a friendly environment for businesses to do this and to progress. i would not consider him a communist or an extreme left.

he is more of a pragmatic leftist been an extreme left. -- then an extreme left. host: what is next for bolsonaro? guest: we are all in the dark about this. we have been seeing some push is u.s. for president biden to ask bolsonaro to leave the country and we will see what happens next. host: bob in michigan, independent. caller: one of the factors that would make it easier and made it fairly easy for this attempted overthrow, the geographic location of brasilia, the capital city, it is way out in the middle of nowhere. it is a large city. it is in the middle of nowhere.

it is easy for people to filter in their over a period of time. brazil is still a second world country in terms of his military readiness and police services. you get a capital of the city so far removed from the general population and it is easy to get something like that going. and have it reach that level before anybody realizes what is going on. it is in the hinterlands. host: let's take that point. guest: it is far far -- from removed. one of the things we have seen is the rise have been organized through social media. we saw these were happening and we saw there was movement all

over brazil going and it was anticipated and we could have prepared better for lois to come. they knew there was this movement and it was a big group, a large group. there had been on the government side to ensure the three powers -- the three buildings of the three branches of government are located. it is to be protected and not extractable to the protests but there was a change in primary hours before the process started to happen. there was anticipation the processor going to happen. host: valentina sader. we thank you for the

conversation this morning. guest: thank you. host: we have one more conversation coming up with all of you after this break. we want to hear from you about your concerns surrounding the accountability of big tech. social media companies. that is what we will talk about next. the phone numbers are on your screen. we'll get to it in a minute. ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings, white house events, the courts, campaigns, and more. all at your fingertips. also stay current with the latest episodes of washington

journal and find scheduling information for c-span tv network and c-span radio plus compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store, google play. download it for free today. your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. >> book tv, 9:15 p.m. eastern, phil grant of texas and co-author john early take a critical look at economic disparities in the u.s. there book the miss of american inequality. at 10:00 p.m. on afterward, armstrong williams and ben croft co-authors of crisis in the classroom to the concerns about the education system in america. watch the tv every sunday on

c-span 2 and find the book schedule your progm guide or watch online, any at booktv.org. >> fridays at 8:00 p.m. eastern, c-span brings you afterwards from booktv. a program where nonfiction authors are interviewed by jourlists, legislators, and others on their latest books. tonight armstrong williamand ben croft co-authors of crisis in the classroom share their concerns about the education system in america. watch “after words” every friday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> washington journal continues. host: we are back. we want to hear to you -- from

you of your concerns with big tech. their other phone lines on your screen. this conversation prompted by this headline, 2020 three is poised to be a landmark year for tech. you have president biden this week writing a rare opinion piece in the wall street journal. calling on bipartisan legislation against big tech abuses. he writes, like many americans i am concerned about how in the industry collect, share their most personal data. polarization in our grocery -- country. violate the civil rights of women and minorities and even put our children at risk. do you share the president's concerns and what would you like lawmakers to do about it? there was the story this week

from the associated press about what is happening in seattle. seattle schools are suing tech giants over social media harm. joining us to talk about this lawsuit is case browning, newscast and reported there. let's begin with what the seattle schools, what did they say in the lawsuit? for they claim is the harm -- what are they claiming is the harm? guest: there are suing the most used social note -- social media networks. the school district is alleging they have created a nuisance for youth. that is the legal claim. the companies have created an environment that is harming you and exacerbating an existing mental health crisis.

they say the companies use algorithms to directly send user specific content and some of the content is harmful and exacerbated the crisis. they are saying they do not want an end to social media. they are not asking for companies to go away. they want the company to take more responsibility on the behalf of youth. host: they will have to prove a harm has been done to them, the school. what are they citing as evidence and what is the exact harm? guest: the harm to the school district they are alleging and i should add, another local district has join in the suit. there are alleging the mental health crisis amount use -- youth was already growing and in the pandemic it worsened. there is a social media networks, tiktok, snapchat, etc.

have added to that by directing users harmful content. they say the impact on the school district as they are not dealing with a crisis they cannot handle alone. they have staffed up their helpline system. they have implemented new problems -- programs in school to address the mental health crisis, especially around depression, anxiety, and bullying. but they cannot handle the wave of the crisis that is hitting seattle. they say the companies should have been taking more responsibility on behalf of youth. host: and they cannot do their job which is teach children? guest: exactly. host: what is the response from tech companies? guest: we have heard response from facebook and instagram and from youtube. they have said in a statement so

far, they do have protections in place. they do sift through content that is harmful ever move things that are flagged by users and themselves they find harmful. that is what we have heard so far. we have not heard directly from snapchat or twitter. they're waiting for the lawsuit to play out. we are waiting to see what happens. this is the force of his client lawsuit in the u.s. seattle school state they do not know any other legal action or litigation or laws that directly targeted at companies in this way. saying they created a nuisance and environment of harm. this is a first for the companies to be responding and we willsaying they see how theil teams respond as the cases go forward. host: it is hard to sue social media companies because of the law and the section known as 230. how does this lawsuit deal with

that, section 230, which paraphrasing, the tech companies are not held accountable for the content or the moderation of the content of their platform. guest: yes, the school district is trying to take a different route. they are calling this a nuisance. they not alleging the content itself was the problem. there alleging the fact that the algorithm are pumping this content to users and exacerbating depression, content regarding disordered eating, bullying, contributing to anxiety, they think that is an environment of harm. the same way you might sue about acid rain or a toxic junkyard that is putting fumes into the neighborhood. they are not targeting the

content but saying it is a nuisance you did not prevent. i will say, legal experts i've talked to including at the university of washington, this is going to be a very hard hurdle to cross. we are watching other u.s. supreme court decisions that could shed light on what happens in this case, but section 230 law, those are not directly targeting it, it is a hurdle for them. host: what happens next with the lawsuit? guest: we will be waiting for more response from social media companies and then waiting for court dates to proceed. i anticipate more school district may be joining the lawsuit. washington state, superintendent of public instruction has not joined, but they are eyeing it as well. what i'm seeing next from watching the legal process play out is how many people, school

districts, it join this now that seattle -- seattle has set the president. host: it will be interesting to hear from teachers and parents this morning that they think of the school should be so weak and their concerns over this. guest: i have friends that are educators across washington state that are not in the seattle district and they are messaging me saying, we talked about this and had eight school conversation in my class with the students and their feelings about social media and with the conversations they're having with their families. this is an issue in these districts and washington touched every single family that we are dealing with massive amounts of depression, anxiety, disordered eating, thoughts of self harm or hurt -- harming others. the school district says we cannot handle this anymore.

it is distracting us from our job and kids are talking about it all across the state with their teachers now. host: page browning, thank you. want to try to all of you now and get your adults -- we want to turn to all of you and you get your thoughts and concerns you have about big tech. stephen, democratically. caller: hi, greta. people accuse you and others in the media of wrongdoing, there could be nothing further from the truth. you are heroes of our society and bringing us and the work you do to bring us the media and the true. god bless you. to the point of my concerns of big tech, yes, it began with the

awful video posts. how horrible we would take a mass shooting in our post office where our postal workers, were trying to handle the melt were brutally shot and murdered -- mail were brutally shot and murdered. we all were concerned about it. we set the should not be allowed in the eight yelp aoc you said free speech -- aoc you said free speech and that is the kind of thing that should not be allowed as free speech. host: what is congress do about it? caller: congress should be able to judge and the bible says righteousness and sin is an

approach to any people. we should be able to know the difference between good and bad. it is not that hard to do. we should know it is not ok to have a video game that allows you to take a shotgun is give video game and go in and shoot everybody in the game is by putting the shotgun in your mouth and blow your head off. host: you are saying, these social media platforms, they should be held responsible for third-party content, the desire content, we are not saying we recommend -- you watched is. they are saying, it is third-party content. caller: we should be able, as i government, we should be able to know dangerous dangerous gross s

and ok -- dangerous drugs are not ok. there is a good reason for that. we should know drugs are safe and no postal and everything that is come after it are unsafe. host: ok. bread in des moines, republican. caller: good morning. i'll make it all once in a month and this is my only call. i'm a grandfather of 65. i worry about my grandkids. i think the congress and the supreme court -- in fairness, i'm so glad i got to talk to you. host: the supreme court will

take up two cases in february. 2023 is poised to be a landmark year for tech legal belts -- bouts. this is analysis and research from the washington post. with the supreme court said away in the tech industry liability protections in two landmark cases, more potentially on the way, 2023 shaping up to be the watershed year for courtroom battles over internet regulations. they will hear oral arguments. cases that will way the limits of section 230, decades old law that shields digital services from lawsuits from hosting and moderating user content. tech industry groups are separately pushing for the course to strike down platform regulation in texas, florida, california setting up other standoffs that could sweeping

implications for online services and content moderation. do you want the supreme court to act? do you want congress to act? what are your concerns? host: david in california. we lost him. client in kentucky. -- tanya in kentucky. caller: hello. i was listening this morning, i was making breakfast. i love my phone. i sell my phone quite a bit. i do not feel like i needed to survive but i know it is a problem for the kids. and for some adults. it is getting to the point where it is with the teachers, they cannot concentrate. there is a huge problem when --

i am speaking for my own situation come up my daughter's first year in middle school and reading the paper, says no devices to be brought to school. no phone. no iwatches. it changes so now the kids can bring their phones but they have to not be on them until school is out. i think it is a recipe for distraction and it is exactly what is happening. host: what about what carries over into the school day? they are not on their phone during the school day but at night they're on their phone, there on these platforms and what seattle schools are saying, they are getting this content base of the algorithms of the companies that is harmful to their mental health and when they go to school they are distracted by it. caller: absolutely. i feel like if they crackdown

more, you can crackdown in your own house home, but if the schools crackdown a little bit and put their foot down and say, absolutely, no phones here is goal. just like if you have a family gathering in everyone at your house. me, if i ever have an opportunity to have all of my family at my house, i am going to put a basket outside and i'm going to put a big, no, if you cannot handle an hour or two with your family without looking on your phone, you're not welcome in my home. it should be the same. it is destroying? host: have you tried it? caller: i've not held a for family gatherings yet. it is not that they would not be welcome, but i want to talk to you. i do not want to see you over there on your phone. host: if you try that, call back

in and let us know how it went. mark in california, independent. caller: yes. i like that lady's idea. she should do that. as far as congress, they should pull 230. so the companies can get sued by other people. host: what do you think would be the impact on the companies? caller: let's see what happens to them. they are ok with what goes in their platform. to news organizations, possibly being suefor any stories that could hurtomebody. they pull 230 and see what happens of these companies and like the lady said, pull the ones, no phones at school. none of us had phones in schools and we turned out ok. host: before the supreme court,

two cases that deal with section 230 and google, makes headlines today in wsj saying, the supreme court will link it up and the internet -- could upend the internet. it challenges the liability shield, it could upend the internet resulting in widespread censorship and proliferation of a -- content. a new pre-filed with the high court, google says scaling back protections could lead to controversial political speech and smaller websites to drop their filters to avoid liability that can arise from efforts to screen content. your reaction to that argument? caller: let's see what happens. they are to protected. let's go out and go to congress

and say it is not us, it is the people on the website. it is repeats -- free speech. they should be held liable. host: there is bipartisan talk on capitol hill about regulating the social media platforms. senator of minnesota and senator of wisconsin, appeared on nbc's meet the press earlier this month calling for reforms. [video clip] >> amended and focus on certain speech misinformation, disinformation and all you are seeing, we know people will put us that step on your task square which has become a communication company, your network has limits in place and standards. the argument is if you start making money off of it, if you amplify it, it is a different thing. >> if you change the newsfeed,

as in the company become a publisher? >> they are a publisher. let's face the facts. now they are a mega company. it is starting to happen all over the world. it is time for 2023 part to be our resolution we passed one of these bills. it is not that we have done nothing, we have bipartisan agreement. >> let me ask you and i like what you are saying on that front, my concern with the 230 appeal, it might accidentally increase censorship of social media. a deplatforms -- a deplatforms for people that use them say. a better framework might be, mandate data across platforms so

you're able to bring your network whatever platform has the best content moderation policies and best transparencies you like combined with neutrality in the stack where in contrast to twitter or facebook, private companies, amazon web services, the infrastructure of the internet could not deny someone access to their services because they do not like their political beliefs over they think about this or that political issue. that is the framework i have in mind. i am open to having the conversation. host: two prospectus from capitol hill. we're talking this morning of your concerns. president biden in an opinion piece this week called all republicans and democrats to unite against big tech companies. he writes, there are three areas where he would like to see douglas come together. the second, w big tech companies to take responsibi forhe content they spread and

gorithm they use. that is why, we must reform section 230. it protects tech companies from legal responsibility for content listed on their side. mark in florida, a republican. what do you say? caller: i would say, dark money is the biggest problem we have had. we have had problems with money being used to paper lobbyists and think tanks -- pay for lobbyists and think tanks to buy our politicians. the tech companies are being attacked by the money that is already in our congress. we need to work on -- i have grandchildren and i believe we need to protect them. most of the platforms like youtube has kids versions.

there are choices on those platforms for the parents. my other statement would be about federal voter id link to social security. host: we are not open forum. elizabeth in minnesota. caller: hello. i was wondering, i'm a genesis speaker and whenever you have a personality come on and speaking, i would like to know when they talk about a bill 230, i would like to know who the sponsors of the bill would be. host: that is a law. it is a lot right now. -- a law right now. caller: i know, but when the speaker comes on, i would like to know who the bill is

sponsored so the people who do not like it have an ability to respond to it. very often people complain and they do not know where to go with their complaints but it might be a great idea if the sponsor of the bill -- it is kind of hard to find with the ordinary person. host: this is section 230 is part of the communications decency act which is passed in 1996. it is odor legislation. it has been a law on the books for decades. it says,o providerser of a computer service shall be treated as theublisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

in florida, independent, hello polly. caller: good morning. i think there are a wide variety of problems with algorithms and how they influence our thinking. the unintended consequences that people overlook. body cam on police officers have revealed problems but you do not understand the situation such as i have a child and her father was killed by an officer. i had to raise a child would put it -- video footage of her parent being told on the internet. it is still on the internet. even if i prevent her from going on the internet, she lives in a society where this video footage of her father being killed. it is on the internet. that is horrible. host: gordon in kansas.

caller: good morning. i've been trying to call in since 6:00 a.m. this morning. i something big to say about the documents. i something big to say about taxes. i hate to waste my call. i have a question from you, did you graduate from virginia tech? host: no. caller: democrats are parasites. host: anthony in florida. caller: hey. you have on virginia tech colors but it is all right. it is always a pleasure to talk to you and big john and pedro. i'm disappointed in our government dealing with freedom of speech. i believe it is an attack against freedom of speech.

i know platforms like you to -- youtube and facebook, so people go overboard but it is our opportunity and to share our view and our lifestyles. it is an opportunity of regular citizens to show what goes on in their community and in their lives. host: are you saying do not change section 230? are you worried about how the process will change if the government acts or supreme court rules against the tech companies? caller: yeah i am. it will be a great change. i believe our politicians are trying to limit -- it goes beyond our children. there are greater things we should be worry about as it does with our children. i was a federal police officer, retired. after i retired i worked with

young teenagers dealing with troubles. most times they were dealing with drugs, teenagers. far from being in harm from what they do on facebook. it is some content but i do not think the supreme court should change to 30. use their duty to limit -- 230 to limit our rights. host: section 230 must be repelled. the companies are publishers and they have to be responsible for their content. as an attorney, i knew it was a huge problem when it was implement it. the companies are unregulated. consequences could be foreseen. host: in texas, john. caller: there are so much double standards on everything. certain speech is regulated and censored, whereas the most

immoral provocative stuff you can think -- imagine is allowed left and right. even if it affects children, but if you speak out and tell the truth of how the system we live in is totally and completely owned and operated outright by big banks and corporations from every level from the white house to your local schoolhouse, if you tell the truth about that, you get censored and your account get suspended for weeks or up to a month. it is a complete double standard about the alleged free speech. only certain speech is allowed in the u.s. and it is only speech that goes along with the system and with the immoral wall street driven agenda of the system. if you tell the truth about the system itself, you get suspended and censored. host: got your point. back to the president's point in his op-ed, he made three points

where he wants to see action by republicans and democrats. the first, we need serious feraprotections for americans. how companiesollect, use, and share personal data. your internet history, your personal communication, your cation, your health. it is not enough fpanies to disclose what data they are collecting, much of that data should not be collected in the first place. these protections should be stronger for young people who are vulnerable online. we should limit targeting advertising and banded altogether for children. on twitter, my concerns with big tech or my concern is that we individuals are two independent on the services. a republican in massachusetts, good morning. caller: good morning.

thank you for taking my call. i find it interesting that this is now happening when this is been going on for years and the mental health issues with children has been going on for years. i know congress had had hearings after hearings and nothing ever got done with big tech. i believe nothing ever got done because it was about political speech. i find it interesting now that elon musk is putting information out there that shows twitter and big tech was censoring a lot of political speech, mostly on republican side. i do not think this is about children because they have not been protecting children for years. it was obama that was given out free phones for children in elementary school and middle schools. there is no protection there. amy klobuchar has been against preventing the violence that

children has missing for years. you can go back on c-span and listen to democrats and republicans talking about the violence in video games and nothing ever seems to be getting done. she was the one that always said it was the parents responsibility to protect children from watching these violent video games. i think this is more about political speech. if you do 230, get rid of that, it is saying you can censor again, which is what twitter was doing originally. now that it is being discovered what was happening, it was a republican therapy and censored, not democrats -- republicans that were being censored and not democrats. people should look at what is going on with the twitter files coming out. i do not think it is about children. i believe children should not have bones anyway. they should have -- light is a

six-year-old need a phone -- why does a six-year-old need a phone? why do they need to bring it to school? host: it is not what they are looking at a school. it is the content they are seeing out of school and how it is distracting them and anxiety when they are supposed to be learning. that is the argument from the seattle schools. caller: no. the distraction has been going on for years. i have been at the schools and have been on their phones for many years. it is not anything new. i think this is more about politics. host: understood. the other point you made was about the twitter files. we will hear more from a gop letter congress -- let congress

when they begin their work in the 118th congress they said they will look at the communication between government and twitter about censoring conservative voices on the twitter platform. this tweet, big tech has unprecedented power and influence, it also provides viable services. we have concerns about privacy, antitrust, democracy with the benefits of companies bring. a complex issue and i am unsure where i stand. pol in maryland. caller: ok. everybody begin this morning, i believe they have a point. their credit correct in some ways but it is a little skewed.

it is political. it is beneficial for one party. as the schools are concerned, the parents have to take charge of their home. you do not have to give your child a phone. your child can survive. thousands of years we did not have bones -- phones and we all survived and managed and grew. that is a part of growth. you see people get in accidents. i drive a truck for 11 and i had a girl lose control of her car because she was on her phone. she brought several tires, spin around, 360. i stop in time to not smasher. the first thing she did, her car

was able to be moved, she jumped out of her car with her phone in her hand and not make any effort to get out of the middle of the highway. everybody stop so she could move. if people are looking to their phones, my answers as they should be looking at each other. host: on twitter, the way it is set up, there is little to no protection for your personal information they can be used to exploit or influence what you're exposed to. no security. that is the point by the president and some lawmake well. the third point the president makes, we need to bring more companies -- when tech platforms get big enough, many find ways to promote their own products while excluding or disadvantaging competitors or competitors a fortune to sell on their platform. we need a rules of the road.

the next generation of company should not be smothered by the dominants before they have a chance to get off the ground. randy in california. caller: good morning. the devil is in the details. it is all about the truth and falsehood. i think it is precious this morning that joe biden signed his name to something in the wall street journal. everybody knows he did not write it. host: buddy in georgia, republican. your concerns with big tech. caller: good morning. i have been listening to a lot of the calls this morning and it seems like a lot of people are all subject -- off subject.

i believe congress should be involved in the law and have it rewritten. i believe the supreme court shall rule in favor. as far as the content for children that seattle school board has brought before the supreme court host: not support -- not before the supreme court yet. caller: it will wound up there i am sure. i believe the big tech companies should be liable for what these kids see because the algorithms push it to them. anybody that goes on the internet to look up whatever you want to look at, be you are shopping for groceries or whatever, if you google something come the next time you get online you see all of that stuff that is associated with what you were searching for.

it is the algorithms that is pushing into you. it is not the content as the lady from seattle stated. it is the algorithms push to get to you. big tech is responsible for that. i believe big tech company should be held reliable for that. host: alex for massachusetts says this, plaintiff will advocate, tutor cannot -- children cannot afford phones, people only change when parents stop buying. in virginia, democratic caller. hello, erin. caller: hello. my concerns with big tech because i am an i.t. professional, i do agree it

comes down to the parents. when we talk about big tech companies, take the tech award out of it, they are big companies. when you sign up to use the companies, you read the small print, you are signing up for whatever they want to deliver to you. when talking about regulation. i recently had my twitter account block because i use the phrase cut off your nose to spite your face and i was banned because they said it is promoting violence. they also did not allow me to delete my account because i read the small print it is said if you are blocked, you cannot delete your own account and we will not remove it. they're still collecting data from me. you to has content -- youtube has content marked for children but if you watch it with your kids, you will pick up a lot of adult scenes and adult content and adult language on the platforms.

it is up to the parents to pull their children away from the devices and content. take them to a library and you pick the books you want them to read or you watch the content before you show it to them. they're going to talk about monitoring and subjecting big companies to a stronger standard on what is "decent" then you have to look at who is making rules on what is decent or not. raise your kids. show them what is right and wrong and help them with their anxiety. host: nicole. caller: hey. i want to piggyback off what virginia just said, i member when it came out, my daughter -- my daughter was separated. there were teenagers.

deny your old wanted to do with the 16-year-old do. i only gave my teenager a phone. a prosecutor -- prosecutor -- i like libraries. my kids are visual and a lot of us are visual learners. host: this is from charles, it is important to note most executives of technology companies send their children to schools. the devices cannot connect to the internet. it of the devices they are making are harmful and addictive. they're are called electronic heroin. we need oversight from the government. from florida, democratic caller. caller: i have watched the

internet grow up and turn into what it has become. we do regulate cigarettes. regulate who can buy them. re-regulate how much nicotine is allowed. we did that many years ago against strong opposition of the cigarettes companies. they do need to be regulated. the algorithms need to be regulated because they are reinforcing dramatic content which is what is stimulating people's minds to push the button and put their finger to the tone and go forward and continually go down these rat holes. this is not stopping and it will not stop and it will not. it is not going to happen.

we cannot live in that planet. we are not that kind of species. we need a society that self regulates and corporations do not do that. there never been known to do that. host: alexis skate of kalama, independent. caller: good morning. i do not have much to say but it is the corporations. you talk about big tech or oil empire, we are all being scammed. five people on all of the media that is out there including c-span. host: one more call, steve in illinois. caller: good morning. i find it interesting that everybody is a price.

anything big tech is a manifestation of big brother in our lives. i got the solution for everyone. do not patronize them. do not use them. turn it off. leave it outside your house. do not use it. do not give them your money. did not show on amazon -- do not shop on amazon. write a letter. you do not need a facebook page. you do not need a tweet. you don't need none of it. host: we will leave it there. we will be back tomorrow morning 7:00 a.m. eastern time. thank you all for watching and participating in the conversation. ♪

>> president biden welcome japanese prime minister to washington dc. this will be his first visit to the white house is becoming prime minister over a year ago. they will discuss the u.s. japan alliance and japan's new national security strategy. c-span will have live coverage of the visit starting at 1115 eastern this morning. later keisha last bottom -- lanc e bottom. we will have live coverage of that starting at 12:30 p.m. eastern. ♪

>> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, funded by these television companies and more, including cox. >> cox is committed to providing eligible families access to affordable internet. bridging the digital divide one connected d engaged student at a time. >> cox supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> on august 24, nine teen 45, admit till -- 1945, emmett till was accused of flirting with a white grove. his cousin was with him when the incident happened and also four days later when he was of ducted. sunday on q&a, reverend parker, recounting the events of emmett

till's murder and getting justice for his late cousin. >> nothing happened in the store. he was 14 and i was 16. nothing happened while they were in the store. they came out of the store and once they were out of the store, a short time later, she came out of the store. he loved to make people laugh. he whistled and when he did that, we just died. you have to understand the atmosphere in 1955 in mississippi, a black man whistling at a white woman. >> the reverend with his book, a few days full of trouble, sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on

c-span's q&a. you can listen on our free c-span now app. >> during her state of the state address, iowa governor kim reynolds talked about what she learned during her past decisions during the pandemic and what she wants to a compass and her tenure of governor, including supporting children and families in a school bill and she give her remarks before the state's ledger.