announcer: coming up on washington journal, thatode-1 of punch bowl news talks about the month ahead f congress. and en the white house request for $16 billion to shore up the federal disaster fund that has been depleted after natural disasters across the u.s. we will speak with e&eews reporter thomas frank. and then the not guilty plea from president trump and others. washington journal starts now. ♪ host: this is the washington journal for september 6. the longest sentence and related to the attack on the capital yesterday. peter navarro and his criminal

contempt of congress charges. the case against former president trump himself as well. how much trust do you have with the legal system when it comes to january 6 related cases? democrats (202)-748-8000, republicans (202)-748-8001, an independents (202)-748-8002. you can text us your thought at (202)-748-8003. you can post on facebook and x, and follow the show on instagram. it was into today hugo lowell writing prosecutors

expected to present the case today that peter navarro should be convicted in contempt of congress because he ignored a subpoena last year. the only standard prosecutors will have to reach. his failure to comply was intentional and navarro will not be able to argue in defense that he blew off the subpoena because he thought trump had executive privilege. the big story of the day was the sentencing of that proud boy leader. this is in usa today. sentenced to 22 years, the harshest penalty yet. mr. janssen joining us via zoom to talk about that article. guest: thank you for having me. host: can you tell us what he

was convicted of and the sentencing? guest: he was convicted of six charges, the most serious of which was seditious copicy. and a couple other interfering with police and damage to federal property. the judge was sentencing a handful of proud boy defendant who were tried in april. four of the five were convicted of seditious conspiracy. he has been handing down -- the district judge, timothy kelly -- has been handing down the longest sentences yet. host: when it comes to the 22 years received, how was that reached? what guidelines were given as far as that number is concerned?

guest: they total up the sentencing guidance for each of those charges and then there were enhancements for terrorism. the actions he took were intended to influence the government through either intimidation or coercion. his lawyers argued he was not a terrorist or using violent means to achieve his ends. he was convicted of seditious conspiracy. the judge said terrorism could be applied. kelly said he understood it was not trying to blow up buildings or kill people but the standards of interfering with the government applied. enhancements to the sentence were applied. host: did mr. tarrio address the

court in any way? guest: he spoke for several minutes. he apologized to law enforcement officers who he said he was not trying to mistreat. he apologized to the citizens of d.c. saying he would not his own city overrun in riot. and he asked for mercy. he knew he was looking at a long sentence. his defense lawyers asked for no more than 15 years. he is 39-years-old and asked the judge not to take away his 40's from him, but judge kelly sentenced him to 22 years. host: did the judge respond to those pleas? what was the judge's tone during this time? guest: equaled with the defense lawyers -- he quibbled with the

defense lawyers saying the jury already convicted you. one of his defenses and an argument his lawyers were making was that he was not at the capitol on january 6. he had been arrested days before and left the city. he was in baltimore and his lawyers said he did not contact people on january 6. he never directed anyone to assault the police or destroy government property. but the judge said he was convicted of leading this conspiracy and organizing 200 people to come to washington -- he would say to protest -- but what became a riot and he should have foreseen that violence could erupt. the judge said he was not buying it. host: with the 22 year sentence

he received, how might that influence further sentencing for those involved? guest: this recent flurry of sentencing were the leaders of the proud boys. we had the 22 year sentence for henrique dario, joseph biggs last week, 17 year sentence -- 18 for ethan rdn, 17 for zachary reel. the longest before this last week was for the head of the oath keepers who got 18 years. i do not if we have -- i do not know if we have defendants charged in the riot, if there was an they were looking at a longer sentence. host: the cases against those

who participated in january 6, where did the defendants stand? can you break that down? guest: there have been more than 1100 people charged in the january 6 attack. more than 600 have been sentenced so far. many have been misdemeanors and many not including jail time. a lot have been house arrests. as we are getting farther away from the attack, more of these serious cases have made their way through the courts. we are finally getting resolutions and ideas about how the serious cases are playing out. prosecutors have said they may charge nearly a thousand more people from the attack. we will have to keep watching who gets charged, but at this point, the leaders of the oath keepers and proud boys were the leaders of the folks on the ground. host: do any of these charges

and what has been done connect in any way to the potential legal issues president trump faces when it comes to january 6 activities? guest: not yet. trump was indicted on federal charges. four federal charges which were conspiracy to obstruct congress and defraud the united states, which means overturn the vote. but he was not charged with seditious conspiracy. he was not charged with inciting the riot as he had been during the house impeachment action. the house said he did insight the riot -- incite the riot but it fell short of the two thirds majority needed. he has not yet been charged with inciting the riot. but that investigation by the

special counsel jack smith is continuing. we will have to see. his trial and conspiracy charges is scheduled march 4. he would like to move it later. host: bart janssen covers the justice department for usa today and you can see his work on recent events at usatoday.com. thank you for giving us your time this morning. guest: thanks for having me. host: when it comes to those legal issues, the legal system, and january 6 related cases, do you have trust in that system? (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, and independents, (202)-748-8002 . you can also text us at (202)-748-8003. willie in annapolis, maryland starts us off. caller: i have a lot of

confidence in it but the main focus should be on our former president. my biggest concern is that all trump or somebody behind trump causing this? this man was never fit to be president to start. it should be my opinion to find out who is behind all this. host: when you say you have trust in the system is it because of the sentences like enrique tarrio? caller: i just have trust in the system period. i have a problem with these people trying to undermine our justice system. it should be the so-called multibillionaires because since trump is not in power, they have not been cutting up as much. i am embarrassed as an american

we have somebody to do something like this. host: jeff on the line for independents in ohio. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro. talk about justice. let's talk about injustice. we have ray epps. ray epps, people, who was telling people to breach the capitol, yet he turns out to be an fbi informant? are you kidding me? how many were in the crowd before the trump rally showed up? that's right. we cannot see the video evidence to see the truth of what is going on. michael gerd killed ashli babbitt for breaching the door. host: that is on the events of the day but the legal system, what is your level of trust in it? caller: i have no trust whatsoever, pedro.

i have watched this administration turn on all republicans and everybody running -- lawyers and everything are being persecuted. the only way we are going to get injustice is if we get this idiot out of the white house and throw everybody in jail. host: doug in new jersey, republican line. good morning. caller: yeah, the last caller said everything i would like to say. i think it is disgusting we are worried about this when we have joe biden and the democrats destroying this country. whether it is the economy, foreign policy, everything he is doing is a disaster and the media will not cover it. host: hold on. you called on the question. your thoughts on the legal system, how would you characterize that? caller: i don't now. host: why not? caller: because i am watching in these democrat-run cities with

these far left prosecutors and judges that are leading violent criminals go free, literally, murderers getting shorter sentences. a two-time purple heart recipient, joseph biggs, gets 17 years. but convicted murderers with rap sheets, that's all right. maybe just get released. it is disgusting we are talking about equality when there is no equality. this doj -- i used to have faith but i don't now because they are weaponizing, they are coming after political opponents, and it is obvious. host: doug in new jersey giving us his thoughts. pick the line that best represents you. i will start with the (202)-748-8000 for democrats,

(202)-748-8001 for republicans, (202)-748-8002 for independents. there is a recent piece that talks about the faith in justice system. nearly 60% of americans say they have a fair amount of trust in juries, according to the survey, higher than any in the judicial system. but that may be put to the test as former president donald trump seems to be headed for multiple trials. when asked about his upcoming trials, majority of americans, democrats, republicans, and independents, said they did not think the courts would be able to find impartial jurors. and those jurors will face scrutiny which is reason enough to not want to serve. the majority of americans said they were not personally interested in serving on the jury for mr. trump. that study was conducted in july and focused on americans who served on a jury in the last 10

years, providing a portrait of the type of american that serves and a look into the minds of the people who might decide mr. trump's fate. your trust in the justice system when it comes to january 6 cases. in tennessee, we will hear from dan. hello. dan, hello. caller: thank you for taking my call. good morning, pedro. thank you for taking my call. thank you and your fellow moderators for helping save the country. last month i called on my representatives in the state of tennessee, my state legislatures, my state congressman, and i talked to their staff members. i recited these names -- john ehrlichman, charles colson, john

mitchell, john dean, james mccord. the four or five staff members i spoke to could generally -- they were in their 20's and 30's -- they did not know these names. and these are political staff members that did not know the history of watergate. these are eight individual that served time for crimes far less serious than what is happening now. yes, i have trust in the january 6 case and prosecution since there are so many republicans evolved. like the roughly 60 cases that were brought before the courts. several of those were republicans. when people are poorly educated or undereducated, they are more susceptible to brainwashing. when they are brainwashed they might branch off into denial.

i don't now. this is where we are at. host: another dan, this one in massachusetts, independent line. caller: thank you for having me on. no, i don't trust the legal system with this. let me give you a little historical context to this. to substantiate a story we had about 9/11 we rounded up a bunch of afghans and populated guantanamo bay with them. we did this to help substantiate a story that was made up from those prisoners that were tortured at guantanamo. all kinds of people, no hearing, no anything, got rounded up and thrown in guantanamo. i knew at the time if we let this happen, we rounded up all

these people, brought them to guantanamo, and tortured them to make up a story -- host: how does that relate to january 6? caller: i knew at that time if we let that happen, this would be coming home to america. look what happened january 6. very sketchy election. extremely sketchy. no court has touched any of this stuff. what happened to substantiate a story of an insurrection? they through hundreds of people in jail -- threw hundreds of people in jail and let them sit there illegally. host: that is dan in massachusetts. you heard our guest talk about the sentencing that those who participated received. politico has a roundup of others, including peter schwartz, who got 14 years. he was found guilty on 10

charges including four felony charges of assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers. daniel david rodriguez drove a stun gun into a police officer's next got -- neck got 12 years. body video showed the officer screaming in pain. dominic pazzola, 10 years for triggering the attack on the capitol when he smashed a window. he filmed himself inside the capitol smoking a cigar. if you want to read the prison sentences handed down so far. your trust in the legal system is what we are asking about this money. in baltimore, republican line, gerard, go ahead. caller: good morning.

i do not trust the system neither. if there were officers in the ground, why are they not getting charged? host: ok. gwen in detroit, democrat's line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i do trust our justice system to some extent. i am glad to see that trump got 91 counts of illegal activity, you know. i am waiting to see what comes out of that since enrique got 22 years. not only trump but the rest of the people in the upper class that also organized and participated in this. a lot of the young people who

were given light sentences were the sheep that were led into this to be a distraction. i understand why some of them are on house arrest and things like that. but what about the people in congress? the republicans in congress should not even be there. they need to be on trial too. but they want to say, oh, that's political. but they also did some legal things that were wrong. they participated in it just like enrique. they were probably not at the scene but they helped organize. i want to see justice done all the way around, and i don't hear anything about any white supremacists being charged. they were threatening people. host: paul is in iowa, independent line. go ahead.

caller: yes, i have no trust at all in the department of justice. you keep hearing this term "no one is above the law." in reality, there are people that are. i do not think donald trump will spend any time in jail. pretty certain joe biden is not going to spend any time in jail. mainstream media will not even report on what the biden crime family has been doing. they did not even bring up hunter biden. host: your lack of trust in the system specifically. caller: if that was blm or antifa that attacked the capitol, there would not even be

any trial going on. they have not done anything about the riots that were happening in the suburbs in 2020. the have been covering up for biden. if it is republicans, yeah, they are going to prosecute and send all of them to jail they possibly can. their main goal is to keep donald trump from running for president for being president again. no one has ever brought this up either. let's say for whatever reason -- i cannot predict the future -- but let's say donald trump does not get the nomination. what is he going to do then? host: paul in iowa. it was after the sentencing of enrique tarrio yesterday that his lawyers approached talking about the sentence he received and what their plans were going forward. here is a portion from yesterday.

[video clip] >> you know, the main thing all of you are asking and wondering, what transpired today? while we were spot the judge -- we respect the judge's sentencing, we disagree. there will be a day and time when an appeal will come and we expect the appeal to come soon. whoever handles it will be handling the issues that transpired. we will be filing the appeal. any questions? >> have you spoken to your client? >> we had the chance to speak afterward. the sentences will run consecutive to another. >> [indiscernible]

>> i love you guys. that is pretty much it. >> when are you planning to present an appeal? >> definitely an appeal, definitely. [indiscernible] >> what were you expecting? >> as we said in court, we asked for a recommendation no greater than 15 years. we saw sentences handed down last week and we thought that was appropriate based on the guidelines and based upon the factors. not greater than necessary. host: that occurred yesterday. we will continue on with your

calls hon trust in the legal system. the phone numbers are there if you want to go that route. several on facebook. tracy hale saying, i trust the punishment for my own eyes saw and what my own ears heard. i trust the justice system in this. robert alvarez says it is an extension of the bided administration. lawrence rose, i think they are doing a good job when it comes to people who did an actual crime. those little ones are getting jail time. tina ward, yes and no. i have my doubts in certain aspects. laura, the fact that the fbi, doj, media, and democratic national committee colluded to obstruct the election by covering up hunter's laptop. that is some of the responses from facebook. you can post on x and text us at

(202)-748-8003. nick in florida, republican line . caller: good morning. it is always great to listen to c-span in the morning when i am off of work. when people call in on the dummy-crat line, these people are laughable. we do not have a criminal justice system in this country. the socialist dummy-crats have turned america from a republic. we are not a democracy. we are a republic. they have turned us into a banana republic. someone was just convicted of sending death threats to a sitting congresswoman, marjorie taylor greene, multiple death threats. they were caught, they were prosecuted, three months they got.

three months for threatening the life of a sitting congresswoman. like somebody said earlier, somebody shake the fence and gets 23 years. january 6 was a set up. it was a set up by the fbi, the cia, chuck schumer, nancy pelosi, probably mike pence. january 6 was designed to stop the proceedings on january 6. that is why the fbi created the riot. if you do not think these things happen, look at american history. this goes back to the 1920's -- especially in the 1950's -- operation chaos. they would infiltrate peaceful protests and create violence so the police could attack. host: frederick in virginia,

democrats line. caller: hello. good morning. thank you for taking my call. i am feeling a little better about the justice system at the moment, but in the long run, i do not trust the justice system. it depends who is sitting in judgment. but my parents did not trust the justice system when the killers and murderers walked free. trump supporters remind me of those people that sat on the jury. i think all of his supporters would find those same killers not guilty today. host: that is speculation on your part but as far as the confidence you have, you base that on yesterday's decision? caller: i feel better about yesterday's decision. i hope it continues all the way

up to mr. trump. i am not so confident that it will. 12 people have to agree that he is guilty and that is hard to do in today's climate. but i am glad this man has been charged. host: that is frederick in virginia. 22 for that top plotter of january 6. that occurred yesterday. we will hear from ron in illinois, independent line. caller: yes, sir. thank you. first of all,, no, i do not trust the legal system because i do not have a reason to. this government has always been corrupt to nativeborn black americans and we witnessed it for hundreds of years. secondly, the definition of

terrorism says -- and i am all for use of force to intimidate or coerce the government. that is exactly what these folks did. donald tried to overthrow the u.s. government and then you have these sycophants that go along like they did not see what we saw. these folks killed people. and that man, which was the head of this snake, should be put in jail. he should be executed. host: enrique tarrio got 22 years. why not have -- caller: he was a person that was used and he used his sources, like they always use -- race, religion, sex. they use what they used to

promote fear in this country because that is what it has always been. that is what it is now. you have fear on one side with the republicans and fear on the others with the democrats. we are all heading -- i will say this and shut up. one of my professors in school said when communism and nazism comes to america it will come carrying the bible and wrapping yourself in the flag. what president went down the street carrying a bible and wrapping himself in the u.s. flag? host: will go to helen in california, republican line. caller: yeah, well, i agreed with one of the callers who said the united states seems to be devolving into a banana republic when it is incarcerating its opponents. that is an uncomfortable scenario for me because i believe in democracy.

we are a republic. i do not believe in autocracy. i am not happy with the sentence. this is real persecution of the republicans or anyone who supports trump or does not demonize trump. this is out of control and i do not feel comfortable at all. i have not -- i remember nixon and his dirty tricks. people are talking about that now. there is so much suspicion. i think this sentence is onerous. it is way too -- host: why is it -- why do you have problems with it? caller: i am going to compare when rest of off -- rasamov and his people claimed to be part of

antifa, they took over the east precinct. host: but that happened far away from washington, d.c. and this was in connection with proceedings of the election. how to those compare? caller: first of all, it is in the washington state. host: sure. caller: when you take over a police station, when you start taking over parts of the minutes of the government, you need to tell me only the federal government has the right to punish people if you take over parts of a municipal government? that is ok depending on your political inclinations? they took it over for weeks. they walked around with weapons. they called themselves and said they had separated from the united states. what prison sentence did they receive? they did not get 22 years. the system part of our government. we are a representative government.

they should have gotten a longer sentence than 22 years. host: ok. let's go to shea in los angeles, democrat line. caller: can you hear me? host: you are on. caller: i have some thoughts on this justice system but i think it is pretty clear that all it took was one person to let this bigotry and racism really come to light. i think a lot of these people that support donald trump, they want this country to go back to the 1950's and 1960's. i think everybody that stormed that capitol should have been given a harder sentence. they should have been thrown in prison. they should not have been allowed to see their families.

they should be doing hard label. -- hard labor. host: 22 years is not severe? caller: absolutely not. i think it is a slap in the face. they should have gotten life. it is like you are raising a child. you make the punishment in which the child will not make the mistake again. you have these uneducated, racist, bigoted people that stormed that capitol. host: we will continue on with your calls. (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, and independents, (202)-748-8002 . your trust in the legal system when it comes to these january 6 cases. in an interview as of this morning with the vice president, who is in jakarta, the

associated press had the chance to talk to her about several issues, including january 6 related cases. [speaking another language] [video clip] vp. harris: i spent the majority of my career as a prosecutor. when they break the law there should be accountability. i support it when it happens. >> does that extend to the former president? vp. harris: everyone has their right to their day in court, but absolutely, people should be held accountable. but under our system of law. let the evidence in facts take it where it may. host: wide-ranging interview put out by the associated press. you can find it online. we will go to nancy in oklahoma, independent line. caller: hi.

the january 6 people are being ridiculously persecuted. they sent swat teams to people's houses. they did not even go into the capitol. a 60-year-old woman got beat have to death with a guy that has 10 felonies. they just let him go. but people are walking around the capitol and getting sentenced to years in prison. it is clearly intimidation to make anybody that wants to support trump scared. i think it is crazy. i cannot believe it is happening here. host: in pennsylvania, democrat's line, we will hear from kelly. caller: thank you for taking my call. it was quite interesting to hear these crocodile tears from people complaining about the justice system now.

as an african-american -- and some have said the things i wanted to say -- but there was the counterintelligence program that sought to undermine black organizations, whether it was the naacp, southern conference leadership, and so on. this program started with the bureau of investigation. host: but how does that relate to january 6? caller: i am getting to january 6. we have a whole history of illegally spying on black organizations and leaders, including dr. king's grandfather, dr. king's father, dr. king. there was no outrage from people on the right. host: significant history but again, how do the two relate? caller: it relates to january 6 because in all of our history

african-americans that have more recent than anybody to storm the capitol and protest and be violent, we have never done it. now you see people doing it and actually trying to undermine the government who legitimately are being prosecuted. people are complaining and talking about being weaponized and politicized. where were those people when all of this history was weaponizing african-americans? where are those people who are now complaining about the justice system for correctly arresting people for storming the capitol? where are those people when they were incorrectly weaponizing african-americans throughout history? host: let's hear from mike in north carolina, republican line. caller: yes, sir. good morning. host: good morning. caller: i don't have any faith in the justice system.

i believe i am going to be arrested for voting for donald trump even though my reason for voting had nothing to do with hillary clinton or joe biden. i believe i will be arrested. host: how does that relate to the january 6 cases? what connection are you making? caller: it don't matter. there is a war against republicans. if we do not wake up, we are all going to wake up in jail or some concentration camp. host: what do you base that on? caller: look at the sentences these people are getting for just standing outside. one guy was not even in the state got 20 something years. host: because he was charged with seditious conspiracy. does that matter? caller: he was not in the state. he did not talk to anybody there. before the show started you said the guy did not talk to anybody. i have seen shit on cnn -- sorry for my language -- and the guy

did not say anything to these people. but he is being charged. what is going to stop them from charging me with some kind of conspiracy because i belong to the republican party? host: that is mike in north carolina. the washington post looks at the charge of seditious conspiracy itself and offers explanations asking what is seditious conspiracy? organizing civil disorder or rebellion against the state. the statute invoked in the case requires prosecutors to prove a defendant conspired to use force to oppose u.s. government authority or hinder or delay the execution of any u.s. law. the crime carries a maximum prison term of 20 years. what is the difference between seditious conspiracy entries in? treason is more serious, defined in the constitution as actively making more against the u.s. or giving aid and comfort to enemies.

punishable by death or minimum five years in prison. it is prosecuted less frequently then sedition. nobody has been charged with treason. who has been convicted with seditious conspiracy? six men found guilty and three pleaded guilty who were members of the oath keepers. a loosely organized antigovernment militia involving current and former law enforcement officials and military veterans. the founder and leader was one of those convicted of seditious conspiracy for which he was sentenced to 18 years. members can refuse orders that they believe violate the constitution. one pleaded guilty from the proud boys. it goes on from there.

you can use those things to talk about the legal system, your faith in it. independent line in new hampshire, this is sarah. caller: good morning. the word for the day, "paradox." trump said if you repeat the lie enough, people will believe it. he says the election was stolen from him but then he tries to still the election. and then the people that created anarchy on january 6 are being asked if they believe in the justice system. trump is not being charged with seditious conspiracy when he is the one that called all these people to washington. and i just, you know, weaponizing the doj, i keep hearing that, but these people are ok with weaponizing

congress. so, it is all about brainwashing. if you hear the lie -- and this is according to donald trump -- if you hear the lie enough, you will believe it. donald trump, that is the only time he told the truth to his followers. i think they lost track at 40,000 lies about everything from the election being stolen. 78 court cases with donald trump's judges finding there was no basis for that. yet he continues to this day and has his people repeating this. host: sarah in new hampshire. she brought of the charges against former president trump when it comes to january 6. one count of conspiracy to defraud the united states. it applies to his widespread efforts to spread false claims

about the 2020 election. one count of conspiracy to obstruct the electoral vote certification. one count of obstruction and up an attempt after the 2020 election to block the certification. one count of conspiracy against rights. it talks about their attempts to intimidate people and their right to vote in an election. roy is in georgia and joins us on the republican line. caller: you can actually describe your callers who listen to conservative television. the fbi and the doj have created this whole thing with the

impeachment thing. democratic congressman said trump did something that he did not do. if you read the book by stephen sun, 120 something minutes elapsed before he called the national guard. it was that nancy pelosi and chuck schumer did not want the election challenged. host: if that is the case, the events happened, one person sentenced, several sentenced, including yesterday, when do you come to the line that these things are falsely based? caller: i look at it this way.

the people that were there, the security enforcement that was there, they started shooting into the crowd of people. ray apps was there. john sullivan was there. trump has had hundreds of meetings across the country, no violence. but when you got ray epps and john sullivan ends to getting this -- you saw ray epps on tv with his red hat on -- and you can see trump people calling him a fed. host: but what do you base that on? caller: i called once before and said ray epps was there in your purse and it was conspiracy. host: i am asking you what you are basing it on. caller: what i saw. i saw the man there instigating it on television.

if you look at conservative television -- look it up, ray epps. he is telling people going into the capitol, we are going into the capitol. he is pushing the fence. host: ok. josie in pennsylvania, democrat's line. caller: good morning. listening to this it is amazing to me. i am a retired civics teacher and i taught high school students. i hopefully did my job properly because the misconceptions and the misinformation that everyone is spewing this morning is unbelievable. the constitution of the united states was being violated that day. 's edition is a serious charge -- sedition is a serious charge. it is something that we do not take lightly and something that has to be prosecuted.

what if -- and here's the big what if -- what if those writers had been successful? what if they had overturned a democratically held election? it is with a small "d." where would we be today? people were throwing about the term banana republic. i have never seen people tying themselves to the masthead of a sinking ship the way people are denying that this was an attempt to overthrow an election. whether you liked it or not, it gave us one particular leader for four years. host: what do you make of the fact the former president himself was not charged with seditious conspiracy? caller: i believe other charges

-- what does he have now, four indictments with several broken down into various things? i do not know why that case did not go forward. i remember hearing in december that there were going to be changes of the pentagon. as we look historically backwards, i believe that we will see that the planning for the overthrow of a rightful election began early in the election year. host: nikki is next in new york, independent line. caller: are you talking to nikki? host: yep. caller: i have experience with the federal legal system. i was arrested, indicted, tried, and found not guilty in federal court.

i have complete trust in the fbi and the doj. i have complete trust. what i saw on january 6 made me cry. i have complete trust that a jury decided that these individuals were guilty. a jury, not the doj, not christopher wray, but a jury of my peers found me not guilty. yet you will not accept the fact that 12 individuals, your fellow citizens, you people calling up -- this guy called people dummy-crats? i called trump followers parrots because they parrot everything they hear on fox news and oan.

this is incredibly evil and i have complete faith. i believe there are going to be more sentences handed down and they're going to be more convictions by juries. if you have never been served on a jury, if you have never sat through a trial, if you have never been a defendant and you talk about something you don't know -- and you can hear hannity or tucker calls talk about -- you have no idea. host: thank you. caller: there is a lot of people equating january 6 with the riots. i think the riots were wrong. i was in the middle of watching the city burn. i stand by the cops. they had the right to protest after watching somebody get killed.

january 6 had no right. they were told to come on that day by their leader and they can deny all they want, but if they were not told to be there, it would never have happened. republicans are the ones that should be leading but they are making them believe there is a justice system we can depend on. not after parroting, like the gentleman before me said, parroting over and over. that is not being a leader. that is causing more division in the country that we do not need. i believe trump is the cause of it and i hope they get to the root of it. he should be held accountable. everybody else involved is justifiably being held accountable. host: texas, brenda is on the democrat line. caller: thank you for taking my call.

i feel so vindicated this morning. i called from day one and told you people he was going to be absolutely horrible for this country. is a guy from pennsylvania, you did an excellent job of telling the black history here in america. the lady from new hampshire, god, if all people had your iq. host: your trust in the legal system when it comes to january 6. caller: i am getting to that, pedro. congress, senate, and trump's illegal pack are being investigated as well. the problem with the republican party, they still have not connected fox network with the settlement of the $1 billion because of the lies fox was sharing. host: but specifically to january 6. what is your level of trust?

caller: i am not surprised about any of it. they could have given more time to spend with the others. i think the time they are getting is accurate. i think trump should get even more. thank you, new york guy. i am going to listen to you again. host: john in north carolina, independent line. trust in the legal system when it comes to january 6 related cases. caller: morning. no, i don't. it is terrible to watch something like that, black lives matter burning cities and all that. not one of them that i know of has been charged with anything. the only person killed was a policeman shot a girl in the neck and killed her. i hope every day you have trump people calling. there has not been a day passed

since i have been watching you in 25 years that trump's name has not been brought up on your show. not one day. i cannot wait when the republicans get in. i expect you to do the same thing about biden because he has done crazy things, putting these foreigners over american citizens. host: one more call. victor in massachusetts, your trust in the legal system in regards to january 6 cases. caller: thank you so much. six puerto ricans who came to congress and did some shooting in congress, they got a lot of time in jail. i wonder why a man who has can committed 91 crimes, including rape, is still walking

the streets. these puerto ricans did not kill nobody. that was one of the worst -- i mean, icannot even think -- host: your trust in the legal system. caller: i do not trust it because they do not do the same thing they do to these people that they do to donald trump. host: victor the last call on this topic. anchor to all who participated. we will turn our attention to congress, specifically activities keeping the government from shutting down being done by the senate, and eventually the house. joining us as max cohen of punch bowl news joining us later on. we will talk with ian e-news

reporter thomas frank -- e&e news reporter thomas frank. he will talk about the rising cost to the federal government when it comes to disasters in the united states. those conversations, coming up on washington journal. ♪ announcer: c-span studentcam documentary competition is back and we are 20 years looking forward while considering the past. >> the youth of today are leaders of tomorrow. it's imperative we teach them the groundwork to succeed as they progress through life. >> we can work together to prevent fennel from becoming the world's next pandemic. >> really matters so it's

important -- important to understand the ramifications. announcer: we are asking middle and heisel students to create a videaddressing one of two questions, they want to know in the next 20 years what is the most important change would like to see in america or over the past 20 years what is the most important change in america. we show supporting perspectives as we do each year, we are giving away $100,000 in prizes with the grand prize of $5,000 and because we're celebrating 20 years, every teacher who has students participating in this year's competition has the opportunity to share a portion of $. the deadline for students submit documentaries is friday, january 19, 24. for more information about the contest and rules, visit our website at studentcam.org. announcer: a healthy democracy does not just look like this, it looks like this.

where americans can see democracy at work and citizens are truly informed. a republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word, from the nation's capital to wherever you are. because the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. announcer: c-spanshop.org is he spends online store, browse through our latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home to core, and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit organization. shop now or anytime at. -- c-span shop.org. "washington journal" continues. host: this is max cohen of punch

will news, reporting on congress and here to talk about important deadlines coming up for congress. thanks for coming on the program. guest: they swear having me. host: in the newsletter this morning, the first line of punch bowl says this, there is a warning siren blaring and speaker kevin mccarthy's direction and the message is even a prime position to -- can get jammed by the senate. what is going on? guest: this is referring to the battle over the supplemental funding request of the white house a $40 billion in aid for ukraine, disaster relief, and money to secure the southern border. kevin mccarthy and his republican congress have not been on board with this request but yesterday we saw senate minority leader mitch mcconnell, a top republican in the senate, back this, and this is backed by senate democrats so we have a unified senate in favor of this request and in favor of not shutting down the government at the end of september, a different story. host: first of all, ukraine

spending, why is it part of the package? guest: the white house wants to give more assistance to ukraine in the spending battle. there have been restraints on how much you can raise money in defense spending so another avenue, more aid to ukraine military, economic, a supplemental request and that is one way democrats and the white house and many senate republicans and more mainstream republicans want to do this but it is crucial in the house to get action with the freedom caucus type republicans who say we should not be sending money to the ukraine, focusing on united states itself focusing on crises of the border for example. host: border security being part of that and even how that relates to disaster relief as well. guest: the white house was putting together bunch of things to win over republican support. i think the board of secured measures was a play by the white house to say let's get bipartisan support. if we can get things that are priorities that republicans have, maybe they will support things that they see as democratic parties and factor in

wildfires recently in hawaii and elsewhere throughout the country, disaster relief, it is an important issue to replenish funds fema has and fema says they need more money to do with natural disasters across the country. >> as far as the timeline in the senate, what do we expect to see as far as activity on these various measures? >> is tough to say right now because the house is a key component but i would say some expect this $40 billion supplemental request in the short-term continued revolution to fund the government so we're looking at end of september timeline in my opinion, and also an effort to stop a government shutdown. host: the continuing resolution, talk about and what is the danger of the government shutting down because of a lack of money? guest: i think we need to be realistic that there is a real danger of the government shutting down because there's a difference in the house and senate on this issue. we talked to a bunch of senators, last night i was

talking to republican senators who told me they were concerned by what they saw from house republicans in the sense that house republicans are demanding some very partisan aspects in return for their vote for continued resolution. it would only be to extend the deadline from and of september 2 middle of november. we are lot -- we are not looking to pass a full year spending bill yet, and some of the house republicans say i want to vote to continue a resolution i need an impeachment against president -- impeachment inquiry against is a joe biden or defunding the jackson special counsel, things that will not happen in the senate, no way. we are looking at a big difference in the senate as we said in intro, they are more unified in the house because both republicans and democrats largely want to keep the government open but house republicans said a government shutdown is ok with me if a mean some programs we don't agree with are not funded. host: when it comes to the shutdown being ok, do either speaker mccarthy or minority leader mitch mcconnell buy into

that? guest: deathly not mccarthy and mcconnell. although he is not saying it as forcefully as mcconnell. i think mcconnell wants to show house republicans rule and have a narrow majority that they can leave the country and govern. he does not want to shut down but many members on the right of this conference would be ok with that. he needs to thread the needle and what he has done in past months is give redmeat to his republican members. we saw that in the nda on the site. give concessions on conservative wish list priorities in order to get a larger bill passed. we might see that again. host: max cohen is our guest. if you ask questions related to that, you can do so on the line, democrats to so -- 202, 748-8000. -- democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002.

if you want to text us, you can do that at (202) 748-8003. in light of the various bills coming from the senate, what is the sales pitch speaker mccarthy has to make to his various factions in the house? guest: they are make an opposite claim in terms of his factions a saying we need something in this bill to make is vote for it. they do not want to see the senate as something they want to accept. there is this big diversion between house republicans and senate republicans on many issues. senate republicans by large are more willing to play ball with democrats. we see mcconnell do that and more establishment friendly senate republicans do that this year and house republicans say we have the majority in the house, we are equal portion of this congress, why should we give in? i give a sense that speaker mccarthy would be we want to keep government open because we want to keep our majority end of voters think we are shutdown party, that might hurt us next year. and he will say maybe i would give you any impeachment inquiry vote, not impeachment

itself but opening it up to let's vote on this thing which many freedom caucus republicans have said this is important for us, we think joe biden has done excellent and we can get in on that later and that has been praised by some like marjorie taylor greene as an acceptable compromise for them to fund the government for short period of time. host: what is the preparation as far as the house and senate doing as far as preparing for a shutdown? guest: we are not there yet. we are early september so they are not serious conversations happening about that now. what i would say is to your last question how is mccarthy pitching this? he will say to members in addition we want more time to pass our very conservative spending cut full year fiscal 2024 year spending bill so that might be his also rhetoric is that you guys want to cut spending, that is a huge priority for house republicans that we can get there that we need more time to past

appropriation bills through the house because so far very few have passed in the house and the senate. host: kathleen's in mississippi, joins us on our democrat line for max cohen a punch bowl news. aches were calling. go ahead. caller: the problem is we should not be working on daylight savings time to dock. we should not have to go and get payday loans and people working in the education system getting paid less money. it is sad they are cutting off everybody on medicaid. medicaid expansion. we are here. everywhere, this is going global. stop killing us and our children. thank you. guest: i think medicaid funding

was mentioned there, that is something of a kratz have tried to claim republicans are trying to cut and that would be a big campaign issue and issue on the spending to come, democrats say republicans in the shutdown would wreak havoc on many programs vulnerable americans rely on and expect that kind of rhetoric and is argument to come to the fore as we get closer to a government shutdown, democrat argument is the shutdown has the biggest impact on the poorest of society, the ones who depend on government programs the most. host: republican line from teresa in tennessee, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: i'm well, you are on with our guest. caller: first of all, i do not like the way joe biden is extorting this country saying you either approve my ukraine funding or you don't get no disaster aid. why is he putting it all together like blackmail to

republicans? he knows they don't support funding ukraine as much as he does but he is going to throw that disaster aid in with it and porta security? you really think joe biden will secure the border? what does he need more money for border security for? another thing on kevin mccarthy, if republicans cannot get rid of kevin mccarthy, we will vote him out. i would rather lose the house than have kevin mccarthy go in with the republicans and doing everything joe biden once and mitch mcconnell wanting every penny -- agreeing to every penny joe biden says for $40 billion and now you know why joe biden has, and said i hope mitch mcconnell stays healthy. he needs him long enough to get that stupid bill. it is ridiculous. it is ridiculous and $700 to the people who lost their lives in hawaii? it is just crazy.

host: you put a lot out for our guests so we will that him respond to what he wishes. guest: interesting points with the ukrainian disaster relief. this is another argument for a lot of conservative republicans lately is wide between the two things together, they would support a clean bill just disaster relief don't support ukraine funding. i would say this is not anything new in washington. parties and politicians twin together priorities to build a coalition of votes. i do think the white house might have a stronger hand here because there is such a need to get disaster relief out that many politicians might say i do not support as much aid to ukraine but there are communities suffering in the united states so may be a smart political play. interestingly kevin mccarthy points clearly a lot of angst among the republican base against the speaker and collars like that and also members of mccarthy's own conference are not totally happy with the job performance and that expense a lot in my opinion his actions as

figure of the house. he is worried about a conservative revolt, motion to vacate is always thrown up in these instances, he was on my case last night threatened -- even matt gaetz the into outs mccarthy if he did not get his priority. it's a difficult job mccarthy house to satisfy the conference and remember as they just mentioned, he only has a five majority to bring tact is vulnerable incumbents with tough reelection races in 2024. host: bill in ohio, independent line, hi, bill. caller: hello, max. i wondered if you could help me out if i got that information or something. we were talking about fema requesting more funding. when we heard on a report that fema responders were staying in five star resorts and kind of wasting money it seems like. why could they not stay in a more inexpensive hotel? guest: i can assist barely speak

to that instance. i'm not familiar with that report staying in certain accommodations but i would say i think the problem with the money is certainly larger than a certain number of nights at the hotel. i think to respond to these disasters requires billions of dollars and i think it is $12 billion the government is requesting for fema so we're talking about a larger picture here in terms of responding to these devastating wildfire floods. host: $60 million is the actual figure. it is tied to the thing you have been talking about, max cohen our guest, a lot of things going on with senate this week. (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, and independents, (202) 748-8002 . max cohen, i want to play you little bit from the white house press briefing yesterday. john p or talking about the supplementary request, the white house desire to see that happening giving their case for it. [video clip] >> what we asked for today is basically anomalies, that is

what they are called, see our anomalies, to be clear about that, and to give you a rundown on august 10 we sent congress a supplemental request for critical emergency funding as you asked. that includes funding for disaster relief, $12 million as you heard from the administrator and also from liz moments ago supporting the people of ukraine and combating the fentanyl crisis which is incredibly important. today, omb set a technical package to congress called anomalies to avoid disruptions to government programs during a continuing resolution. that included an adjustment to wic, the supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children. without this adjustment, states would be forced to implement waiting lists, causing women and children to go hungry and pushing vulnerable families into poverty. so for some clarity, this is what congress should pass, pass both the supplemental request and technical package i laid out

with a continuing revolution -- resolution to prevent a government shutdown. this is something congress can do, prevent a government shutdown, they need to prevent a government shutdown. what i listed out are critical programs americans across the country, american families across the country, certainly need. host: that was from last week, not yesterday. but go ahead. guest: one aspect i want to touch on from what the white house press secretary said was government agencies need special assistance during the continued resolution period if there is one. this is not the ideal way to run a government. i think most outside of service would agree that you want ideally a year-long funding package at the end of the fiscal year and the acceptance we will have on continuing resolution, which is a fact, they will not be agreement on the full year spending deal by the end of september. it is acknowledgment of how typical it is in a divided washington to get these packages passed. even a cr, all of the agencies

will tell you that is not ideal for them because they have these flasks they are putting forth in fy 2024 process that are not going to be met in continuing resolution, which is a short from stop measure. host: jay is in indiana, you are next up. caller: my comment, thank you, c-span, micro comment is you can draw straight line from ronald reagan saying government is the problem. to today's gop who just refuses to govern or participate in our government. they are there to turn off the lights and padlock the front door and walk away and shut it down and my question for the guest is, in today's gop, what is the incentive for them to actually govern? and how does the gop, the

serious moderate republicans, how do they emerge from this in a way with some kind of consensus where they can actually work with democrats or we can have compromise? it seems they are stuck in a we don't want to govern, we hate government, feedback loop that keeps repeating over and over again. host: thank you, caller. guest: i think in that caller question is a distillation of what is happening in the republican party in some respects in a sense that may route conservative republicans come to washington and this is part of their campaign page, we want to curtail the federal government in our everyday lives and cut spending to these programs and agencies, which the mission does not align with our values and that is something the freedom caucus has been pushing for during the spending fight. that's a stark contrast to

democrats who buy large want to increase funding to programs and shape them in a way that long to their values. -- that aligned to their values. he's talked about more established republicans come i go back to the house republican and senate to publican -- republican dynamic. when they passed the funding levels or caps during the debt limit situation, mccarthy came back and said those are taxed. we can go lower than that and that is what house republicans are trying to do an appropriations bill is go lower than the cap they set during the debt limit fight and federal republicans are taking a different tact, saying those are the caps and we will go up to them and there is not the same desire for severe spending cuts in the senate republican conference as we see in the house republicans conference. host: two things before continuing on calls unrelated to deadlines, how do senate republicans feel about minority leader mitch mcconnell's health? guest: this is something i was working on yesterday when the senate came back from recess

asking republican senators about this, by and large it needs to be said the senate republican conference stands by mcconnell including his top leadership, allies who would be in line to replace him should he leave the senate, john cornyn, john thune, all saying they trust leader mcconnell and the trustee is in good health and cited this doctor's note that the attending physician released yesterday which said mcconnell is not suffering from a disorder among other things. there are couple other dissenting voices in the gop conference, rand paul was one member i spoke to yesterday, he has a doctor ophthalmologist and said he does not by the judicial expo nation by the doctor. he said to cite these episodes as dehydration is not about diagnosis, he thinks it is a neurological event. we heard josh hawley, another conservative republican saying the fitness and health of the leader is important. he has concerns as well as tommy

tuberville, another conservatives senate republican saying he is concerned about the health. host: this was one of the things we talked about and it fell by the wayside a little bit but as far as senator tuberville's hold on military appointments, is that stone place? guest: it is very much in place and has been brought before this week as we are entering september and the end of the month is the end of the chairman of the joint chief of staff mark milley, his tenure will end at the end of september, his replacement is up for nomination and has not been voted on by the senate and what is happening now is republicans are saying bring cq brown, this important military position, to the full senate floor for a vote. democrats say no if we do that that will set a precedent for voting on these other nominees that up her bill is blocking, doing that because of the pending on abortion policy. he does not support the policy of paying for service members to travel to get abortion care. democrats are resisting mats, though to be fair in the past

this position, the chair, the joint chief of staff, has been brought to the senate floor because it is an important position but democrats are worrying about playing into what about -- whataboutism and other nominees will not be cleared with you know ms. consent. there's an interesting disconnect. i think a lot of senators say publicly they agree with ideology and a sense they do not support the pentagon abortion policy but a number of senior republicans have also said including leader mcconnell that they do not agree with the tactic, that he should not be blocking all of these military positions -- military promotions. they think there is a readiness problem. so far to the state no one in gop leadership exerted the pressure necessary you might say to change senator tuberville's mind. honestly the rhetoric, he is not changing anything and his holds on these hundreds of positions continue. host: michelle is in new york, you are on with max cohen punch bowl news. caller: hi, guys.

good morning. i used to be a democrat, i'm from new york, but i switched my parties. there are three things i want to bring up, first off, mitch mcconnell, his health, fetterman's health, others health, this is an issue. it amazes me how the media will this go in on a republican yet does not speak out about anything else. these are people who had their finger on the nuclear button and it is ok they cannot even make a full sentence. mike mcconnell has brain damage, i know what is happening. tupper villas doing the right thing. he's holding back. we should not be involving our military readiness in this ideology with abortion on demand. third, they are expecting our people linked to ukraine who are

spending our money over there on yachts and everything else is all proven while we have 1700 students come up to 2000, still missing in hawaii. not one media outlet covers it. right wing, left-wing, side wing, any of it. these students missing, mccarthy was standing there when the reporter was asking him in hawaii why haven't these children applied for school? do no one -- do you want to know why? because they were killed in the fire. host: we will leave it there. guest: i think on the point about mcconnell, health and health of politicians, i would like to push back a little bit on the claim the media is not covering other politicians and their health. dianne feinstein, her health has been a primary of coverage for hill reporters and how she is often unable to identify where she is, she is not sure how to vote on things about prompting

of staff and that has been a major issue and it is a fair point that mcconnell is not the only politician who is eligible and i -- elderly in congress, not the only one suffering from a number of health issues. it's well-known members of congress are well above the median age of this country and leaders of this country are many times in their 80's and we see that with the president, with mitch mcconnell as well. host: how has the issue involving senator feinstein been resolved? is she still in congress? is she actively involved? guest: she is still here, actively involved. to be fair i think it has taken a backseat in recent weeks given how many major new developments but we saw before recess in a prominent abbess owed she was in senate judiciary committee hearings, she was called on, she started giving a longer speech and made her dissent to vote yes. she was not sure part of the meeting it was so she is not running for reelection leslie clear -- let's be clear.

she will end before then and that is the main update with her future. o'connell is a different story, he has not announced what is happening at and in the moment of time he is not going to announce any plans to stop serving in congress as we understand it now. host: will he speak with fellow republicans about these issues,\? guest: we are not sure of your there's a senate gop lunch today they have -- as they have their weekly lunch and he will confirm that he will address reporters following the lunch. that was one -- that was the venue when his first episode happened on camera if you remember when he froze for around half a minute and had to be ushered away by staff and came back later in the press conference and answer questions. this will be the first time he will be facing questions from the d.c. press corps following the latest episode in kentucky. he will be certainly asked about this episode. he addressed it yesterday, briefly during his speech on the senate floor he alluded to it as an incident that got a lot of media attention but nothing more. trying to make light of it which is the mcconnell way. host: let's hear from larry in

virginia, democrats line. caller: yes. him i on? host: you are on. go ahead. caller: what i think is both sides of congress, they will do whatever it takes to do something to the other side. what i have to say is this, people who believe in democracy and freedom, they better get up and smell the roses because, for some reason, they think donald trump or some kind of a messiah or something like that. he can just wave his hand and everything will be all right be a me tell you now, at this time are now, there will be some sad and sorry people. host: ok. that is larry from virginia. let's hear from jerry in florida, independent line. you are next up. caller: good morning.

host: morning. go ahead please. caller: i was just wanting to comment about joe biden and his policies compared to drums. joe biden, for some reason he is growing on me. some of the policies and decisions in the world in meeting with other leaders and everything, it is just unbelievable and trump really needs to be reelected. he was growing on me but now he is not. i was just kidding, check you later. host: that was jerry in florida, turning to the house concerning president biden. he said the possible question of an impeachment inquiry. where is it as of today? guest: speaker mccarthy has been vocal over the august recess, speaking to television networks, saying moving forward in the direction of opening speech makers, what exactly will be heb

and beached for is not entirely clear as of now and i one may clear i think the connection between joe biden and some of his son, hunter biden's, crime has not been definitively established what has been established as then vice president joe biden had a greater involvement in hunter biden's business deals then he previously let on, the extent to which we know which was revealed by testimony by one of hunter biden's associates that hunter biden was with his business partners and had a meeting and's put -- put his father on speakerphone and they would not talk about business, they would talk about weather or other chitchat stuff and that link between hunter's private deals and his father who was in office, vice president, is a concern to many republicans and goes be on what we previously had known. this has been termed by republicans as corruption, as lies by joe biden. i think that might form this impeachment inquiry, what the joe biden do, what did he do

privately and right now it looks likely that mccarthy is moving in the direction of a vote on his impeachment inquiry. once you have the inquiry, it seems likely in my mind that leads to impeachment. how this all plays out it was interesting because i'm not sure at this moment in time the car the has the votes to impeach biden. or the votes to open inquiry. he will not open inquiry and find joe biden and nothing wrong. so the inquiry vote is key. host: where is that resistance then from the house republicans or whatever factions, where is the resistance coming from? guest: the 18 house republicans that represent districts joe biden one in the election, these are the 18 most honorable members of kevin mccarthy's conference. this is bad politics for them in many ways. you don't want to be running for reelection in a presidential year in a district that voted for joe biden and you are talking about impeaching him tightly because that is not the issue these vulnerable

republicans want to focus on. they want to talk about the economy, inflation, criticized the biden administration yes but i think the fear is focusing too much on impeaching president biden will frame these somewhat more moderate republicans as partisan and be compared to the far right of their conference which is the last thing they want to do in a tough race against democrats. host: the house oversight committee chair consistently says he has evidence or at least what he would say is evidence about alleged wrongdoings. what is he basing that on? guest: i think a lot of it is dealing with that business connection, alleged business connection, between joe biden and hunter biden. right now there is still no evidence biden metal door was involved in hunter biden's business deals but i think what they are trying to do is say the president was untruthful. many times he said definitively i'd know nothing about hunter's business and that claim has been called into question given the

existence of the phone calls when he is talking. i think what they are hoping is they will get more information as this goes on but right now i would argue there is not the flaming gun. they are trying to connect also joe biden's foreign policy decisions as vice president with hunter biden's business deals in the same time. this is something which has not been definitively proven but that is the avenue they're trying to go down, potentially saying joe biden is an x country in hunter biden did it deal in this country and it is helpful for hunter biden. host: carol is in alexandria, virginia, democrat line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was calling in regards to tommy tuberville, you had made the comment earlier. i'm not sure how he is allowed to bring religious views into government. this seems to be a reoccurring theme with the republicans. they need to remove their views. many of us don't feel the same way and we should not be forced to feel the same way. that is all i would like to say

for today. thank you for taking my call. guest: i think that is the reality of the senate, the interesting dynamic in the body is one member of the senate can hold up a number of nominees single-handedly and that is a unique aspect. -- aspect you don't have in the house. he is plucking unanimous consent for these noncontroversial nominees because of the abortion policy. it only takes one member of the senate to throw a wrench in the plans a leader schumer who wants to clears leads nominees -- clear these nominees. host: bill is in idaho, republican line. caller: how are you guys doing today? my question for you, mr. cohen, is you seem to know a lot about the inside things democrats and republicans are trying to do to get the bill passed for the budget. i would like to know what would happen if the government did shut down, given his opinion on what would happen with first of

all the government services i'm sure would shut down where you are wanting to get government services. with the congressman's pay be shut down? if it were, with a only just pass a bill to have it reinstated at a later date so they still get paid? and would not get hurt at all by this. government -- if the government shutdown, a lot of the public would get hurt very bad. they are not going to be able to get the refund of the money just by asking for it. when the government does pass this bill to get more money, how are they going to get their money? they are just going to print more. why is our taxes even being used to benefit the health of people instead of just the government? host: thank you. guest: the government shutdown, the most essential services will be funded and republicans have argued this is worth it to extract spending cuts down the

line. that is the main argument in talking about the policy of government shutdown is the reason many groups of conservative house republicans say they are willing to do a shut down, they say bring it on, because they feel it is worth it in the short term to cause a shutdown in order to get a more favorable fiscal year 2024 spending bill passed which has cut the government which they say will reduce the government that and deficit. so they say it is worth on the short-term period of a shutdown to non-essential services, democrats will say things like the shutdown, you can simply say people living paycheck-to-paycheck we will pay you back later because that might not work for those when a mortgage payment is due on any given day of the month. host: washington state, that is where carol is on the democrat line. caller: good morning. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: yes, my comment is that i am a new 65-year-old elderly

person and i am on a fixed income and fixed is the word and , as 65, people have to basically forced to be on medicare. i was on medicaid and now i my -- now i am on medicare. medicaid is no longer an option. i cannot afford to pay for my medication. there are quite a few things i have to take to keep going. i have been thinking that i would probably be better off fighting medicare because it is not affordable. i have to pay my monthly dues, 164 month and i cannot afford my

medication. i have to pay out-of-pocket now. it is better to be on medicaid than on medicare. so what can the president or also the -- i am a constituent of governor hensley and a constituent of president biden. what can we do to make medicare affordable? it is really hurting me. host: that is carol from washington state. she talks in large about the medicare/medicaid issue but if you would like to respond. guest: one thing we ever seen -- we have seen recently as medicare is allowed to negotiate drug prices which is something passed the inflation reduction act last summer which is a huge victory for democrats who were pushing for this policy for a long time.

the government can negotiate with drug companies to reduce prices of medications currently a limited list of medications at the moment, they are trying to expand it, that is major for people who want to lower the cost of health care. this is proposed by health care companies that say this is able to stifle innovations but that is lowering costs. host: how are guest is working a punch will not news, mexico and joining us for this conversation. thanks for your time. guest: thank you. host: our next guest coming up will be thomas frank of e and e-news, talking about the disaster supplemental the president is using because of debts not only in fort about hawaii. he will join us for that conversation later. until then, you can participate in open form, democrats, (202) 748-8000, republicans, (202) 748-8001, and independents, (202) 748-8002. we will take those calls when "washington journal" continues.

announcer: 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 the day's biggest events and live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the u.s. congress. white house events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics at your fingertips. also stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network and c-span radio, plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. download for free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. ♪ announcer: since 1979, and partnership with the cable

industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress, from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings, and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat on how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions, and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. announcer: if you ever miss any of c-span's coverage, you can find it online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates, and other events feature markers guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights. these points of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos. the timeline tool makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on c-span's points of interest.

listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker, play c-span radio, and listen to "washington journal" daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern, importing congressional hearings and other republic affairs throughout the day and weekdays at 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. eastern, washington today for the fast-paced stories of the day. listen to c-span any time. just tell your smart speaker, play c-span radio. powered by cable. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: open forum. you can participate at (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, and independents, (202) 748-8002 --(202) 748-8002. maybe one attacks us too, you can do that at -- maybe want to text us too, you can do that at (202) 748-8003.

you heard senator mcconnell as he went back to the senate floor as congress reconvened in which he alluded to the issues concerning his health and at least as he saw them. that -- this is from the speech. [video clip] >> the conversation to address our country's most pressing needs and we need to keep the lights on from october 1. in january, i pointed out washington democrats, the new normal they face, the american people elected a divided government and demand we work together on our most basic governing responsibilities. as i reminded our colleagues regularly since then, that meant funding the government the regular order, encouraging to see senator collins, senator murray, and colleagues on the appropriations committee make serious headway in that direction.

next week, we will aim to past the first batch -- pass the first batch of their work on the floor. also make clear the senate's top priority must be keeping the american people safe. this month we will have a chance to do that with supplemental appropriations for urgent national security and disaster relief priorities. we need to continue to invest in americans defense industrial base, both to support our partners and help our forces deter threats. as our colleagues from florida and hawaii know all, emergency personnel are working overtime to help communities shatter natural disasters over the summer. the senate reconvenes with our work cut out for us and deadline fast approaching. i hope our colleagues has returned -- each of our colleagues has returned ready to

do their part. host: senator mcconnell from yesterday. you can see the speech and more that took place on the senate for yesterday on our app, cspan now and go to our website at c-span.org. a couple things to point you to on the network today, at 10:00 today after this program, senate foreign relations committee will take a look at the security partnership between australia and the united kingdom and united states a first -- as first announced two years ago through information and technology sharing. you will see the status of that on the foreign relations committee. you can also watch on the app and our dot org. later on, dhs officials will discuss immigration law and testify on procedures for migrants encountered at the u.s. southern border. this comes after four months of the expiration of the title 42 emergency health order to allow border patrol officers to turn away asylum-seekers during covid-19.

2:30 is the hearing. our main network on the app and c-span.org. the first call from open form comes from dylan in south dakota. republican line. you are on. caller: yes, i was wondering about the shutdown. i am a disabled veteran out in south dakota by fort meade and we have a lot of veterans that get uptight when you guys -- when they are doing their budgets, and i was wondering about our v.a. checks. will we get checks if they shut our v.a. down in social security? a lot of us fought in vietnam and a lot are committing suicide every day. do know what i'm saying? there are 2000 per day in this country. so i was wondering. host: have you checked in with your v.a. representative or congressional -- caller: they don't want anything

-- they don't know anything. they are in the same boat that we are come out here wondering a lot of us have ptsd. it rows a lot of people up when they do this. it is like fear, you know what i'm saying? to pay our bills, get food, i see lines of people here in south dakota that are waiting for food baskets. every week. it is a shame. then biden and them say they are doing such a good job. i am 73 years old and i have seen a lot in my day, and -- host: have you thought about checking in with your congressional representative? caller: yes, i have called senator thune's office and spoke to jesse over there. the advocate. and senator brown's office. they don't seem to know anything either. i don't know. our country has gone really

downhill and i do not think the republicans or democrats got anybody that is worthy enough to be our president. they are all too old anyway. host: sandra is next in toledo, ohio, democrats line. caller: hello? host: hi, you are on. caller: ok. i am calling about striking down of roe v. wade and by the dobbs decision. my first thought was, my god, they are sentencing women. and they are sentencing them to life. i thought where is the partner in this, the man? what is his punishment? for creating a child. how is he going to be responsible? and i thought with the benefit of 3d printing or so, maybe he should be required to wear a baby bump and have the baby bump be increased along the

pregnancy. host: because the decision of roe v. wade, how does ohio do with abortion-related issues? caller: well we just allowed the possibility of a citizens referendum to be put on the november ballot by voting down the more stringent requirements that the state put in place for ohio, which would have been 60% to get something on the ballot versus 50%. the 60% was voted down, so now the abortion requirement is -- the petition to have an abortion law made legal is now on the ballot for november. host: that a sandra in ohio. let's hear from tom in illinois, republican line. caller: good morning. good morning.

just a couple things. the deficit jumped to trillion dollars from one joined dollars under biden's $7 trillion in less than three years and under trump previously over a $.5 trillion in his presidency. it is just a bunch of -- when it comes to the spending side. the fact that essential services are always covered under any budget breakdown, but what i wanted to emphasize here was i think speaker mccarthy has made a major error in his efforts on the federal deficit and on lack of appropriations bills. the house is only getting one appropriations bill and many set the contents out for five weeks or so on a break. at least five to six appropriation bills at this time

by the house is outrageous if not more than that. i do not care with the problem is within the caucus. they should have passed these appropriations bills to then go to conference with the senate. it is outrageous the republican conference has not passed appropriations. matt gaetz and one of these other idiots that comes on tv spouting their political believes all the time and still can't push the wagon across the finish line without passing appropriations bills. that is why they are there. host: that is tom in illinois. the washington times reporting house investigators issued six subpoenas tuesday, seeking information about the government's role in allegedly obstructing a criminal probe for hunter biden over hundreds of thousands of dollars in unpaid taxes and lying on a gun background check form. the subpoena saw all documents and information related to the fbi off tipping the secret service and biden team about the

interview, the irs and fbi plan to conduct with hunter biden in december of 2020. that is a washington times. if you go to the new york times this morning, they report represented of george santos enter talks with federal prosecutors about possible paths forward in his front case in a letter filed tuesday. prosecutors in the eastern district of new york notified the judge he intended this week to follow a batch of new evidence against mr. santos, a republican represent and queen in the request to delay a court conference set for thursday. prosecutors anticipate making another substantial production of evidence this week and wanted to give mr. santos time to review the material. they added the parties have continued to discuss possible paths forward in this manner and would need additional time and continue discussions. they asked the conference to be pushed to october 27. larry joins us from north carolina, independent line. caller: yes, sir.

a gentleman called in about the social security check. i have been through shutdowns and we will receive our benefits. host: ok? caller: and as far as the dobbs decision, they didn't ban abortion, they just put it back to the states where it should've been and never taking it to the federal level. as far as the wildfires, it is man-made. they can stop forest management, cutting fire lanes, burning tenders. california and their fires [indiscernible] and people injured but they know

the risk of welding in an area, wooded areas, where they have no forest management. i live on the coast, i know thousands of hurricanes. host: charlotte is where wisconsin is. democrats line. caller: bear with me. the reason why i'm calling is because i has the same thing bruce willis has and i've heard a lot of people, republicans, talk about people calling them zombies inkling them ignorant and believe me, i am far from being stupid and how would like for you to have summary on the show to explain to people about strokes. just because a person has a

stroke does not mean they are stupid. i do vote and another thing, i do remember the country under trump. host: charlotte in wisconsin. usa today with a story taking a look at the white house yesterday, the white house press secretary not only talking about the status of the first lady, joe biden, who had covid but also how president biden plans to proceed forward and has not diagnosed with covid, still testing negative, but more from the white house press secretary yesterday. [video clip] >> finally, an update on the president and first lady since she she tested positive for covid-19 last night. i can tell you the first lady is experiencing mild symptoms and will remain in delaware for the week. president biden tested negative last night for covid-19 and tested negative again today. he is not experiencing any symptoms.

as far as the steps he is taking, since the president was with the first lady yesterday, he will be masking while indoors and around people. in alignment with cdc guidance, and has has been the practice in the past, the president will remove his mask once sufficiently distanced from others indoors and while outside as well. the cdc guidelines recommend a combination of masking, testing, and monitoring for symptoms. the president is doing all of that in close consultation with his division. host: there is more from those white house press briefings when they take place in washington. we record them, we are them, and we show them live. you can see them on the website, that app, and a variety of ways to hear from the press secretary. clay in north carolina, republican line, your next. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you doing this morning? i would just get down to the nitty-gritty.

i do not have trust into the justice department. what i see happening is people being charged for 22 years and then nothing -- a lot of people don't know why those people were there. first of all, the people that came to the rally, it was from the rnc that are local, people are republicans, sent you a text or invite to the actual -- not a rally, to donald trump's speech. nothing in that speech encouraged anybody to do any kind of balance. as far as i know, i am former military and i went pretty quick to the capital and there was already people in there. number two, i pray for our

president because he is definitely not there, and just the clip you showed there, if you look at the clip last night of him or yesterday when he was in the yellow room with a meeting or so forth, he was taking his mask off in front of a bunch of people. so i hope we are not going to have a repeat of the covid situation, and i don't know if this is great democrat plan or not. host: michael in washington state, democrats line. caller: good morning. my question is about the congressional brakes and recess. doesn't president biden have the ability to take away the senate and house vacation? if so, how come he did not do it

in this case? there are so many things that are required by congress to get done. we have a looming government shutdown, and to be earnest, i can't even fathom why people would go on vacation a couple months before we have this deadline. people should be working. the average american person don't even get the money vacation time or brakes congress gets. additionally, the average person does not start work at 10:00 in the morning. i do not understand where the priorities lay with our senior leadership at the legislative level. it is confusing to me. host: let's hear from lucresha, independent line. caller: good morning. my question is, is anyone in america interested in calling another convention to do another

constitution, constitutional convention? because our three branches of government are not operating diligently and they are not operating in the good faith of the american public as a millennial, elder millennial. time is moving on and we are out here living our lives while our congress and president and judicial system are fighting over things that make no sense. just thinking about how can we change if we don't go back to the drawing board? that is my question and my thought, and i think you guys for allowing me to be on this morning. host: lucresha in washington, d.c., finishing off this form. thank you to those who participated.

$60 million, the request from the white house when it comes to disaster relief. a lot of political tangles they could be tied up in that to explain it for us, end news thomas frank joins us to talk about the cost of natural disasters in the united states. we will have that conversation with him. when "washington journal" continues. >> this fall, watch c-span's new series, books that shaped america. join us as we embark a

captivating journey in partnership with the library of congress which first created the books that shaped america list to explore key works of literature from american history. the 10 books have won awards and led to significant societal changes and are still talked about today. hear from featured renowned experts will shed light on the profound impact of these iconic works and virtual journeys across the country intricately tied to the celebrated authors and their unforgettable books. among our featured books, common sense, huckleberry finn, their eyes were watching god, and free to choose. watch our 10 part series, books that shaped america, starting monday, september 18 at 9 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. >> and join us thursday for a

preview of books that shaped america with the librarian of congress and a best-selling author live from the library of congress. this is the 14th librarian of congress. douglas frankly teaches that rice university and has edited books on several presidents d other famous americans. watch the preview of our new series, books that shaped america, thursday live at 7 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-sn now, or online at c-span.or >> this year, book tv marks 25 years of shining a spotlight on leading nonfiction authors and their books. from author talks, interviews, book tv has provided viewers with a front row seat to the

latest literary discussions on history, and so much more. you can watch book tv every sunday on c-span2 or online at book tv.org. book tv, 25 years of television for serious readers. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now is tom frank who covers requests for disasters and disaster aid. welcome back to the program. guest: thanks for having me. host: fema has of fun but what does it accomplish? guest: it pays for disasters. it's a separate fund like any federal fund that serves one specific purpose. that purpose is to help communities and individuals recover, cleanup, rebuild after a major disaster. the president declares florida

or hawaii a disaster and that basically opens up the account for states, counties and cities to tap into the money to help pay for the key spending items which are debris cleanup, disasters because on norma's amount of debris and to rebuild roads and police stations and hospitals and so on. also individuals in the designated disaster area are eligible for a few thousand dollars which is not a lot of money for emergency expenses like hotel rooms for a couple of weeks or emergency supplies. the thing about the disaster fund is as there are more and more disasters in this country and as they become more and more damaging, a lot more money is being drawn out of them. the budgeting process is very difficult because you never know how much you are going to need

in a disaster fund each year so it's a little bit of guesswork. it's a lot of guesswork. host: so they will put x amount of dollars into this fund? guest: every year it gets funded in the national budget but the question is how does the administration come up with the request and what they typically done is taken the average of the past 10 years. that's tough because you have some years like 2017 when you had hurricane harvey in texas and maria in florida -- irma in puerto rico and the costs were astronomical but than other years where there is nothing. that is why there is some guesswork involved. part of the way it's been acknowledged is that there will on occasion be supplemental requests like midyear requests for emergency money and that's

understood as part of the process. congress typically has been pretty comfortable approving supplemental requests. is not a partisan thing regardless of the administration. people say all the time that hurricanes don't care what party you are or anything. they are just there to make a mess. host: before the events in maui and before i daily what was the condition of the fund? guest: it has been troubled all year really. that goes back to march of 2020, the beginning of the pandemic when president trump basically opened up the disaster fund for states to pay for their response to covid. it was an unusual use of the fund, it hadn't been done before. nobody was really objecting, it seemed like a reasonable way to get money from the federal

government to the states that were on the front lines. that again was just a wild amount of guesswork. part of the issue is that some of those costs came in much higher than were expected so when estate gets approved for a disaster, fema says we will give you $5 billion or one billion we will pay 75% of your costs whatever they are. there is a lot of uncertainty. allow -- there is a real delay between when a disaster occurs and when the federal money actually -- the check gets cut. you've got to do the work, you've got to submit the receipts and get everything approved and that can take several years which is why there was a lot of uncertainty about the pandemic cost for several years. it's not like it was a hurricane

that happened in one afternoon. the cost accumulated over a long time. host: if you want to ask our guest questions about the condition of the disaster relief fund, for those in the eastern and central time zones, (202) 748-8000, mountain and pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001 if you are impacted by natural disasters, (202) 748-8002 and you can text us at (202) 748-8003. here is the president from last week and making his request for the fund. >> you know, these crises are affecting more and more americans. every american rightly expects fema to show up when they are needed. to help with the disaster. i'm calling on the united states congress, democrats and republicans to ensure the funding is there to deal with the immediate crisis as well as our long-term commitments to the

safety and security of the american people. host: there is the president last week from his visit in florida. guest: i just talked about these emergency funding requests. in august, the president put in a request to congress for emergency funding, $40 billion package, a lot of money going to ukraine are supposedly going to ukraine and about $12 billion going to replenish the disaster fund. lastly, the president increase the request to $16 billion. the reason he has to make the case to congress this time is because the fema money is part of a bigger package. it is not uniformly approved. congress is usually, no issue

approving money but the ukraine money makes it more complicated. it's a much more complicated issue, it's not like we will help hawaii and florida rebuild. the question is whether congress will approve the overall package or whether there will be too many people who are opposed to the ukraine portion of the president's request and what that will mean and whether the package will get voted down or whether they will split the request into. that's why he has to make these kind of public statements. normally i don't think presidents have to make a better request for a few billion dollars extra for the disaster fund. host: how common is it to make these requests from the fund for other requests? guest: it's usually every other year. it's not unusual. the unusual part is blending it

with other things. when you do that, you make it more complicated. it was certainly be easier to say i want $16 billion for disasters. host: we have the potential of tropical storm lee making its way and possibly turning into a hurricane. if war comes in weird debating about disasters, what happens? is there a gap? guest: this gets really deep into the weeds of disaster funding. fema last week basically cut off the credit card. a lot of the fema money from the disaster fund is in the form of reimbursements for these rebuilding projects, reconstruction projects. what fema did because the dollars are getting lower and lower, they said we are not

going to do anymore reimbursements for rebuilding roads in texas from hurricane harvey or systems in puerto rico. we are saving our money just for these emergencies like idalia and the maui fires just so we can pay for the most urgent, immediate needs, search and rescue missions, the aids to individuals and cleaning up debris to keep things functioning. it's as if your credit card got shut off and you are forced for the next few weeks or however long, all you have is the cash in your wallet and maybe money in a checking account. host: ultimately, the decision at the fema level of how much goes where -- if several states from a disaster ask for money, how does fema decide who gets what? guest: the decision to approve -- the practice starts with a

request from a governor. for example, governor desantis in florida last week made a written request to the president saying i am asking you to declare these counties in my state a disaster and to approve these categories of funding. that decision is really the president's. fema does a lot of vetting of it and looks at the numbers and makes a recommendation to the president but the president will usually follow that. it is ultimately up to the president. not just to approve a request for disaster funding but to approve paying for cleanup but we are not going to pay for rebuilding roads or we will pay for cleanup -- it's like in all a cart menu that states can order from and they say we are out of that word yes that's special. that's how it works.

host: the lines are on the screen if you want to talk about tom frank and disaster funding and related issues. gary from florida is on with our guest. caller: i was calling because i had read something and looked it up and maybe i might be mistaken but i read about where fema for the emergency aid has spent $47 billion. guest: 47 billion on what? host: caller, are you there? caller: yes, i'm here. guest: when you say 47 billion that fema had spent, meaning spent it on what? caller: for the spending for the disaster areas that had been affected.

guest: fema spends billions and billions of dollars per year. over the nearly 50 years of its existence, it probably has spent hundreds of billions of dollars. i don't know what $47 billion is. just to give you an example, fema's annual budget for the disaster fund is usually about $20 billion. that's with the president has requested for the fiscal year beginning october 1. it's a gas and sometimes it's more and sometimes it's less. the thing about the disaster fund is is not -- is it is not -- we spend our money and we are done for the year. i'm not sure what the 47 billion is but it spends a lot of money and these disasters are very expensive when you talk about the amount of destruction that a

wildfire or hurricane can cause. host: charlottesville, virginia, eric. caller: i finished your book of one market under god. guest: yes, that's the other tom frank. i do get confused with him a lot but i didn't write that book. i didn't write any of those books. host: thank you for the clarification. when it comes to disaster funding, there's fema but fema also administers the national flood insurance program. guest: that is correct. host: remind people what that is. guest: it's a government program that basically sells flood insurance. it sells flood insurance to anyone who wants to buy it. it's the main supplier, about 90% of the flood insurance policies in the u.s. so it's really crucial. one thing to understand is that flood insurance is not part of

your standard homeowners policy that will cover fire damage or wind damage or debris damage. you have to buy a separate policy to cover flood damage. the insurance companies have not been selling those for basically 50 years. fema now sells it. a lot of people, about 5 million fema policies which is way short of the number of policies there should be. a lot of people don't buy it because it's not cheap. host: the gao puts the program of flood insurance on its high risk list year after year. they say is experienced difficult challenges because ' tasked with twopeting goals, keeping it affordable and keeping the program solvent. it has led to premium rates that do n reflect the full loss

that has transferred some of the financial burden for individual property owners to taxpayers. as of september, 2022, the debt was huge after having canceled $16 billion of debt in 2017. guest: that is changing. the flood insurance program that fema runs has always been a hybrid of an insurance program and a social welfare program. as you say, there are these two conflicting demands in federal law that say it should be run like a business, like your homeowner insurance reflection rates. the flood insurance should reflect the flood risk of your property and yet there is language in the statute of the insurance should be affordable. it's one of those vague terms that's scattered throughout the united states code. what fema has done since the

program was created in 1968 is focused more on affordability. the result has been that the program has never charged the rates it should charge, the rates that a private company would charge. what happened is after hurricane katrina in 2005, there were a norma's claims. fema just didn't have enough money. this happens to insurers all the time. that's why the insurance companies go insolvent. they go out of business. government programs. go out of business, they just get bailed out. that's with a reference was for forgiving debt. about two years ago, fema undertook this huge restructuring of rates basically throwing away the social welfare

part and saying we will act like allstate and farmers and we will be an insurance company and we are going to charge everyone what's called the actuarial rates, the rates you should be charged. the new rates would begun taking effect. it's what they call a glide path so they will be phased in gradually over a decade or more. that is going to solve the problem of the flood insurance program not having enough money. but it's going to greet a new problem because many people are going to drop their policies when their insurance rate goes to $5,000 per year instead of $1000. so you will end up with a much smaller number of people who have flood insurance. that's dangerous because if you get flooded and you don't have flood insurance, your homeowners insurance won't cover it and you

will have to pay for it out-of-pocket. flooding can cause a lot of damage. host: julie from chicago, go ahead. she hung up. this is diane in lakewood, florida. caller: good morning. looking for a suggestion. i have a problem. i am a victim of hurricane irma. it destroyed my mobile home. i have been on a rebuild florida list for -- since 2017 or whenever the hurricane was. every year, we go through a process in december where you submit your financials in order to stay -- to state your case. i did this and 2021, i was in the process of working with my

account representative. i had contracted covid or i thought i did. i was confined to the place where i was without internet connection or anyway to submit my financial paperwork. during that time, the rebuild florida, which they do all the time, downsized. they took my representative and did not -- they gave me to someone else. they also did not process my paperwork. she left at some point in december. ever since then, i've been on this kind of appeals list. but i have never received an appeal letter. i don't know what to do, honestly. i have contacted rebuild florida.

i guess it was in march with my new representative and she said write out an appeal. host: hold on, caller. guest: what is rebuild florida? caller: rebuild florida was the next step that fema passed us into. once you are accepted into fema and you had severe damage, rebuild florida is a program that replaces people who lost their mobile home. guest: it replaces homes or repairs home? caller: it replaces the mobile home and put a new one on the lot. guest: so specifically for mobile homes. caller: i think it's for anybody. that's the situation i am in. i don't really know. host: i'm sure if you go to florida jobs.org, it says it's created to help long-term recovery from hurricanes.

guest: if it's out of the florida department of economic development, it's not a fema program but a hud program, the department of housing and urban development. it also does something similar to fema which gives a lot of money to states and counties to distribute to homeowners such as yourself to repair homes. i'm guessing that you got what's called disaster relief money from the housing and urban development department because that's the department that deals with the florida department of economic development. host: at least that's what it looks like on the website. guest: also, irma was six years ago so you wouldn't still be waiting for fema aid. have you been rejected? host: the caller is gone. guest: let's move on. i guess the bigger point is that

there is this alphabet soup list of federal disaster programs. the one everyone knows is fema but there is an endless list of agencies, the small business administration, the interior, agriculture, they all have disaster aid programs. guest: you bet. yes, florida has had a major insurance crisis in the past three or so years. i forget with the latest number is, maybe 14 insurance companies in florida -- it's become insolvent. it's like bankruptcy but it means they don't have enough money to pay their claims. there are two things which have been responsible for that. when is florida has been hit with a lot of disasters.

the thing to understand about florida is everybody in florida lives on the coast. it's not like texas where you have a small percentage of the state or even louisiana. everyone in florida lives on the coast because that's why they live in florida. a storm i likean last year or urgent -- or irma or ideally will cause a lot of damage. they've been hit with these costs that they can't deal with than the other issue in florida is there is a system of litigation where people, homeowners and policy owners can sue over claimed settlements there insurance companies offer. the legal structure has been, in the eyes of some, too favorable toward plaintiff's. it's become very costly for insurance companies to defend those claims. yes, florida has a huge insurance crisis and that's

something that may get worse as the claims are submitted from my daily a. host: mike from north carolina. caller: good morning. i live in north carolina about the middle of the state but these people that live on the coast all the way from the jersey shore all the way to florida, they know that there is a strong possibility of a hurricane going to hit along the east coast and sometimes in the gulf coast. our insurance is getting higher to help pay for those people that have insurance that live on the coast. if you can afford to live on the coast, you can afford to live -- you can afford to pay insurance. the fact that disturbs me is that fema has said new york city -- has sent new york city $100

million for the illegal immigrant crisis. that's a thing the biden administration has cause, not mother nature or global warming. that money there should not be allocated to new york city. it's just like california and chicago, all the sanctuary cities, all the illegals are welcome here and they get them in their and they cry for the government. guest: let me answer your first question because i don't know about the issues with immigration. you said that people living on the coast know that another hurricane will affect them. i don't know if they do. maybe they know it intellectually but they don't know it to the point that they do anything about it. they think maybe it will happen and maybe it won't but to make a good point. that's what has been happening with the fema flood insurance.

the people living on the coast whether it's in new jersey, florida or anywhere have been paying insurance rates that are too low. they should be higher. it's too low for the amount of risk those properties face. they been subsidized by people like you who don't live in flood zones and don't live on the coast or in a hurricane zone and that's exactly what fema is trying to correct right now. that is why you are seeing places like coastal louisiana and some parts of coastal florida the flood insurance cost are going way up. it's a good point. these are what they call cross subsidies. they definitely have been a problem for the reasons the caller pointed out. host: this is from a viewer who texted us -- guest: there is a lot of

oversight. the main oversight comes from the inspector general of the department of homeland security which fema belongs to. the inspector general always looks at fema and other spending to look for improper spending and improper uses. there is also congress. fema has plenty of oversight in congress and that's part of the job of congress is to analyze what fema is doing with its money. host: tom frank joined us for this discussion on disaster aid, thank you for the time. we finish up with another round of open forum. if you want to participate, (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 four republicans and independents (202) 748-8002. we will go until 10:00.

♪ >> c-span studentcam documentary competitions back and we are celebrating 20 years, looking forward well considering the past. >> the youth of today are the leaders of tomorrow. it's imperative we take care of them. >> we can work together to prevent fentanyl from becoming the world's next pandemic. >> inflation really matters. we need to understand the ramifications of inflation going out of control. >> middle and high school students can create a five or six minute video about the change it like to see in

america. or the most important change in america. you need to show different perspectives. we have 100,000 dollars in total prizes with a grand prize of $5,000. because we are celebrating 20 years, every teacher who has students participating has the opportunity to share a portion of the $50,000. e deadline is friday, january 19, 2024. for more information, visit our website at studentcam.org. >> porter your copy of the 118th congressional directory now available at c-spanshop.org. it's your access to the federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member and important information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. scanned the code at the right to

order your copy today or go to c-spanshop.org. it's 9 five cents plus shipping and handling in every purchase help support our nonprofit operations. be up to date in the latest in publishing with tv's podcast about books with current nonfiction book releases plus bestseller list 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 podcasts. >> "washington journal" continues. host: it's open forum, (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 four republicans, and (202) 748-8002 for independents. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. it was yesterday that president

trump's former advisor, peter navarro as part of his trial that starts today, the jury was seated yesterday. he was heckled by several people as he left the d.c. courthouse. his criminal trial is on contempt of congress and here is a portion of that from yesterday. >> the trial will begin tomorrow which is good news. it wasn't a lengthy jury and panel meant and we will see you all tomorrow. i buried the lead. >> ha ha ha ha. >> thank you,. [whistle}] >> are you going to talk? >> this is what's wrong with

america here. www. defendant peotter.com. -- defend peter.com. come on, cut that out. >> let the man talk. >> that's great. >> he has every top -- he has every right to talk. >> trader. traitor. >> this is just wrong. i'm trying to speak about serious issues with you and the clown with the whistle, go figure. defend peter.com and help support this fight against the attack on the separation of powers. these trials are very expensive. >> send me money. >> these trials are very

expensive and it's part of the democrats were fair. [whistle] >> come on, dude. host: taking place yesterday . you can talk about that an open forum but richard is first in missouri, democrats line. caller: yeah, i'd like to talk about my senator and the senator from texas. a whole bunch of republicans held up the vote on january 6 until the mop got there -- until the mop got there and destroy them. according to the constitution, the 14th amendment, but should not be in washington. they should be kicked out in the supreme court to be do something about it. they are part of the scheme to overthrow the government.

they ought to be on trial instead of trump. they are the ones trying to overthrow the government. that's all i have to host: host: say about it. maggie is in georgia on our line for democrats, go ahead. caller: is this me? host: you are on. caller: i'm sorry, i didn't hear my name. two things, first of all, i think it would help a lot if we would just get our utilities underground during a disaster. hurricane or tornado's or whatever, we need to have our utilities underground. number two, during katrina, i remember when it came up for bids for the cleanup, i think

the bid was like $100 and he subcontracted. and it ended up all they paid was $12 a yard. there were four or five people who were making money on it and finally, it only cost $12. fema should only pay the lowest bid. thank you. host: two special elections yesterday, one of them and politico. in politico.

rollcall talks about the special election in utah.

the evangelina in san antonio, texas read a book in line. caller: i was calling because i'm confused about all the voting and stuff going on now. during the summer, i had a bunch of mail coming in from iges democrats that wanted me to vote through the mail. they just did they start that already or what's going on? host: that depends on your state and how they handle that.

you might want to contact your state officials. caller: i wasn't too sure, thank you. host: ron in pennsylvania, democrats line. caller: hello. good morning. i would like to clarify something about this xl pipeline. this is from the natural resource defense council publication. the supreme court affirmed that the keystone xl pipeline could not be built while the fight played out. president biden then killed the project. there were so many lawsuits, probably some of those were from states that had aquifers and were endangered. some of those were republican

senators, state senators that were opposed to this. i think it should be clarified. only 8% of the pipeline was actually completed and most of it was piped from canada to vancouver. it's still being transported. it's not to our country. host: that's ron from pennsylvania. if you want to participate in this open forum, it's (202) 748-8000 four democrats, (202) 748-8001 four republicans and independents (202) 748-80023. in georgia yesterday, another look into the case of election interference with the expected appearance of those participating in those being charged but there were changes. here to explain what happened is the guardian. thanks for giving is your time,

good morning. guest: good morning. host: talk a little bit about what was expected yesterday and then what happened. guest: we have been seeing a trickle of co-defendants in the georgia election case, basically pleading not guilty and waving their appearance at their arraignment. we had been scheduled for all 19 defendants in the fulton county indictment to plead not guilty that was what happened. what didn't happen was them appearing in person. they filed waivers for appearances and they won't be in the courtroom to hear the charges against them. the pretrial process now starts as the co-defendants prepare. host: as far as them not showing in pleading not guilty, was that unusual situation or has that

happened before? guest: under georgia state law, independence in an indictment can waive the formal reading of the charges. that's what happens in court anyway. it's rare for them to appear especially of the magnitude of the fulton county indictment where it's a conspiracy charge with multiple counts of criminal activity alleged for that to be read out in court. we saw an expedited version of that. it basically means trump and the rest of the co-defendants avoided having to come in person. they plead not guilty and they waived the arraignment but it's not typical. host: some of the defendants did not enter their plays within the 48-hour window before the hearing date. does that matter and what happens to them? guest: it's up to the judge's discretion. judges have wide discretion when

it comes to things like this. typically, you have to file 48 hours before the window but in this instance, it appears judge mcafee, the presiding judge in this case, has accepted the waivers. they have been docketed by the clerk of the court and that indicates that nothing further will happen and he will accept they're not guilty plea. host: a little bit about judge mcafee, what do we know about him? guest: he is one of the superior court judges in fulton county. he is known to be relatively new to the bench in georgia. with a case of this magnitude, it's difficult to know how judges react. when we look at the federal cases in comparison, you have the judge in the d.c. january 6 case and she is shown to be very aggressive with her scheduling and has shown some deference to

prosecutors. there is no way to read into that. as of right now, we are still waiting on a lot of decisions as to where the trial will ultimately be as well as how this case is going to progress and whether there will be motions or a speedy trial for some defendants and not others. we have to see how it's approach. host: can you elaborate on those trying to get the severance from the other co-defendants? guest: we've got a hearing today for kenneth chesbro and sidney powell, two trump election attorneys who moved to have a speedy trial. the judge sent a tentative trial date of october 23 and we will hear whether the district attorney is ready to go to trial by then whether or not she enters that trial date to be

realistic. the defense needs time to construct and read through all the evidence and discovery and we will get potentially ruling on whether can chesbro and sidney powell can sever their cases from the rest of the defendants. it's become complicated because these two guys want to go to trial independently and the other defendants do not. to make things more complicated, kenneth chesbro doesn't want to be tried at the same time as sidney powell so they are trying to separate from each other as well. host: what is driving their desire for this to go quickly? guest: it's not entirely clear based on the court documents they want some indication of kenneth chesbro being described as the architect, that he might have wanted to gamble a little

bit. when you invoke a speedy trial, there is an inherent gamble that you think the prosecutors are not ready to go to trial. you are betting that the district attorney in a big ricoh case and we have a long time to prepare for this and by invoking the speedy trial rule, you are basically forcing the prosecutors hand. it's not clear if it will pay off in this instance. we've been reporting for months that the district attorney has been anticipating a potential motion and had her lined up in arroyo. host: do we know anymore about the da's approach to this case and what strategies she will employ? guest: we don't, we are waiting to see what the judge is due. this is out of the da's hands. we have a motion from mark meadows, trumps former chief of

staff, trying to get it into federal court and he's arguing that the actions charged in the indictment came under his official duties as chief of staff so the proper jurisdiction is not state corporate federal court. if that happens, it's not clear whether 18 defendants go with him to federal court and whether the whole thing gets removed. we are waiting to see whether or not some people can go individually or what will happen. we don't know but i think the disc -- but the district attorney actions will be dictated by what the judges decide. host: you can find more on the guardian.com. on your twitter feed yesterday, you posted something --

can you elaborate guest: on this tweet? guest:we got a docket alert yesterday morning that the u.s. a lower court decision in the scott perry case. he is the house republican who was fighting to prevent the special counsel from accessing his phone records in the federal january 6 case. he was arguing he was protected on the debate floor afforded to members of congress and that he was acting as a member of congress that he was engaged in efforts to supposedly find fraud in the 2020 election. that decision means the dcc has decided the chief judge's earlier decision to allow prosecutors to look at the contents of his phone should be overturned. they sent it back to the d.c. district court and they need to rule on this again, applying a

test and we don't know what the test is. host: you said to apply correct standards and you put that in quotations. guest: that was the synopsis in the decision. it strongly suggests that scott perry has won this battle at least in part if not entirely. i think for doj to have been defeated on the debate floor is a major step back for them and we will see whether they appeal the circuit court decision. host: thanks for your time. let's hear from mike in maryland, democrats line. thanks for holding on but go ahead. caller: thank you. i just wanted to say that one of the things i've been thinking about, as a democrat, i am also

supporting my second amendment rights. i think it's time that we do a universal background checks in exchange for a 50 state permit. i think that would give both sides some leeway and i guess some buy in to the whole debate thing. host: do you think that that kind of approach would appeal to most people? when it comes to background checks, many people agree with something like that. caller: on the republican side, i think there are people don't want universal background checks because they believe is their second amendment right to have a gun which i don't agree with but i understand. if you are in my situation, i cannot make -- take my gun across state lines.

we say ok, you can take your gun across state lines because maybe you have a federal universal background checks in a federal permit, that may bring people closer to the middle. host: what got you involved in the first place? do you shoot recreationally? what do you use it for? caller: when i was a kid, my dad was a new york city police officer and he was taking me camping and target shooting and i learned that way. through my young adulthood, i'm 47 now, i'm 47 now come i didn't get into guns and my brother sent me an ar. i had to go through the government in order to accept it and have it registered. once ia got myr i started target shooting and i got into it as a sport. then i started seeing the need

for self-defense. they say there's a whole lot of crime and democratic cities and there is a lot of crime but is proportionate to the number of people. that said, i think anybody anywhere in the united states should have a right to defend themselves. i live outside of baltimore and outside of d.c. and if something happens to me, the police are not coming until it's too late. when it comes to my second amendment rights, i use it for target shooting and i'd like to be able to use it for hunting. that self-defense rule is important for americans to have. host: mike giving his take on the second amendment issue. you can do the same for the remaining time we have. you can post on our twitter feed or call in.

fitzgerald, georgia, republican line, good morning. caller: yes, going after navarro for contempt and not showing up, one of the go after holden? he never showed up host: next up, align fruit democrats, david in michigan, clinton township, hello. caller: yes, hi, i want to agree with everything from the previous caller for maryland. i also want to say i'm a democrat and i'm also a carry concealed permit guy. i also feel abortion is murder. i like to cross all the lines and have a great day. host: how did you come to your position on the second amendment and gun ownership? caller: i strongly believe in

the second amendment. i believe we have the right as is in the constitution. i would like to see background checks. i had to go through a background check to get the weapons i own. i don't see what a problem with that is. host: do you shoot recreationally or do you hunt? caller: recreationally and also for self-defense. host: ok, that's david in michigan and letting us know his thoughts on the second amendment. illinois is next, republican line. caller: i have something about all of these people in the senate. the most terrible thing is the july 6 thing and all these men

are being convicted of this crime. ok? host: you're on, go ahead. caller: now we've had the sentences and nothing ever came up about the policeman who shot the woman in the hallway. did he get time off for an award or something? that was the only bullet i ever heard shot on that day. that was the policeman who shot the woman. now we've got convicts who were on loudspeakers or in a hotel room and they are getting 22 years for talking on the telephone. it doesn't seem right. people do make mistakes and that's about all i got, i guess. host: from lake george, new york, david is next, independent line. caller: hi, i have a comment on the second amendment.

people are upset about the semiautomatic rifles and they want to outlaw that type of technology. if you are going to outlaw technology, then that opens up a whole world of issues because we did not have electronic typesetting, we did not have electronic media. all that technology came after the constitution. if you're going to outlaw the technology for firearms, that's going to flip right over and outlaw the technology for free speech. we are going to have to go back to the gutenberg press in order for us to have free speech because that what was around then. host: one more call, benjamin in chicago. caller: good morning, i wanted to talk about with the previous

caller was talking about with regards to technology and outlawing freedom of speech. i a misinformation researcher and the unlimited amount of access, the public gets to each other has taken the attention with advertising and media. we are constantly battling for each other's attention and emotional reaction. and whether or not free speech is in title to us, we are actively harming one another and any sort of revolutionary or acts that could bring change to a society as a whole. while it is important to speak freely in open forums, going to private platforms, or cyber theaters to act out and be a

fool has created, hopefully not an irreparable tear in the fabric of society. two that finishes off the call. -- host: that finishes off the call. we have a hearing in front of the senate homeland security subcommittee. you can see that on our main channel. right now on the main channel, a discussion in front of the senate foreign relations committee about the security partnership between the united states, united kingdom, and australia set to begin shortly. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

[indistinct chatter]

>> c-span is live on capitol hill for a hearing where expected -- senate state department officials are set talk about the partnership between australia and the u.s. about partnerships sharing. it is expected to start shortly. >> this hearing of the senate foreign