host: good morning. it is saturday, december 16. a federal jury ordered former campaign lawyer donald trump -- to donald trump rudy giuliani

pay almost $150 million in damages to two georgia election workers for defamation about their work on the 2020 presidential election, including emotional distress caused by the defamation. giuliani says he plans to appeal. we want to hear your thoughts on the news. you can start calling now. our republican line is (202) 748-8001. democrats can call at (202) 748-8000. our line for independents is (202) 748-8002. if you would like to text, you can do that at (202) 748-8003. please be sure to include your name and where you are from. you can reach/-- facebook.com/ c-span or on x. there have been headlines about this award of damages today. here is the washington post. "giuliani must pay defamed

workers." $148 million. a federal jury ordered him to pay $148 million to election workers who sued for defamation, asserting the former attorney for donald trump exposed them to a life altering torrent of abuse and trauma by promoting false claims that they stole the 2020 election from the former president in georgia. there's been quite a bit of reaction on social media. noah buchbinder. the massive jury award for election workers d by rudy giuls appropriate an important. ing public servants based on misinformation as part of a scheme to overturn the election is dangerous and harmful and cannot be tolerated. charlie kirk says, "free speech has a cost. alex jones, $1 billion.

tucker carlson and fox, $787.5 million. rudy giuliani, 148 million dollars for wanting to ensure fair elections. are youext?" michael cohen says, "really drunk and giuliani was orded to pay $148 million for demation. i want this more on everyone who gets close to donald suffers. the from donald's mouth will be -- the next line from donald's mouth lle rudy who?" a jury has imposed $148 million against giuliani. this is subject to orr reduce excessive damages. this type of oversized verdict is often ruced in proceedings and appeals. the award included punitive damages which seems warranted but it would still raise t question of the size of the award. what is interesting is the high

compsary damages of $20 million for freeman and moss. that is ve high foundation. barb mcquaid, former u.s. attorney and a michigan law professor. "the jury awarded $140 million against dy giuliani for defaming them. judgments for torts are not dischargeable in bankruptcy. let's hear from the women themselves. there was a statement made to the press after the ruling. here are a portion of her remarks. [video] >> i have spent 10 years as an election worker in fulton county, georgia. the lies rudy giuliani told about me and my mom after the 2020 presidential election have changed our lives. in the past for years it has been devastating.

the flame that giuliani lit with those lies and passed to others to keep the flame blazing changed every aspect of our lives. our home, our family, our work, our sense of safety, our mental health. we are still working to rebuild. as we move forward and continue to seek justice our greatest wish is that no one, no election worker or voter or school board member or anyone else ever experiences anything what we went through. you all matter and you are all important. we hope no one ever has to fight so hard to get your name back. we are very grateful to the jury for taking the time out of their busy lives to do their civic duty, to listen to everything we have been going through. i know i won't be able to retire from my job with accounting like

my grandmother did but i hope i is taking the steps, these very big steps towards justice that i can make her just as proud. host: more reaction to what happened in the courtroom itself. an article from usa today. there was an audible gasp in the courtroom when the jury read aloud the $75 million award in punitive damages for the women and $36 million each and other damages. freeman and moss hugged their attorneys after the jury left the courtroom and did not look at giuliani as he left with his lawyer. the damages dwarf other financial challenges the 79 euros mayor faces. his former lawyer is suing him for $1.36 million in unpaid fees. he listed his apartment for sale for $6.5 million, which is only a fraction of what is owed. the article authored by a

justice department correspondent who joins us now to talk about this. good morning, bart. what was it like in the courtroom in that moment? guest: it was a fairly hushed reaction. obviously, a surprise. the number was very big. host: who are these two georgia election workers who filed this case? what exactly did they accuse mr. giuliani of doing? guest: there were two people during elections that were counting votes on election night of 2020 in state farm arena. mrs. freeman is the mother. shaye moss is her daughter. among the things that giuliani said about them in meetings with georgia lawmakers as he tried to pursue them -- persuade them to basically ignore or overturn the results that showed that biden had won the election. he said they did things like

count and exit 12,000 votes which would have been more than the margin that trump needed to overturn the election. he said they were passing around usb sticks as if they were vials of heroin or cocaine. they testified in congress and in this trial to say among the things that were passing run ginger mints.they did not stuff the ballots at state farm arena. there are acquisitions about suitcases full about being carried in. officials investigated all the allegations that were made. they said the alleged suitcases were actually storage boxes. that is the way they always store ballots in georgia. all the complaints that giuliani raised about potential election fraud were investigated by republican secretaries of state

-- secretary of state officials in georgia and found not to have any widespread voter fraud. the election was certified. yet rudy giuliani has continued to say he thinks the election was stolen. he said it on monday and was told by the judge outside the courthouse and the judge scolded him. he said it again as he left after the verdict that he think the president was elected fraudulently. the $75 million in punitive damages to stop him from saying these things has so far not work. host: the judge had already ruled the definition -- defamation occurred and he's liable. the jury was deciding how much the damages should be, correct? guest: correct. the judge howell has been chief judge in district court. she's a senior person. she oversaw the case.

giuliani conceded -- he did not choose to fight their claims that he was lying about them. the judge said then you lose. she found him liable for defamation. in addition, he did not provide financial documentation of how much he is worth. we don't know how much this penalty is going to hurt him. as we say, we have seen the clues that his own lawyer is suing him for back fees. he has his manhattan apartment for sale. we don't know. they put the case in front of an eight-person jury. they were the ones to decide how much the damages should be. there were several pieces to it. defamation itself was $16.2 million to ruby freeman.

nearly $17 million to shaye moss. they each got $20 million for intentional infliction of emotional distress. then it was $75 million jointly for punitive damages theoretically to stop him from saying what he has been saying. he has vowed to appeal. they pursued the case to say we want to appeal this case. his lawyer said basically he had a first amendment right to express his opinions that the election was fraudulent and that any harm that came to them was from other people. he did not harm them directly because he put out his comments and that other people surrounded ruby freeman's house, drove her from her house. she had to sell her house of 20 years. she went into hiding for several months at the recommendation of the fbi. ever since then they have received vile threats that are

both racist and death threats. it's miniature medic several years for ruby freeman and shaye moss. the case will continue as rudy giuliani appeals this judgment. host: mr. giuliani said he was not able to offer evidence in this trial in his defense. to what degree is that true? guest: well, i do not think it is true. he had an opportunity to contest the allegations all along during the trial. the case was filed in december of 2021. they testified in a house hearing in the summer of 2022. the judge finally ruled in the case this summer. now have the jury's verdict. he said on monday he was going to testify in this case because he wanted to get his side out. he said he still thought there was fraud and he wanted to prove his case.

that everything he said was true. when it came to thursday, the time for him to testify, he declined. his defense put on no witnesses. he is banking entirely on the appeal. he had an opportunity and he chose not to testify. host: he is planning to appeal. in your experience what are the chances this $148 million figure is going to be reduced upon appeal? guest: i'm not a lawyer. i don't know what standards the circuit court will be applying. it is a large number. legal experts say numbers this big are often reduced on appeal. i suspect any amount of money will help ruby freeman and shaye moss begin to rebuild their lives. we will have to see what the number ones of being after the courts have exhausted the issues. host: many people in the former

president's orbit are facing legal challenges. what do you think the outcome of this case means for the rest of those folks? guest: it suggests that judges and juries are listening to these accusations very carefully. i suspect it is ominous for the criminal case pending in d.c. it's also in a d.c. federal court before a different judge in which the justice department has charged former president donald trump with conspiring to overturn the 2020 election. giuliani is not a codefendant in that case but it covers many of the same issues. it is about efforts to overturn the election and the events that led to the capital attack on january 6, 2020 one. -- 2021. the same jury pool. the same audience for the same

issues. giuliani and trump are charged jointly with 17 other people, four have pleaded guilty, but charged in a wide-ranging racketeering case in georgia, in atlanta where these women are from. for, again, trying to overturn -- allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 election. giuliani and trump both lead not guilty. motions are pending and we do not yet have a trial date in that case. host: bart jansen as a justice department correspondent for usa today. thank you so much for your insights on the trial. appreciate it. guest: thanks for having me. host: let's get to your thoughts on this. ray in ithaca, new york, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. merry christmas. i am not sure in terms of if mr. giuliani is guilty or not guilty on this.

the amount of money is outrageous. absolutely outrageous. you are basically getting $75 million apiece. whatever they went through, what person would not go through that for a couple years for $75 million? yes, it might be reduced on appeal but this sets up more of these lawsuits for outrageous sums of money. i think it is just wrong. host: next up we have gary in new hampshire on the democratic line. good morning, gary. caller: good morning and happy holidays. i don't agree with the caller that just spoke now. first of all, no amount of money is ever going to undo the damage that was done to these ladies for doing their civic duty. that is these damn republicans that think they can do with a damn well please. host: joe is in georgia on the

republican line. go ahead, joe. caller: i have been calling this great network for 30 years. y'all do a super job. i think all these cases -- i don't know all the facts on the giuliani case but i think all these cases against trump are election interference that i think will lead to a huge trump landslide win. one reason the stock market is breaking all kinds of highs is because of the unfair treatment president trump is getting. i think he will win a landslide reelection. i just think most of these cases -- i don't know the specifics in the giuliani case. i don't know enough to comment except to say all these election interference cases will result in a huge donald trump landslide win. host: william in ohio on the independent line. caller: hello. i think the ladies deserve every nickel they are getting and i

hope they can get it. maybe they should get it off of trump. it is his fault all this stupid stuff happened anyway. he's not going to win by a landlight. -- landslide. he's going to leave giulianin the dust. he's going to say giuliani who? he will kick into the curb. those women deserve every nickel theyan get. he deserves it. host: steve in san jose, california on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to make a couple of points. very important points. before i do, your guest, i think it was bart freeman -- host: janssen. guest: he admittedly stated he

is not a lawyer. my first point is, giuliani, which is a lawyer. he was a district attorney. giuliani said he was not allowed to admit evidence. he was referring to video evidence. i was very disappointed that he was not allowed to admit evidence, because video does not lie. it showed the movement and what was going on between those two women. the second point is that about six weeks ago, in bridgeport, connecticut, a judge throughout the election. it was between two democrats. two democrats. the point is that if democrats

can -- what's the word? if they can do this between themselves, stuffed ballot boxes and that is what they are were doing, how much more do democrats hate trump? thank you for taking my call. host: ok. donnie in st. louis, missouri. caller: good morning. i called because i agree with the award. i think that the large amount -- host: can you turn down the volume on your tv please? caller: sorry. i think the large amount they were awarded should set a precedent for other people that want to defame people.

these were poll workers. they had nothing to do with republican or democrat. but they did not prove they had a junk drive and it was not a ginger mint, but giuliani got up there every time and he defamed them. their character. why? because he wanted trump to win. they were pulled into the court of law -- proved in the court of law that the elections were fair. i think the ladies received justly whether he pays are not and it should set a precedent for trump not to talk about people like he does. not only trump. if it was a democrat and set a president, don't do it. the law is just. i think you.

-- thank you. host: greg in corning, ohio, independently. -- independent line. caller: good morning, cnn. host: c-span. caller: i saw the video of them passing the thumb drives. how they hell do they get away with that one? how do they do that? i saw a video of them, the dominion machines. it showed how they can get in the back door those things. how is this right? kids don't even matter now, because those lady will die of diabetes -- those two ladies will die of diabetes before they see a dime. host: robert in marina del rey, california, republican line. caller: yes. the award is ridiculous. let's compare it to someone who has not paid anyone anything which is o.j. simpson. in his trial that he murdered

two people the judgment was $33.5 million. to date, o.j. simpson has paid goldman $132,000. fred goldman refiled the debt on the o.j. simpson judgment. now in real dollars the judgment is $96 million. the $96 million that o.j. simpson owes the ron goldman estate, he's paid $132,000. let's put this in perspective. this is a complete joke. this whole giuliani thing is politically inspired. let's look at some who lost their son and he has not gotten anything. host: we have vernon in virginia on the democratic line. good morning, vernon. caller: yes. this is complete hypocrisy.

host: can you turn down the volume on your tv? caller: yes. this is complete hypocrisy. the man did what he did. he intimidated those people and all kinds of ways. he deserves everything coming his way. just like donald trump. everyone is turning a blind eye to him. if he's ever elected in this country again it will be a long day for america. host: ok. jethrie in nebraska -- jeffrey in nebraska on the independent line. caller: how are you doing this morning? everybody is sick and tired of listening about trump and biden. [indiscernible] let's get on with our lives. host: carla in illinois on the republican line.

good morning, carla. caller: good morning. i just wondered if giuliani can be sued for defamation, does that mean i can go after hillary clinton and joe biden and maybe hakeem jeffries and several other people that have pretty much defamed half of america? is that plausible? hillary clinton called half of america deplorables. host: next up is lazy in bristol, tennessee, independent line. caller: yes ma'am. i don't know what those two people were saying but the previous caller said video lied. rudy giuliani certainly lies. donald trump lies. anybody that don't believed out -- anybody that don't believe

that don't believe there is corn in iowa. a few people and the other news agencies -- you people and the other new agencies can't do anything to trump. this whole entire country went against everything, all democracy, everything in this whole united states. trump, you can't do nothing for trump. he is 666 like a lot of people believe he is. you can't do anything with him. host: a bit more reporting on this jury verdict from cnbc. giuliani said after the 2020 election that freeman and moss had passed each other usb flash drives like vials of heroin or cocaine as part of a scheme to defraud trump of an election win.

testified -- moss testified they were passing candy. after giuliani made claims about her and her daughter, they received nonstop threats and she left her home for two months at the beginning of 2021 at their him addition of the fbi -- the recommendation of the fbi. "we are coming for you and your family." ms. ruby, the safest place for you is prison or you will swing from the trees. freeman said it is so scary. every time i go somewhere if i have to use my name. some comments that we are receiving on x. gary says the judgment will be appealed and any amount will be drastically reduced. these judges need to be fired. stephen referring to michigan pressor tu --tephen says professor turley is wrong. giuliani refused to cooperate, including discovery.

ruby and shea deserve the money. let's hear giuliani's response to the actual outcome of this case. rudy giuliani spoke to the press after the jury ruled he had to pay the $148 million. here is some of what he had to say. [video] >> there is very little i can say right now. i have to analyze this. obviously, possibly will move for a new trial. certainly, we will appeal. the absurdity of the number underscores the absurdity of the entire proceeding where i have not been allowed to offer one single piece of evidence in defense. of which i have a lot. i am quite confident when this case gets before a fair tribunal it will be reversed so quickly that it will make your head spin. the absurd number that just came in will help that actually.

>> why do you think it was unfair? >> i cannot go into the details. i did not testify because the judge made it clear that if i made any mistakes or did anything wrong she would considering contempt. this judge does have a reputation for putting people in jail. i thought honestly it would not do any good. >> do you believe about what these two women? >> do you still believe these claims? >> i have no doubt that my comments were made and they were supportable and are supportable today. i did not have an opportunity to present the evidence we offered. did you notice were not allowed to put in one piece of evidence in defense? do you realize that liability is not based on any trial? liability is based on her disagreement with me on discovery, which is absurd. i believe the judge was

threatening me with a strong possibility that i would be held in contempt or i would be put in jail. it did not seem like it was going to do much to persuade anybody. they could give her what she seemed to be threatening. that is all i have to say. i have -- shhh. shhh. >> do you have any regrets about the comments the women received? >> i had nothing to do with it. the comments are abominable. i received comments like that every day on different kinds of things. i have represented clients you got that from the other side. this is a terrible part of our political system. republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives all get that. my comments were not that.

i think i was also very unfair part of it. my comments had no connection at all. there were thousands of things in the press about this, of which mine were small amount. no way to say my comets connected to that. that will be part of what we will get to litigate in a fair court. host: former traveler rudy giuliani speaking --trump attorney rudy giuliani speaking there. cj on the democratic line. caller: thanks for taking my call. i want to remind the maga folks that giuliani did not cement any financial discovery during this trial. who knows what he's hiding. i can't wait until the convicted rapist orange pustule gets convicted on his trials and all the maga tea party crybabies will come out of the woodwork. that is all i have to say. host: next up is karen and

youngstown, ohio, independent line. good morning, karen. caller: hi. of course he was able to have the rights of anybody who goes to trial. he was allowed to submit evidence. he chose not to submit evidence. that is number one. number two. people need to wake up. this man is an authoritarian dictator and his followers -- if we were in the times of hitler. the and trump are hitler. the followers of the german people during that time. it is as plain as that. when you vote this time you are voting to save our democracy. you have to vote for democrats. you may not love biden but the alternative is the end of freedom in our country. he can stand up there and say

whatever he wants, but the truth is -- look at donald trump's rallies. he tells people if someone disagrees with you, ruin their lives. attack them. physically attack them. this is an authoritarian dictator. this is how they operate. they don't like laws. they don't like rules. if there is a law that gets in their way, they get rid of the law. the supreme court has always been a revered institution. the supreme court went in there -- trump went in there and staffed it in their favor -- stacked in their favor. we cannot count on the highest court in the land anymore to come down with a fair decision. this is the roots of our democracy. arlington cemetery is filled with people who died fighting to preserve our freedoms, fighting against this ideology. host: what do you think this particular verdict in the giuliani case?

caller: i think if you go out there and you use your power and your platform and your wealth and your connections to try to destroy someone's life you deserve what is coming to you. it should be in proportion to your worth and livelihood. host: tommy in georgia on the republican line. go ahead. caller: how're are you doing? let me say that i have not been able to vote republican since george w. bush. the republican party is not the same party of my father's republican party. when it comes to giuliani, he went to 50 different courts. they all threw him out for trying to, you know, distort the truth.

he lost over 60 times. that is why trump never paid him a dime for being his lawyer. he got what he deserved. you have a republican governor in georgia. a republican elected official in georgia that looked at everything that they threw these two ladies and said it was not true. it comes down to what are people going to believe the truth and stop believing all these lies that these are publicans are putting out there? the president had all the levels of power. how could he lose an election and 70 beat him up of an election if he's got all the levels of power in his office? every one of his levels of power come the fbi, cia, attorney general told him he lost. it is time for people to wake up and discover the truth. he will not be the next

president of the note states. people are going to give up democracy for this man. you might as well believe georgia will go blue again. all the states that voted for -- host: thanks. renee in georgia on the democratic line. go ahead, renee. caller: i just wanted to say that i agree with the order for giuliani to pay the $148 million . i feel he really destroyed those people's lives. getting death threats. had to move. so much things happening today.

to have something like that is a crush on a person in their family. it's just too much. host: nick in indianapolis on the independent line. caller: good morning and thanks for taking my call. i believe in the verdict of really giuliani -- rudy giuliani . if any of us had to go up against the full power and the voice and the podium of the president and his lawyer doing his bidding, his personal bidding, that's not exact equal to the pain and giuliani has suffered. it is deftly worth the $148 million. if you go out on the platform and cause damage, you reap what you sow. looking at the forecast, listening to the former caller tommy, the republican they can't vote republican anymore and all

the democrats that are so divisive right now, is reassuring to hear that people can change. it is good to wake up in here that people can change. you are big and bad and telling everybody i can say this and do this to you because trump is behind me. he will have my back. where is trump now? where is he now? that's a metaphor of the entire situation. he's not there for you. he's there for himself. i think young people need to get out and vote. whether you are republican or democrat, get out and vote. if you are young, get out and vote. the same way they have empowered their followers, this whole divisive nature, this is not america. this is not where we should be. this is not the america most of us have grown up in. social media is damaging everybody. everybody is getting that snapshot headline of what their party says they should think. let's come together, get out and vote. if you are young and listening, i'm young and i'm calling

c-span. get out and vote. host: next up is carol in arkansas on the republican line. go ahead, carol. carol, can you hear us? looks like we may have lost carol. let's go to michael in naples, florida, democratic line. caller: hello and thank you for taking my call. the reason i'm calling today is i know the $148 million sounds large but giuliani is certainly guilty of it. he will not be able to pay it. we know that. the reason i'm calling is i'm having a real problem with most americans calling it and not really understanding our government and how it works. i hope in the future civics classes in this country come back into the high schools and

elementary schools so people can understand the way bills and congress and the senate works. we need a higher education in this country on things like this, because people just don't understand the way our government works. host: we have a text message from antonio in annapolis , maryland. " giia's fine would be lower if he had not repeated h basis accusations to reporters outside urthouse." "these women had their lives upended from the lies giuliani made. he not only owes the restitution but an apology. maybe others out making false statements should learn they too can end up in court and paying out money." shaye moss testified at the january 6 committee hearing back

in june of 2022 on her experience in targeted by rudy giuliani. here is a portion of what she had to say about the experience. [video] >> your service as an election worker took a dramatic turn on the day that rudy giuliani publicized a video of you and your mother counting ballots on election night. president trump, rudy giuliani and others claimed on the basis of this video that you and your brother were somehow involved in a plot to kick out observers, bring suit cases of false ballots for biden into the arena, and then run them through the machines multiple times. none of that was true, was it? >> none of it. >> i would like to show you some of the statements rudy giuliani made in a second hearing before the georgia state legislators. a week after the video clip from state farm arena was first circulated by mr. giuliani and president trump. i went to advise he was the

statements are completely false and also deeply disturbing. >> a tape of ruby freeman and shea freeman moss and whether genoa and obviously surreptitiously passing around usb ports as if they were vials of heroin or cocaine. it's obvious anyone who is a criminal investigator that they are engaged in surreptitious illegal activity that day. as of a week ago they are still walking around georgia lying. they should have been questions already -- questioned already. their places of work and homes should have been searched for evidence of usb ports, evidence of voter fraud. >> that video was from rudy giuliani's appearance at a georgia state hearing on december 10.

how did you first become aware that rudy giuliani was accusing you and your mother of a crime? >> i was at work, like always. the former chief, mr. jones, asked me to come to his office. when i went to his office the former director mr. baron was in there. they showed me a video on their computer. it was just like a very short clip of us working at state farm. it had someone on the video talking over the video just saying we were doing things that we were not supposed to do.

just lying throughout the video. that is when i first found out about it. host: back to more of your calls now. erin in san francisco on the republican line. caller: can you hear me? host: go ahead, aaron. caller: i would start by saying the comparisons of trump and hitler are insulting. the man was president for four years. he has no comparison to hitler and the desire to kill millions of people. you could attack trump's character and argue what he has to say but i don't think many democrats even listen to trump. they don't watch his town halls. they don't watch his campaign speeches. they comment on what the news

says. that's fine, but there is some sort of entity going on that is controlling the news and they are controlling the narrative. it is like sports. you take aside. -- a side and you want to stick to your team. a lot of democrats and san francisco want to stick to their team. they want to agree with what their side is saying. i don't e e comparisons to hitler beingsel in the discussion. i inif they want to really attack trump they ought to stick to what he actually says and not go extreme. the extreme comparisons are actually helping trump. it causes people to say this does not reallad up. i think it only helpsrump when they compare him to hitler. thank you for heinmy

comments. host: kevin in anort, kentucky, democratic line. caller: i did not know there was a frankfort, new york. ho: sorry about that, kevin. caller: love your show. you are the most balanced tv commentary show that there is in this country. you do a great job. i would like to respond to the $142 million delivered -- host: $148 million is what the jury decided. caller: is it necessary to pay a baseball player $700 million to play baseball? do you think that is in the right category of moneys to be expended? i would like to say trump is a fascist. i do believe people understand that.

he wants to jail everybody that does not believe in what he believes in. he has no compassion for anybody else. he's a ridiculous president. that was one of the advantages of having the covid come in. the president got on the tv, said drink some bleach. that will help you. it killed two people from drinking bleach. these people are idiots. host: what do you think of this decision about giuliani's culpability? caller: giuliani is a liar. he's always been a liar. he has had one great moment when the terrorists, one of them who emigrated into our country from canada, not mexico -- canada. they will go on and on about

how democracy is at stake. of course it is. go out and get yourself registered and get rid of this horrible person who was running for president. the idea that you can be removed from your house by the fbi and told you need to be somewhere else where it is safe is ridiculous. that should not happen at any democracy. also, if they are not prosecuting the people who called and made threats against these two innocent voting worker people, they need to take that up. that is still a crime. host: next up we have brady in holland, ohio, independently. go ahead, brady. make sure to turn down the volume on your tv. go ahead.

we can hear you. caller: ok. i'm here. host: go ahead with your comment. caller: yes. i was calling. thank you for taking my call. i was calling regarding the rudy giuliani incident. rudy giuliani has been married three times and three times divorced. it's apparent he has no respect for women. in my opinion he got exacted what he deserved. -- exactly what he deserved. one other made a comment, the $700 being awarded the baseball players. $148 million is nothing compared

to what these women sacrificed. losing their homes, losing their freedom. good morning and thank you. host: let's go to fred in michigan who is calling on the republican line. caller: hello? host: good morning, fred. caller: thank you for taking my call. regarding this rudy giuliani business, it's going to be put out to appeal. it will be a long time before these women get their money, if they get any. what people need to remember in this nation is the left-wing and the right wing are both parts of the same bird. it was really, really eye-opening for a 19-year-old man in vietnam to realize this

government will lookou straight in the eye and tell you boldfaced lies. i don't know what has happed to our judicial system but if the leftad been scrutinized as deeply as trump and the right has been scrutinized with lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit, they would be going crazy. there is such an imbalance in the fairness. t democrats want fairness, let biden be subjected and his family be subjected to the same investigations that trump and his family were. but we sit here and we see such an imbalance of justice. at just drives us further and further away. my family was democrats. but the democratic party today at t democratic party from 40,

50, 60 years ago are completely different parties. i cannot respect anybody that lies. the think about trump, he was a businessman. he was not a politician. most republicans throughout his presidency kept saying to ourselves he needs to just shut up with the rhetoric, quit insulting everybody, stay in tune to what this nation needs. host: thank you, fred. let's go to will in atlanta, georgia on the independently. caller: fred is right. i was disillusioned going into the army in 1968 and having to figure out precisely what was going on. what it comes down to is the violation of our constitution, which is framed by 18 forms of the word capital e elect.

that means chosen of god. we are a republic, not a democracy. god is our king and we are to be ruled by truth and justice maintained by fairlawn courts. that is -- fair law courts. we know five state stopped the vote at 3:00 a.m. on election night, all at the same time. all coordinated. it is all complete fraud. we did not elect a pedophile as president. he's a proven pedophile president who kicks dogs. host: alan from fort lauderdale on the republican line. caller: good morning. i want to say al gore questioned an election for five weeks. we just had exposed in bridgeport, connecticut, the stuffing of a ballot box that the left-wing media has not said much about. that was a democratic primary. a judge ordered a new election

in bridgeport, connecticut. that was democrat on democrat. why would they do that? former congressman in philadelphia michael myers got convicted of voter fraud. he said democratic operative. spending 30 months in federal jail. google congressman voter fraud philly. why would a congressman do that in philadelphia? host: do you have any thoughts on the jury's decision to award $148 million in damages to those election workers? caller: my point is challenging elections is american. it is part of who we are. despite everything that they are throwing at donald trump his poll numbers are up because the voters are not believing it. it is we the people. this government rests on the people.

you must have the consent of the people and they will have the final say. he is 10 points up in michigan. twice impeached trump. baghdad trump is up. the american people are not buying it. democratic operatives are calling this morning. let's see with the american people say. the courts should not preclude him from being on the ballot, because all authority comes from god to the people. host: let's go to joseph in north carolina on the democratic line. caller: good morning. i hope you have some bourbon close by because you have to maintain a very lively face. i appreciate that. to my point. the $148 million being awarded or ordered to pay, i hope it happens. i'm always amazed as to how when people vote to cite aspects of

the constitution they cite god and it says we the people when history dictated we the people becomes we a certain class of people. that is unfortunate. to that point i am really happy to see that those two women, some aspect has been vindicated and hopefully they can get back on track. so many others lives have been ruined by false, baseless claims. my hope is that it is not appealed. the appeal does not hold up, whatever they are to be awarded and their lives can move on. i look forward to whatever the next election brings. whether you are young, whether you are african-american, people of color, whatever it is you may, have some things you believe in and hopefully we can

see this country certainly regain its platform and profile. as a veteran i proudly served the country. i do believe in what it is supposed to stand for and hope that one day it will. thank you. host: guy in florida on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. the award that was given by the court against giuliani will probably never be collected. and they deserve it. they had been terribly maligned. because of that, as a senior who also volunteered as a worker in the upcoming election, the government unfortunately needs to change its attitude and

go to a popular vote as far as i'm concerned so that the people are not being affected by the way the states can manipulate an election outcome. in a popular vote there is no discussion on who wins. whoever gets the most votes wins. we need to have been immigration policy. whether it is 250,000 or million people you're coming in, that should be the cut off. they should not be a discussion on either party on that. host: thank you, guy. let's go to kevin in albany, georgia, democratic line. caller: i would say that donald trump is a fascist and a crook. he will be behind bars before the polls close in north carolina. as far as giuliani goes, well,

what comes around goes around. you can lie yourself but not to me or the american people. merry christmas. host: we will stop it there for now. it would get to more oyour calls later in the show. next up on washington journ, we hear from david salvo from e alliance for securing democracy who will join us to discuss issues facing democracy in the u.sand abroad. plus, key upcoming elections. later, american enterprise institute's kevin kosar will discuss his podcast “understanding congress." we will be right back. ♪ ♪ >> american history tv exploring the people and events that tell the american story. from the george washington symposium held at mount vernon,

a discussion of the united states constitution and how it has evolved. top lectures in history, university of kentucky english professor on how cold war politics shaped literature from africa, asia, and the caribbean. on the presidency, a conversation on the presidency and the press hosted by the john 8 -- john f. kennedy library. exploring the american story, watch american history tv every weekend. and fi t full schedule on the program guide or watch on c-span.org/history. booktv, every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 2:00 p.m. eastern, we present coverage of the 2023 southern

festival of books with author discussions on aalachia, the kkk, tennessee history, and more. and then afterwards, tim alberta examines the evangelical movement and its intersection with political issues in his book "the kingdom, the power, and the glory." watch booktv every sunday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch anytime on booktv.org. listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio got easier. set -- tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio and listen to washington journal daily, important congressional hearings and other affairs events. weekends at 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. eastern. watch washington today.

listen to c-span anytime, just tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable. >> a healthy democracy just does not look like this. it looks like this, where americans can see democracy at work, where 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. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back. we are joined by david salvo with the german marshall fund and the alliance for securing democracy where he is a senior fellow and managing director. thank you for joining us. can you tell us about the

alliance for securing democracy and the german marshall fund. who funds you, but german is in the name but you are a u.s. organization? guest: the german marshall fund is an american organization but transatlantic. so we have headquarters in washington, funded by a variety of sources. my credit governments give us grants and -- democratic governments give us grants and philosophic -- we are also funded by private philanthropic foundations. we are nonpartisan and focus on autocratic threats to democracy across the world. united states, europe, and elsewhere and we look at democratic backsliding and come up with policy strategy to try and defend against that. host: one of the stories globally -- what are the stories globally that you are watching? guest: there is democratic

backsliding happening everywhere. 2024 will be a key year for elections worldwide. the year starts with a key election in taiwan and there are implications for geopolitics and tensions across the chinese straight between mainland china and taiwan. there is the election in the united states, european union, india. over one billion people are going to vote there. it is a big year for democracy on the ballot. there are candidates that have very different physicians -- visions for what democracy should look like. so democratic -- the democratic order could look different at the end of 2024 than going into it. host: i want to read a piece from "the new york times" and get yournse. "digital media, cultural chan d economic stagnation hps explains why democracy is struggling in other parts of the world. two decades ago democracy was a

triumphant form of gent around the world with acy in retreat and the former soviet union. 72 countries wer democratizing and three wewing more authoritarian according to a swedish institute that monitors democracy. last year only third -- 15 countries grew more democratic while 33 slid towards authoritarianism." that is from a piece back in june. what do you think that assessment, do you agree? guest: i agree and there are two main reasons. in many countries people do not think that democracy is working for them. and there are legitimate or says, economic -- grievances, that speak to a general

frustration that crosses traditional party lines. so you see an up ending of divisions and new coalitions forming that have different visions for what democratic institutions look like and how they ought to serve. that is one issue. the other issue is that in some countries you have ruling regimes manipulating state resources and institutional practices to make it harder for them to really switch power. when ordinary citizens go to the polls they might be voting in free elections but they are not always fair because the incumbent regimes have stacked the deck. in those environments it is a mixture of genuine grievances against democracy working for the ordinary person and regimes reluctant to relinquish power and stack the deck against those opponents.

host: talk more about that because your organization discusses the subversive efforts of autocracies across the u.s.. and across the world. and some of those countries and tactics, could you lay out more about that especially when it comes to artificial intelligence, social media and things like that. how do you counter those? guest: there is a lot to unpack. the first is that in certain countries you have state media. and when an incumbent regime wants to denigrate an opponent or not give them airtime it is easy for them to exert editorial control over state media and make sure that ordinary citizens are only seeing one narrative or candidate being shown on the airwaves. in certain countries this has happened extensively in turkey. the incumbent regime installed

cronies in private media, people who are loyal to the incumbent regime to make sure that there was editorial control over the a stencil blame private meet up -- up stencil blame private media. in some countries including turkey, it has been harder for people to vote in areas of high opposition concentration. so stacking the deck in these ways are part and parcel of the autocratic playbook. it is easily adopted and the mockers seem -- and you use these tactics and there is a real fine line between a healthy democracy and slow but clear backsliding, and that has happened in a lot of the democratic states that border on the fence with actual authoritarianism. that is one set of challenges. then you have the technological

set of challenges which makes the environment so much more complex. we have been living in the disinformation era for quite some time, but we are truly in the artificial intelligence era now. the ai tools have been democratized and what i mean is that citizens now have those tools in their hands. these are not just tools sitting behind secret walls that secret security services are taking advantage of. these are tools that every citizen has at their disposal. and so anyone can use ai to put out say election related misinformation. and spread it with a virality, speed and volume that is unprecedented. you can just imagine the scenario in which someone creates a manipulated image or video of say ballot stuffing

that is not happening. and then millions of people and millions of americans see that image and now they believe that there is actual ballot stuffing happening when it was not. that is scary. and that is how i think that this is contributing to the sense of grievance that democracy is not working. people cannot even trust the information it is consuming. it is harder to distinguish what is manipulated information and what is fact. host: we have an example from that about the conversation of the election workers in georgia and that video was just edited not even with the aid of ai. we want to take your calls and questions for david. you can start calling you now. republicans at 202-748-8001. democrats at 202-748-8000. independents on 202-748-8002.

-- 202-748-8003. you have been analyzing the kremlin's efforts throughout your career. what should we know, and is that power by russian -- the russian government in particular to undermine democracy getting more or less powerful? guest: i know the whole question of russian interference in american democracy is polarized. but let us try to remove it from the american context because it is fraught and understand why russia does what it does. russia has everything to interfere -- every reason to interfere for domestic political purposes and autocratic regimes like vladimir putin's needs to point the figure -- the finger at the united states and european union to say do you really want to live in a democracy, they cannot hold elections without people coming into the streets and being at each other's throats and not

trusting the integrity of the building results. you do not want to live like that. you do not want to live in a genetic -- an agent generate a -- a degenerate west you want to live in a controlled russia. and then there are geopolitical reasons. look at what is happening in ukraine. that war gives it every incentive to want to influence how voters go to the polls and the information they are consuming in countries like the united states and across europe. the united states and europe are on the side of ukraine, obviously. and russia is waging a war of aggression. the kremlin has every incentive to want to sway voters to choose a candidate that is more likely to share their role -- their worldview. that should not be polarizing. we are talking about specific candidates but it is almost not relevant. the idea is to have people in

power more sympathetic to russia and to create chaos in democracy is because that is good -- democracies because that is good for russia. host: let us start with jeff on the democratic line. caller: good morning. mr. salvo thank you. i am a democrat, proud democrat. a kennedy democrat. but also i know it is not always about me. i know that we have a two-party system and right now one of the two parties is not very healthy, the republican party. they are not the party of abraham lincoln or dwight eisenhower or even ronald reagan. the reason i say that is because it all really came to a head in 2008 when this nation elected

its first black president and there were those of a certain population that could not deal with the fact that a black family would be living at 1600 pennsylvania. 2016 donald trump tapped into the resentment and basically now you have the whole maga movement. and now the republican party are willing to get rid of the constitution, set up a fascist state to maintain white male privilege. host: what is your question? caller: well, it seems to me that the republican party no longer cares about the constitution. they have embraced fascism. i want to know if he sees it that way or -- host: let us give david a chance to respond. guest: thank you for your question. i think both parties have big

tents and they represent different factions. there are republicans who would disagree with your assessment. who are very committed to the constitution and constitutional order and there are republicans who have a fundamentally different view of what the constitutional order represents. on the democratic side there is the progressive left and centrist democrats and they have not necessarily different views on the constitutional order but different priorities. and even different voting platforms in different respects. i think one of the challenges of the two party system, only having two parties is that they are supposed to represent broad spectrums of ideology. and they do not always match. right now you are starting to see a splintering of that big tank coalition where on both sides of the aisle, especially

people towards the middle are looking at the wings of their parties and saying i do not know if this represents what i believe. it would not surprise me if over the coming years there is a fragmentation of the two parties and the different coalition that emerges. host: jose in new york on the independent line. go ahead. caller: hello. i am an independent voter and i believe in freedom. i am trying to organize a wolverine independent party to defend the country, which is one of the best countries in the world. host: could you turn down the volume on your tv and do you have a question for david? caller: why are people letting socialist take over this country? host: i will let you respond. guest: i do not really think that there are socialists in the sense that i am used to

thinking, like in europe you have actual social democratic regimes that have nationalized social services across the board. the united states is somewhere in between where you have some services that the government runs and most other things like health care which is largely privatized. i think it is a bit of a misnomer to say that the united states is run by socialists. and certainly we have a system where parties alternate between democrats and republicans. so ending up in outlook -- in outright socialism is probably not in our immediate future. host: donna in michigan on the republican line. caller: yes. i am going to talk a little bit about the iraq war. host: as long as we keep it to the topic that david can speak to. caller: well, then i do not have anything. host: ok. let us go to james in hawaii on

the democratic line. go ahead. caller: yes. i am not from hawaii, i am from sacramento, california. host: my bad. go ahead. caller: not a problem. basically i feel really bad inside because i see our democracy in the united states starting to wither away and people in power are willing to lie. and people believe it. my question for david is what do we do in order to be able to combat the lies? where do we go? guest: there are a number of things. first i really do believe that global democracy is the linchpin for a lot of the information disorder, and mistrust in our society. i think that, for example,

volunteering on election day builds more trust that the election process works, that government works on behalf of the american border -- american voter. participating in politics makes it more possible for you to shape how the party responds to your needs. if you think that the people in power are liars then the great thing about living in a democracy is that every four years we get a chance to show up and vote them out of office. so, that is why doing our civic duty as cheesy as that might sound, there is a reason why it works because it gives you a chance to shape the direction of the country. host: greg in lincoln park, michigan. caller: good morning. i would like to know who in your professional opinion between republicans and democrats is the worst violator of a democracy in

the united states? that is all i've got. guest: since i run a nonpartisan organization i am going to politely decline that because we are an organization with republicans and democrats on staff. that is intentional. we believe very strongly that working together across the aisle is the only way we are going to bridge the divide. i do not think it is my place to label one better or worse than the other at this moment in time. host: i do want to ask you about this specific comment made by the person in the lead for the nomination for the republican party. donald trump has made comments saying he would only be a dictator on day one. how does that play into how you analyze a shift towards autocracy? guest: you have to call it like you see it when comments like that are made. that is very disturbing,

hopefully it is not a harbinger of things to come. i think we should not be embracing dictatorship in the united states. historically what we have done is push back. we literally formed a country because we did not want dictatorial rule imposed on us by the crown in england. we have fought wars against dictators throughout the 20th century. we should not be embracing a dictatorship. that is anti-democratic. that is not the best interest of the american citizen. it suppresses the american's ability to shape how the country works and whether it works for them. all sorts of reasons why we should be alarmed by that comment. that is not an indictment of any one political party. but for a presidential candidate to say i will be a dictator on day one, we should be asking questions about what that means

and whether we really want to accept that. host: charlie in jonesboro, arkansas. republican line. go ahead. caller: i just wish we had a verification system, a method to verify the vote. i think donald trump is a threat to democracy, the democracy that we have now. the word democracy -- we do not get to vote on anything. do not call it a pole, let us vote on things and say what the will of the people has and what they are doing. in the border, ukraine, and many things. we could solve these problems if we could just vote on things. if all of the states did the elections the same way and we could see black and white who the winners were. if we could dip our finger in ink, some way to verify. everybody knows the truth. but it is like you said, the

media lies to us and tells us somebody else won. host: let us let david respond about the ability in the united states for us to verify elections. guest: i think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of and this is nobody's fault, election administration is a complicated topic. i do not fully understand it myself. what i can say is that the election procedures in the 10,000 plus jurisdictions in this country, they run well. there are procedures in place to audit and verify results. in the overwhelming majority of american states there are postelection audits that ensure especially through electronic voting methods that those systems are counting votes accurately, and that the will of the people is accurately reflected in election results.

there are millions of americans who distrust the outcomes of american elections. that saddens me because i know that these hard-working members of local communities across the country who run the elections, they are doing so honestly and they have all of these procedures in place, technological procedures, human procedures to ensure that your vote is accurately counted and the winners reflect the will of the people. i hope in time we build more trust around the integrity of our election systems. because by in large, they do run quite well. host: we have a question on x "is it time to abolish the electoral college. clear failures undermine confidence in electoral features and undermine the popular will." guest: there is a lot of debate

on whether -- of the system that we should have in this country. there other measures such as right choice voting which is a different way of thinking about how to choose a candidate at the polls. so, this is a legitimate question and there are real debates happening in this country. i think the electoral college is part of our history so it is hard to just willy-nilly get rid of it. and it will probably take several years to build any sort of consistent -- consensus. and we might not. we might decide that this is part of who we are. there are states out there that really believe in the electoral college because it makes them think that they put it on equal footing with larger states. so i do not know. i think we are in the middle of that debate right now and there

are legitimate arguments on both sides and we are experimenting with different forms of democracy in certain states. and that is important to. -- too. host: jim in georgia on the democratic line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a couple of questions for you. one is about the german marshall fund specifically. but first of all i want to ask you, your definition of democracy because i disagree with you that we live in a democracy where we have a constitutional republic with three branches of government so i think that the term democracy is thrown or left -- thrown around a lot by the media.

it is kind of disappointing to me because i do not think -- we do not live in a democracy. host: i want to give them a chance to respond to their point about what his definition of democracy is. but before that what was a question about the german marshall fund? caller: i would like to know what it is about. is it related to the marshall plan that was instituted? host: let us give him a chance to respond. guest: the german marshall fund was established with an endowment gift from the west german government in the 1970's to thank the united states for the marshall plan. this is an endowment to set up an organization committed to transatlantic ties between the united states, canada, and europe. that is what we work towards. we are a think tank and a nongovernmental organization that supports the strengthening of those transatlantic ties. that is why we have offices

across europe as well. we support civil saccades -- civil society actors in eastern europe to strengthen democracy in their own countries. we do research and policy work to further the ties between the united states and europe. that is the genesis of the german marshall fund. as for the question on the definition of democracy. in the united states we live in a representative democracy which is a form of democratic governance where we vote representatives in and seed c --ede the responsibility for decisions to them. there are direct democratic decision points where we go to the polls and vote on referendums, for example we have a direct say on a specific issue. that is also more direct democracy. i think by in large we do live in a democratic -- with a democratic government in a

democratic society. i do not think it is a misnomer to call it that. host: lots of folks say we do not live in a democracy but a republic. is there a lot of daylight when people are using that language? guest: i mean i am a political theorist, so who am i to make that call. i do think that there is less daylight between republican government and representative democracy as we know it. i guess maybe there is more of a distinction then i gave it credit before. i see those things is not too distinct. host: darrell in pennsylvania on the independent line. good morning. caller: yes. i was listening to everything that david said and i find it ironic, he used a lot of terms like countries and regimes when talking about elections and their elections, and he uses those to imply other places on the funny thing is he is

describing our election system to a t. i do not know if he has no self-awareness or he is simply lying and pushing a democrat agenda that elections are fair in this country because our country is in shambles. the comments about trumping a dictator was actually a joke. he said it as a complete joke saying that on day one he would do all of these things just like biden did like every other president does. it was clearly a joke and he is taking it seriously and he forgets that trump was president. if you wanted to be a dictator he had four years so he did -- so clearly he did not understand humor. our government is the problem, both parties are corrupt. the biden regime and a good -- and that is a good choice of a word. they use state run media which is most every channel except maybe fox and others to push only their methods and hide the

truth just like the hunter leiden laptop and everything. he talks about china and russia and he talked about it saying that they run poor elections. it is our country that runs poor elections. david is projecting all of the democratic actions on trump. biden is a real dictator. everything what he is doing is what dictator tries to do. i do not understand where he is coming from as he works at the center of alliance for democracy. he is just pushing other propaganda's. host: the alliance for securing democracy. there were two points, if you want to respond to. how different is the united states from some of these other countries that you mentioned? and the idea that the caller was saying that a lot of the actions by the current administration could fall into these categories? guest: i do draw a distinction between countries that have actual state media and the

united states which is largely privatized. host: and also about the elections and how free and fair they are. guest: my point being that in the united states an incumbent administration can allocate state resources and say put out this narrative or promote the present this way and denigrate. that does happen in other democratic countries or because i democratic countries and in authoritarian countries like russia where there is a direct channel of communication between the kremlin and state media. that is fundamentally different from the information environment and political environment in the united states. i also do think, as i mentioned in response to one of the previous callers, i do think elections in this country are held freely and fairly which means sometimes a party that i want wins and the party that i

want loses. that is part of the democratic lifecycle. i think that there is not widespread electoral fraud. i do not believe that. i think you have thousands and thousands of honest election officials who represent their local communities and run their elections freely and fairly. and i do not think that there is a massive censorship campaign going on. the fact that donald trump won in 2016 freely and fairly shows that conservative voices really had their moments in these -- in the sun and it resonated with more americans than it did on the democratic side. in 2020 opposite happened. that is our country and that is how it works. i do not think that there is a massive conspiracy.

joe biden loses in 2024 you know , then people could say that -- you could spend that any number of ways. so i think it is dangerous to draw sweeping conclusions based on what happened in one particular election to say that there is a massive conspiracy because somebody prefers one who did not win. that is dangerous. host: we have a text message question by erwin from madison, wisconsin who asked "what is the connection between immigration policy and autocracy, if any?" guest: that is a good question and i am not an immigration expert. i think that lots of democracies including ours have struggled with immigration policies for a time. i do not necessarily think that a country's particular immigration policy signifies autocratic or democratic. we have a very tight immigration

regime that is democratically represented in the will of the people or the opposite. host: i wonder if that is referencing some of the trends through the countries that you mentioned to focus on some nativeism guest: guest: in certain cases. yeah. although there too, we have to be careful not to label those trends as inherently autocratic. i mean, again those -- we might disagree with them, those could also be genuinely held views and those people might go to the polls and genuinely vote in people that reflect those views. so i would not want to say that nativism and tribalism inherently speaks to an inherent authoritarianism or autocracy. they can, but it does not have

to. host: keith in evansville, indiana. republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i was just wondering are any of the immigrants that came into the country in the last few years be able to vote in different states? host: i'm not sure if those -- that is your areas of expertise. guest: to the best my knowledge if you are an illegal immigrant you do not have the ability to vote in u.s. elections, local or federal. that is to the best of my knowledge. host: karen in pennsylvania on the democratic line. caller: my question is in your explanation of the fair elections you did not address the fact that -- i am a democrat and i would like to vote for a

republican, i cannot do that unless i change my party before the primary. if you are independent in your current cash in this country you cannot vote in the primary and these laws are dictated by the republicans and democrats. i do not see republican and democrat rulers in my constitution. it does not say political parties in my constitution. host: further wanted -- go ahead. guest: for what it is worth, i agree with the caller. the parties would say you cannot vote in our party primaries unless you are a very registered voter, there is a reason it is a party primary. i agree. if you want to cross party lines and vote in another party's primary you should have that right as an american citizen. host: jaden in south carolina on the independent line. caller: yes, good morning.

you know, organization like his and a lot of others, they just do not like to tell the truth about things. i think it is mainly because they are trying to get money from both sides. host: what do you think that he has said which is untrue? guest: because when the guy asked him -- caller: because when the guy asked him which party do you think is more autocratic and that is obvious. and he dodged the question saying i do not like to take sides. i understand, he is trying to get money for both sides. let me get my point because i do not have much time. the system the way it was set up, it was set out to fail and we have not adjusted it over the years. and then you have the electoral college and the senate were a little state can have two senators like any of the other ones. and gerrymandering.

we complain about russia getting into our elections and all the other foreign countries, but that is why they can because the system is set up that way. apec does that better than anyone and other people have taken notes and now the russians and the chinese are doing it. and we do nothing. the supreme court set up citizens united and say you can put all the money you wanted it does not matter. and then we expect art -- our democracies or serve -- to survive. organization should be out, you should tell the truth, just try to not hurt people's feelings. but this system was set up to fail this way and we should have adjusted it over the years. host: let us give david a chance to respond. guest: there are a lot of good points and my organization does

published research that shows exactly how countries like russia and china exploit the things that you talked about to be able to say move money into the count that then bleeds into the political system or to support or influence operations targeting american voters at the micro level because they know exactly these gerrymandered systems, which districts in which electoral districts are the most important and where they can have the most money. so the system is such that our enemies like russia and china, they have the ability to try and influence our elections in that way because the system has real flaws like you pointed out. host: russ in new york city on the democratic line. caller: i do not know if you remember if we are trying this

-- in vietnam to save the village we had to destroy the village. we would talk about maggot was right -- maga was right about the 2020 elections and we will just have to put off changing the government. use continuity of government. i want to know if this is possible. and since ukraine i have not been able to watch russia today and since gaza i have not been able to watch al jazeera. and a government that violates its own laws by sending munitions to war criminals, is that an autocratic government? when you said that trump wanted to be dictator from day one, that tells me you are spell -- spreading misinformation. you know that he said for one day. host: sorry, i just want to correct. i was the one who cited the quote and said that he would only be a dictator on day one. did you want to go ahead and respond to that? guest: yes.

which one of those three should i try to pick off first? i guess -- i misinterpreted the quote where i do not have a sense of humor. but i'm still alarmed if a candidate references being a dictator. at my core, that is alarming and it does not matter to me what party the candidate represents. i am troubled by that. on ukraine, there is -- russia today is labeled as a state-sponsored media outlet on the russia governor -- and the russian government. when people watch russia today they should be aware that they are consuming russian state propaganda. that is not span. that is accurate. there is an actual editorial control that the russian government exerts over rt.

host: sorry we did not get to all of the points but we want to get to a few more. jeff in rapid city, michigan. republican line. caller: merry christmas c-span. spreading propaganda ad nausea. this guy is probably from a sorros group. i would like to thank the guy from pennsylvania to covering so many points. he missed the point about ballot harvesting and how the democrats have this all set up for the next election and this is why this guy is sitting here and telling you that there is nothing to fear. the fix is already in. and he sits here and says that you have to know that elections are safe because we do not have state run media. where are you sitting right now? you are sitting on the c-span studio. you are part of state run media.

host: i will just correct you that c-span is funded by the cable networks and paid by people to their cable -- by the fees paid to the cable networks. let us go to new jersey, independent line. caller: good morning. i read "the rise and fall of the third reich" and hitler did put out " mien kampt" to tell you what to do. well the heritage fund has what they call projects 24. project 24 is a book, it is not my imagination, it is on c-span. what they are gearing up for the former president to become president, and they want to do, it is not my imagination and it is on c-span. host: you are referring to the

heritage project 2025 presidential transition project. caller: they want to get rid of civil service, say you have a civil service you take that to the president and not to the constitution. so something is wrong here. host: that is the last caller that we can get. you want to respond to that and add final thoughts? guest: yes. i think there is a lot of frustration out there that the media or pundits are sort of saying x the next regime is going to do, y, and z. and a lot of that is being published now. this is all transparent so neutering the civil-service for example, that is not some imaginary policy idea. it is being talked about where civil-service is now going to be

about loyalty more than it is about upholding an oath to the constitution. i think that is dangerous. no one is making that up that is something that is being talked about and written about. so, before we sort of called people liars or this and that, we should actually read verbatim from these texts and understand that these are policy platforms that certain candidates for office are putting out there and might do if they are elected and if that is ok, that is great, they have the ability to freely vote that person in. but, we should also take at face value what these people are saying in writing. the point about the civil-service is indicative about that. host: david salvo is a senior fellow and managing director at the german marshall fund and alliance for securing democracy. thank you.

later this morning we will hear more perspectives from american enterprise institute's kevin kosar he will discuss his podcast "understanding congress ." first, we will hear more from you during the open forum. you can start calling you now. we will be right back. ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring unfiltered view of what is happening in washington. live and on-demand. keep up with the biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings of the congress, white house events, the court, campaigns and more. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for the tv network and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling broadcasts. c-span now is available at the

apple store and google play. scan the qr code to download it today or visit c-span.org/c-span now. c-span now, your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. >> all of this month watch the best of q&a on sunday, the journalist discusses her book about a 1973 experiment led by stanford psychologist david rosen hand which tested the legitimacy of psychiatric hospitals in america. she talks about the experiment and the impact on the psychiatric profession sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on q&a. you can listen to q&a and all of our podcast on the free c-span now app. >> weeknights at 9:00 eastern, c-span's encore presentation of

our 10 course series books that shaped america. we partnered with the library of congress which explored key pieces of literature that had a profound impact on american literature. monday night we feature "common sense" as discussed by richard bell. watch the encore presentation of books that shaped america weeknights at 9:00 eastern on c-span or go to c-span.org/booksthatsh apedamerica to learn more about each book feature. ♪ american history tv exploring the people and events that tell the american story. from this year's george washington symposium held at mount vernon, a discussion on the united states constitution and how it has evolved. from lectures in history, the university of kentucky english

professor talks about how cold war politics shaped literature from africa, asia, and the caribbean. on the presidency, a conversation on the presidency and the press hosted by the john f. kennedy presidential library and museum featuring doug mills and tamra key is. exploring the america story -- the american story. find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime on c-span.org/history. >> a healthy democracy does not just look like this, it looks like this where americans can see democracy at work. where 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. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back. we are in open forum ready to take your calls on topics we have discussed already or other news and political topics. let us start with larry in connecticut on the republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. the screener said if i stayed on hold i could address the last segment. i have been watching you for about 20 years, i have been retired a long time. a democratic pollster was on and i love what i -- what he said when the news media takes aside it is a threat to the democracy. c-span is clearly part of the news media. would you please read the complete quote one trump said that he would like to be a

dictator for the day? because not to do so would mislead people and i've been hearing a lot of misleading as it regards the quote. could you please read the complete quote that donald said. host: i will pull that up as we hear from another caller. shirley is in connecticut on the democratic line. go ahead. caller: actually i am calling on the republican line. i am sorry. host: that is ok. caller: i do not understand all of the things you people say. but when it comes up to lies that biden tells, the white house, they just go along with it. but, i think the biggest thing is you have to just stop being

so dam messy. host: go ahead. caller: the ballots in bridgeport, connecticut. you do not show it all. why don't you show the tape of that? with someone stuffing ballots. you condemn trent -- you condemn president trump for questioning, but you do not go and show the ballot stuffing in connecticut on a local election. so, i do not know. host: next up we have mike and rockford, illinois. independent line. caller: two points, one about the ivy league school and the impeachment. it is ironic how it is similar to the first impeachment of donald trump, what the democrats

and the biden is due -- and biden is doing where they do not see anything wrong. in the first impeachment of donald trump it feels like -- it seems like if the monkeys did not see or hear the testimony or the report then the monkey did not do no evil. and that is exactly what is happening with this impeachment. the democrats do not see anything so he did not do nothing. that would be an excellent segment for c-span to do, what precedents that donald trump set up. i found out this week through c-span that a senator was testifying that we over -- that we have over 300,000 chinese nationalists at the ivy league school. if biden wants to become president is that after chinese new year's, stay home, the schools are for american

students only. the problem with funding research and development in ivy league schools is that the board, once the school comes across anything that they could put out, it is up to the board to hand out what they came up with. inventions or whatever. so we never get feedback. we are funding all of this research and development in ivy league schools and we do not get anything because it is up to the board to hand out the stuff that they come up with. that is allowed there. so those two points would be a great segment for c-span. host: thank you for that. we have been able to pull up some of the clip of the section referenced several times about whether or not former president trump when he spoke about being a dictator. this was at a fox news town hall that he did with sean hannity. let us go ahead and play that. [end video clip] -- [video clip]

>> under no circumstances you are promising to never abuse power except -- two as rep or duchenne -- retribution against anyone? >> except for day one. i want to close the border and i want to drill. that is not retribution. you know >> he says you not going to be a dictator are you? >> i said no, other than day one. we are closing the border. >> and then drilling. [end video clip] host: that was a clip we were referencing. john on the republican line. go ahead. we will try one more time. john, are you there? caller: yes i am. hello? host: go ahead. caller: i am curious about the gentleman's perspective about war -- what large bureaucracies

do to impede the will of the people. many of us on the republican side have the view that bureaucracy is completely out of control, and is populated by left-leaning individuals who resist the implementation of executive policies. so i am curious about his view of whether there is a tipping point where the bureaucracy becomes the body and the people are no longer in control. thank you. host: unfortunately david has stepped away but the point is well made. let us go to diane and greenbelt, maryland. democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. hello? host: good morning. go ahead with your comment. caller: i am the first heavyweight world champion in

world -- in women's boxing. host: congratulations. caller: thank you. i am calling concerning the tragedy that happened october 7 to the israeli people. i believe it was planned by the prime minister, benjamin netanyahu. the reason i am saying this is because all of the news media are saying why it took so long, why it hours? some of them are saying nine hours. and that is why i believe that it was planned. because the hamas fighters knew how much time they had. they were timing themselves. they knew that israel ms. -- that the israeli military was not coming. they knew what they were doing because it was all planned.

the timing and all of that were planned. they had time enough to rape the jewish women and kill babies. to just go and massacre them, this was timed. and i believed they were timing themselves because they knew ahead of time that the israeli military was not coming. why? because of what the prime minister is doing now and what he wants. that is why i believe it was planned. but a lot of media will not say the reason. they say we do not understand why so many hours. because they will not say what they really wants to. they believe it was planned. host: thank you. mike and oak grove, missouri on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i heard a lot of things.

the first thing i would like to say is what kind of people makes a woman carry a baby to term if it is going to die two or three days after it is born. that is ridiculous. secondly i want to make a comment to the russian republicans that want to know what ukraine has been doing with the money and the aid that they have been given? all you have to do is look at the map where the war started -- sorry i said war, when this engagement started, look at the map of the territory russia to from ukraine. and see how far back they pushed russia to see where it has gone. and i don't know why the russian republicans want to give ukraine to russia, but i think they're in trouble. i mean, you know, there's things

i don't like about the democrats but i really don't like the new republican party. host: victor is in atlanta on our republican line. go ahead, victor. caller: hello? host: yes, victor, we can hear you. caller: ok. i was calling about the usage of the word democracy that's been just throwing around when the gentleman was on the table? the word democracy is to where in our constitution. and the federalist papers, it's discussed why our founders did not choose a democracy. we're not being educated on c-span. you guys are not being fair. i've been watching c-span since the 1990's, the early 1990's. and it's getting worse and worse with this democracy thing. that's a dangerous thing to be drug around to the people.

-- throwing around to the people. we are a republic. that's many pour pledge of allegiance. i'm a veteran. we're teaching our own people to disagree with one another politically. we are a republic. that democracy, folks. there's a graduation to democracy. democracy, socialism, two outright dictatorship. we're not that. we are a free people under a constitution which is founded by a republic. thank you. host: ok. it just looks to the dictionary to get some insight on this idea of democracy versus republic. miriam webster says here that a case can be made for either.

is the united states a democracy, a republic? this is one of those either/or questions. seems like they should have a straight answer but the short answer is they're frequently used to mean the same thing, a government in which the people vote for their leaders. and then i'll scroll down a bit. it's true that there are nuance and difference between these words, according to their historical use and intent meteorology -- end meteorology -- entemology. it is the most basic understanding refers to the direct democracy of ancient greece. republic comes from latin roots -- these terms are not mentioned

in the declaration of independence. so, one of many interpretations of this debate of democracy versus republic. next up, let's hear from kathy in satellite beach, florida, on our democratic line. caller: yes. i have a question about the binder of law russian data that's been missing since trump left office. it's about 10 inches thick, full of all the raw data that america has collected on sources and

methods and everything. i've always wondered why ivana trump's casket had 10 pallbearers when princess diana's lead line casket only had six. i mean, that casket had to have been hugely heavy and without the missing boxes of secret documents that everybody keeps talking about, i think that they need to go to the golf course where trump had her buried and just take a looksy, just out of curiosity. i want to know where that binder of raw russian -- excuse me, information went. host: alton on our independent line from louisiana. caller: i am in my -- excuse me, white u.s. air force in my 80's

and i want to tell these people sayi that our electn are corrupt. they need to do what i have done over the years and go down and vol too earlily work in your state election and you will see that it is virtually impossible to steal an electionn the united states ofmerica. we stopped teaching the true history. we need to go back to preworld war i and teach what happened to bring the world into a world war, same as world war ii d it appears to be hpening again here in this country that our young don't understand what it means when the united states of

america reses to help their free countries arounthe world that's being invaded by dictators. they need to study who joseph stalin was, what authoritarian soviet union vladimir putin dictatorship would be to this country. and it appears to be one party is headed in that direction. they want a communist socialist -- the trump lookers seem to want to have a hardcore soviet union dictatorship. thank you very much. host: ann is in oregon on our republican line. good morning, ann. caller: good morning. i have two things. regarding the last caller, we

have to take care of our southern borders first for our own security before we take care of other countries' borders. and also, talking about the green socialist trend forced to us by all these rules and everything about buying electric. plants use co2. so we can't go to zero carbon emissions like they're talking about. it's just ridiculous. they're just trying to take far and as far as i know the last i heard, we were a free country. we can choose what we wanted. but the green socialists don't want us to have that. they want to have power over us. host: ok. next up is keith in houston, texas, on our democratic line. caller: good morning, c-span. host: good morning. caller: listen, i applaud that gentleman that was just before the young lady that spoke.

and let me just say this about immigration. there is a form you can go to. it's how the united states immigration works. i advise everybody who was talking about this immigration system. it is a problem. to go and look at -- go read our immigration policy in the united states. i think you'll find out that it is up to congress to do something about that system. and it has been -- i think the last time that anything that's been done was during the barack obama era and it was on daca. i called in to say that donald trump, i think, would have made a hell of a president had he not been such a compulsive liar. i think he has done an unjustice

to our justice system by trying to play all of -- all the parts of our political system. but if you really want to know what this country would look like under donald trump administration, all we have to do is go back to charlottesville. you had two days in charlottesville where they called the iowa state the alt-right. i don't see how you can allow that to happen in our country where we had -- i mean, it was in my opinion, one of the worst times that we can ever imagine where we had neo-nazis. where we had the gnat decide symbols and these people marched.

where will were you when these people were marching, anti-semitism and chanting anti-jewish, where were you when those people were out there chanting this? and i believe there was -- there were people injured or people hurt or killed during that process. and why are we not pulling these people in and talking about this? host: ok. next up is thomas in detroit lakes, minnesota, on our independent line. good morning, thomas. caller: oh, yes. i was listening for a couple of hours in that segment before this last one. somebody mentioned civics lessons in school. boy is that ever true. that would be so wonderful if people would get informed. i have a very dear friend here in town who -- he's the most compassionate person. he volunteers for all kinds of

wonderful things. and yes, he is a true trumper and i just can't understand why he wouldn't be -- let himself be informed on because a lot of these people just listen to one station, you know, the viewpoints of the slander, one particular party and they don't listen to get a good well-rounded education about the other side. and it would be so good if people would just spend a little time balancing between msnbc and fox, for instance, and get both sides, people's ideas to be better informed. i think that would be a wonderful thing if people would just let themselves become

informed and i just want the best person to be the president. i'm independent. i don't care what party they're from. but i just want somebody with good character and, you know, somebody who will do really well. i have a solution for this thing. it's just crazy, but it's my idea. host: ok. caller: just a wonderful republican for pennsylvania from the wonderful democrat from california. those two guys ought to run together. flip a point for who is going to be a president and run for a four-year term and then the other guy take over the next four years from both parties and alternate like that. and i think those two would get along because they're at the right age -- host: ok, thank you for that suggestion, thomas.

next up is jerry from our republican line. caller: good morning, america. host: good morning. caller: i have a couple of topics that i would like to address today. first off is those voting machines from 2020. you know those voting machines never were analyzed. every time they were supposed to go somewhere to be analyzed, something mysteriously happened and they never made it. the last time i believe was in nashville, the at&t building in nashville. the voting machines were supposed to go there to be analyzed and lo and behold, a bomb goes off outside the building. shuts down this system for their system computer. has anyone ever heard of them? whatever happened to that investigation? why? because the people supposed to be investigating have money are

the ones that planted the bombing. f.b.i. host: so jerry, i do want to point to some stories that the voting companies, the companies that actually make those voting machines you're referencing to, including dominion voting system have sued for defamation to several companies and have in certain cases -- here we go. this is some nbc news voting companies are heading back to court next year likely dragging reames of new evidence into open court just as the former president seeks a second term. the companies are accuses of rigging the 2020 election despite the fact that there is no evidence of significant voter fraud. both have filed separate lawsuits alleging defamation against fox news, news max and trump lawyers sydney powell and rudy giuliani and others.

go ahead and finish your point, jerry. caller: well, those same voting machines were tampered with again in 2020 in arizona. host: we will be taking more of your calls later on up next on "washington journal." we're going to hear from american enterprise institute's kevin kosar who's going to discuss his podcast "understanding congress." we will be right back. ♪

>> since 1979 in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provide complete coverage of the halls of congress from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefing and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span. your unfiltered view of government. ♪ >> friday night, watch c-span's 2024 campaign trail, a weekly roundup of c-span's campaign coverage providing a one-stop shop no cover where the candidates are traveling across the country and what they're saying to voters along with firsthand accounts from political reporter, updated poll numbers, fundraising data and

campaign act. watch c-span's 2024 campaign trail, friday nights at 7:00 eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org or download it as a podcast on c-span now, our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcast. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. ♪ >> c-span piece studentcam documentary competition is back, celebrating 20 years with this year's theme, looking forward while considering the past. we're asking middle and high school students to address one of these questions. is next 20 years, what is the most important change you'd like to see in america? or over the past 20 years, what has been the most important change in america? as we do each year, we're giving away $100,000 in total prizes with a grand prize of $5,000 and every teacher who has students participate in this year's

competition has the opportunity to share a portion of an additional $50,000. the competition deadline is friday, january 19, 202 for information, visit our website at studentcam.org. >> a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work, when citizens are truly influenced, a republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's capitol to wherever you are. you'll get the opinion that matters the most, it's your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. we're joined by kevin kosar who's a senior fellow at the american enterprise institute and the host of the

"understanding congress" podcast. hi there, kevin. guest: good morning. host: it seems kind of obvious but can you tell us what "understanding congress" is about? guest: yeah, the podcast was borne after i spent about a decade working on capitol hill as a civil servant, a non-part distant researcher outside the library of congress. and when i got to congress first in 2003, i thought i understood pretty much how the wheels turn there. i was incorrect. despite reading books and studying articles, i didn't really understand congress. it's a really complicated beast. and so the podcast was borne from this admission of my own ignorance and the desire to share all the complexities of this machinery. because, look, we're a democratic republic, we're a represented democracy and people need to understand how this central part of our government system works. host: off lot of different episodes. can you talk about the different topics you cover and who you

talk to and how you find your guests? guest: yeah. well, the first thing is to note that this is not an exercise in partisanship. so when i pick a topic, i want to go to a person who knows that topic well. if i want to understand what the speaker of the house's duties are, how the duties change over time, go to professor matt greene of k.a.t. flick university because he's written -- catholic university because he's written books about it. in the course of speaking with them, they're educating both me and the audience. host: so why did you start the podcast and who would you say your target audience is? guest: i started it because it feels to me that our national

government system is kind of understandable. i mean, the supreme court, the federal court. we as voters kind of get what they do. the presidency, we kind of understand what that is about. congress, meanwhile, boy, it's confusing. and it's built to be confusing. there's a whole lot of mixed expectations about what it's supposed to be doing, sewn right into the structure. and figuring out that messness was part of the desire. i hope it's helpful to media and people who work on capitol hill. that's one thing that's less appreciated is representative democracy is governed by amateurs. you come rolling into town, you need to be schooled in how to do your job on capitol hill and the

podcast is one piece of that educational process. host: i want to follow-up on something you mentioned about the mixed expectations that people have about congress. i have to imagine that ties into the very low approval ratings we have for congress as well. guest: yeah. you think about it, voters to some degree are judging members of congress on how well they're doing their job. well, what is their job? where is the job description? you can look in the constitution and you can get hints of their responsibilities, the expectations for fulfilling those positions but there's no clear job description. and so everybody to some degree is bringing their own priors. so we've got a whole episode devoted to what do you expect the congress to do. it gets people to think more about what they really want when they go of the polls and cast the vote and they're trying to determine did this person do a good job or do i need to get

somebody else in there. host: right. i mean you have your most recent episode, focusing on congressional capacity. can you explain what that is? guest: yeah. as you mention, there's a lot of people who are not happy with the performance of congress. and typically when people talk about what's wrong with congress, they rely on what i call the three p's of the explanations are the people. we just got the wrong beam in there. it's the party. well, the democrats are dysfunctional. the republicans are dysfunctional. or polarization. that's why it's broken. what i argue is all those things are part of the truth but there's also this thing that's called capacity. like any other organization, congress can only do as much as it's capable of doing. and it's important to look at it as an organization, how are we choosing its members? how are our staff getting hired? what are the process of doing work? what kind of technology they have to get the job done?

when you start asking questions like that as if you're thinking about a business or a choir or any sort of organization, it becomes very illuminating. congress is really not structured to analyst the demands of the 21st century. host: i want to remind folks that you can call in with your questions for kevin. our republican line is 202-748-8001. democrats is 202-748-8000. and independence, 202-748-8002. this latest episode about congressional capacity, i want to read a portion of what you said. because this episode was all you. you didn't need bring in an expert because you knew this so well. the day-to-day demand congress have skyrocketed. by law, congress mus fund and oversee 180 federal agencies and four million civil and military ees that administer thousands

thousands of policies and program affecting the public. annual spending isbout $6.5 trillion which is seven times higher than it was in 1980 and a dozen times larger than the world's largest corporations, wal-mart. the senate is oblig to review and vote upon 300 executive branch nominees and thousands of no to independent agencies. the military andhe service academies for example, the naval academy, the immensity of federal activity leads to more demandthe public. in an average year, americans whose numbers have 12, 45% since 1980 write, e-mail or otherwise contacress between 25 million and 30 million times per year, which amounts to more than ,000 communications per legislature. that is nothing of the escalating demand from it groups and lobbyists to meet with legislatures. and let me say one more thing of voters the average number of

house of representatives has 760,000 constituents, yet, he serves them with a staff of wethan 20. the senate is even more challenge since there are only 100 senators who has to collectively serve 330 million americans. i have to say when i was listening to that, that list felt daunting to me and i follow this quite a bit. guest: yeah, yeah. it's been an incredible job. 50 years ago, member of congress or a senator doing their job was a bit like running a medium sized business. now each one of them is in charge the equivalent of a corporation. and they're not really equipped for it. and there are not the systems and resources in place in order to empower them to do the job better. and i think that's in large part why a lot of americans feel like they're not being heard. their problems are not being solved. and that's why they're so down on congress. host: what are some of the solutions to that? guest: first, staffing.

congress has always had committees. that's the division of labor. if they gave out a machine shop, there's different things done in different places and different people specializing. and committees are public policies, specialization centers within congress. they need have more staff. if you're not going to increase the number of members of congress to do more and more work, then you're going to need more staff. and remarkably, the house of representatives has fewer staff today than it did in the early 1980's and the job is getting bigger. and they have to update their processes. look at the budge process. it's 50 years old. it's clearly not working. we face government shutdown. massive debt. nobody thinks this is healthy and functional. computers. i.t. i mean, congress persistently lacks behind the private sector. and again, when you're trying to manage, you know, listening to

760,000 constituents in the house of representatives, you need good technology. you need the equivalent of a call center or something like that. you probably need the voice of a.i. to start parsing the messages. so what exactly does public wants you to do? host: let's hear from members of the public. fred is on our republican line. go ahead, fred. caller: where do you go to find out where schumer blocked the subpoena for the flight logs to be replaced? guest: [laughter] that's a good one. where would you go for that? well, you can't go to congress.gov. i guess the follow-up question i would have was how was it blocked? was this a judicial proceeding of some sort of a congressional

proceed something that's unclear to me. if you can find me on twitter or online, we can follow-up on that conversation. host: ok. i will say that you are on x@kevin rkosar. next up on our republican line, ben. caller: kevin, if i may, i have a two-part question. can you mention a little background about yourself and your beliefs and also the people that you use for reference. the reason why i do that is so many people with the person sitting the bully pulpit exactly what your personal beliefs are. thank you. host: ok. so stand by there, ben. i will give a little bit of your background which is -- this is your 10th time on "washington journal," i believe.

so, welcome back. guest: thank you. thank you. i grew up in ohio. i'm a middle-american person. like to spend a lot of time outside. two labrador retrievers. i'm a pretty regular guy in many respects. i worry about the state of this country. government's gotten really big. that creates a dissonance and a concern. and it also kind of leads to questions about whether we're losing control of our government. representative democracy is sliding into like a presidential system without itaewoning to do that. -- it wanting to do that. if we get the system for choosing people and we get better systems in place and kind of bridge the gap between the

public and the congress with better communication, better accountability, i think we have a chance to really turn things around and that america's best days could be ahead of us. host: ben, what was the second part of your question? caller: yeah, i have to agree with kevin on a whole lot of what he said. i would have liked to have known if you believe that -- as an older man, i was involved with government both as a teacher and an individual. a whole lot, and what i see today that difference from the past is the past, people dealt with compromise. even lindon johnson, they call him the great compromiser. the other fact of big business

and the rest of the constituent buts it seems to be more outside sources that control the way congress vote today and what they agree on. what do you think? guest: i'm with you. there are a lot of really boring issues that congress does compromise on. and typically, they don't get much media coverage because they're in the weeds, technical. they're not exciting like big stuff, like to abortion and immigration. they're not high salient. and critically, they're not issues that the parties can run on an election. and this leads into the point which i think answers some of your concerns can. think about the way the elections are structured. in most parts of the country, when you're picking the amount

-- congress, democrats get together and the republicans get together and they pick which candidate they're going to put forth in the general election. gut guess what? only about 20-25% of eligible voters show up to those primaries and they tend to be the most partisan and out on the far right and left wing. they're the ones who are doing the picking. so any candidates who gets to washington, d.c., you're in the house of representatives, you are going to go right through that process in two years. and so you are afraid of compromising on big tough issues. you don't want to cut a deal. and none of these guys like to do all these work to get elected and get booted out. shot we need to think about that. because look, our election system, i like to say it's our hiring process. we're getting members. and if we're not happy with their performance, then we got to change the hiring process.

host: ben also mention the congress not really getting much done and there's a headline here at the huff post and it's one of in that were similar this was the least productive congress since the recession. congress has only written 21 laws since the great depression and members draw more headlines for confrontations than for public policy making. is that a fair assessment of this particular congress? guest: sorta. the house has been having a hard time coming to agreement with the very narrow g.o.p. majority and we have drama around the speaker back in january, and then back in october, we decided to do that drama again apparently. and that's been very disruptive to the ability to just spend time on stuff other than picking a speaker. but that said, congress just did pass the national defense authorization act which is not just about fed, there's a whole lot of stuff in there. and one of my glorious tasks

over the holiday break is to dig into the legislation and see what kind of non-defense stuff was put in there. there are things there and they're quite interesting, but i need to work through that. so it's sort of accurate but it can add something if the bill was 2,000 pages long. host: yeah, it's when some of the bills for naming post offices and stuff like that. guest: right. some bills are more important than others. host: let's hear from another ben on our republican line from lexington, kentucky. go ahead, ben. caller: yes, good morning, thank you. with the statement that donald trump made and this is before him basically the same thing or will do the same thing and had done the same thing as wanting to be a dictator on day one, trump on his first presidency had a mandate from congress to

build the wall. they had to get money for that. and then when the second -- the last dictators, he wanted to take away that wall and not build that wall that was funded. what should congress do about mandating what previous congresses have put in place to build the wall and to keep these presidents on day one from becoming dictators? we don't want a dictator. we thought they were supposed to go to representatives and win the argument and under debate of what to do in a country the best way. and if you have the knowledge to do this, explain to me the -- and there are so many other hosts say this, that they are not -- you have my -- government

funded. they're 501c3 but our tax breaks are paid for by others and people have to pay that tax break. and the station gets back that taxes. it's a tax break. host: all right. let's let kevin respond. go ahead. guest: yeah, a lot of questions on tax policy. i will say that there has been this broader debate about what counts as a government expenditure. is it similarly when money goes out to government door or should it include tax breaks? if you're an apple farmer you will probably stuck someone shipping to you. with respect to trump, yeah, you hit on something that's important. congress has the power to purse.

only congress can raise money. it can direct very specifically how it should be spent. and unfortunately, what we've seen is presidents are more and more inclined and this has been going on for decades, to just ignore the law and spend the money in the way that they want to spend it, stretch their reading of the law to reprogram funds from one thing to another thing. and congress, unless it's controlled by the other party has gotten in the habit of just giving in. and that's where i am hoping that members of congress can kind of get past the whole democrat versus republican thing when it comes to spending. and not letting presidents push them around and standing up for themselves. host: ok. let's go to a question here from x, who this is -- what can you tell us about project 2025? guest: sure.

project 2025. you will recall that there were some challenges staffing up. first, trump did expect to win but he didn't start lining up the right people ahead of type. so you had a lot of jobs that were sitting empty. you had people thrown into jobs that were not qualified. the republicans in the senate, in many cases blocked trump nominees who were just not ready for primetime. and it's an effort by some folks on the outside heritage foundation and others to screen and to train people who could possibly serve in the next administration. now it's kind of funny thing because the groups that are doing this do not work directly for mr. trump. so whether mr. trump agrees with their work or doesn't agree with their work remains entirely to

be seen but that's part of the plan. the other part of the project 2025 that's getting a lot of attention is the host -- he will then plan an executive order that will change the permanent positions at the top of the agencies from civil service protected positions into at-will service. namely a president can fire all these people and swap them in with these other folks who have been selected by outsiders. trump wants to do that, apparently. he thinks he can put more loyalists in there. i and others have expressed a concern that it might go beyond the reachable law. but also that it could take us back to late 19th century where a president could roll into washington, d.c. followed a whole bunch of partisans and donors and other hear, on who were given jobs in government whether they were good at it or not. we don't want to go back in those days.

host: do you think civics lessons should be mandatory to all school levels? guest: yes. i would like to see a civics course that is a lot more practical. i would like to see students spending more time actually engaging in negotiation the way members of congress do, the way, well, the way we adults are supposed to do in our day-to-day lives which means different values coming to the table, different wants, different needs. having those conversations, being civil about it, trying to find compromise. and those are good interpersonal skills. and, you know, we need them in congress but we need them in the rest of our lives. so yes, absolutely, i would like to see civic education strengthen in our school. host: let's hear from albert on our independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call and thanks for creating this podcast. you sound like somebody who's interested in the right choice.

my question is you say ultimate the right people. currently congress is made up of mostly lawyers and entrepreneurs. my question is what professions will be most specifically most suited for the role of congress or who should step up in other professions to take those roles? thanks again. guest: yeah, i think it's healthy for congress to have people from all walks of life. i mean, yes, it's a law making body. so having people who are skilled in the law is valuable. but, you know, they also have staff. there's also a house legislative councils office which has lawyers the congressional research office has lawyers. adding more lawyers is not my formula for congress. i like to see more people who are trained the trade who worked in all sorts of different jobs coming in there. those life experiences would make the body a lot smarter. but what's key is that we need a

selection process, an election selection process that incentivizes them to do the work, which is to compromise the bargain, take on the tough issues and to take the tough vote. we don't get that right, we're going to be continue to be disappointed that members are coming and they may look great but when they get here, ultimately, they're not going to make the hard decisions. host: some data from the congressional research service, which used some data for the 117th congress. so not exactly this one. looks at the occupational categories of members of congress. and so many of them doin' deed come from play and business. 273 in business. 173 coming with a law background. and 85 want education

background. so a fair representation of educators there as well. next up, lest hear from john from colorado on our democratic line. caller: we don't have time for a podcast, i need blood -- host: ok. we are talking to graham on our independent line. caller: yes. good morning, america. good morning, c-span. i'd like to look at this from a different perspective. -- pay the salary of congress. how much time they spend going to is raising capital for the parties and then even though they're getting paid by the taxpayers. so i feel like that's a rip-off for us, but then i also want to know what is the actual structure of the parties? what is their organizational

status? thank you very much. host: ok. guest: all right. let's focus on the fundraising one because the party structured one is complicated one because it's the local version, the state parties. yeah, fundraising is the problem. members have no do it regularly. and members who are in purple district are kind of tossup. they have extra fundraising to do. because they are always worried about being challenged. you know from the left or from the right. and it slows up in an inordinate amount of time. there are some folks who say members of congress have cushy jobs. that they don't put in 40 hours a week. that's not correct. all available data indicates that they are hustling, 50, 60 plus hours a week. plus the problem is when you

look at what they're doing, a lot of that time is not spent in the capitol on legislative business. it's raising money for re-election. it's going back to their home state and doing various outreach activities and talking to voters. they're busy. but unfortunately, the demands of the job as is often in the early 21st century has them doing a lot of other things than governorring and fundraising has been a big problem. i'll have to do that back at home or in extra hours. and that kind of boggles their mind. host: another question here from annette stephenson on x. here's my negative ew today. congress has been bought by

lobbies, we the people don't have a chance. how fair is that? guest: there's some truth to that. depends on the issue. it depends on what they mean by a lobby. there are still ons of interest groups in this town. and on the one hand, that sounds bad like we're being swamped by special interests. on the other hand, these interests are representing people from outside of here. you know? animal rights activists. they didn't have an organization representing them 50 years ago in this town. now, yeah. they're here on capitol hill and they're well funded and they're trying to push their agenda just as people on the other side who are in favor of hunting and they're trying to push their agenda. so it varies from issue to issue. on certain topics like banking, for example, yeah. lobbieses are very powerful they're super smart. they have a lot of money. they've got a lot of connection.

host: nelson is in pembroke pines, florida on our republican line. good morning, nelson. caller: good morning. can you hear me ok? host: yes, we can. caller: great. mr. kozar, i find this to be a very interesting topic. you mentioned earlier the number of constituents that members of congress have and their lack of funding, etc. i like to know what your opinion is. i think part of the problem with congress is that it's too big. it's 5235 members plus all of their staff which probably leads to a couple of thousand individuals in congress working and fighting one another.

it's no wonder that congress is in a constant state of chaos. it seems to me it's more efficient if they were smaller. and my second point is that part of the problem with congress is that federalism in the united states seems to be declining where states have less power while the federal government has more power which also leads to the confusion and the chaos and the infighting, etc. i think some of the power and responsibilities needs to go back to the state. and i'd like to hear your thoughts regarding those situations. thank you, sir. guest: yeah. the federalism thing. let me start with that latter part. that's great insight there. yeah, we have a national government now that is involved in a whole lot of issues that it wasn't previously involved in. 100 years ago, the federal government had very little to do

with public education. that was almost an entirely state and local manner. the federal government 100 years ago had nothing to do with disaster response. they pretty much who are the attitude that the red cross and the state should deal with it. if there's a problem in florida, that's not our problem, that's florida's problem. with that has come more spending, but also the intense politics. 100 years ago, they wouldn't have been pulled into those issues because the federal government gives these grants down there. so, yeah. the federal government means the expansion of political conflict. as for the size of congress, i'm going to say -- consider this. there used to be the case that the size of a house of representatives would grow every

10 years. we would have a national census. we count the number of people and we want to make sure the house in particular where close to voters. that they could have sufficient number but not too in that they could listen to them well. #00 years ago -- 100 years ago, congress quit doing that. now we've got this bizarre ratio where they have to represent 300 billion people and i'm not sure having a house of representatives with like 6,000 members, no, that's not doable. but it's possible to be raise the side of the house a little bit and get better representation but without creating complete chaos. host: ok. shirley this garland, texas, on our democratic line. go ahead, shirley. caller: yes, hello? host: yes, shirley, we can hear you. just make sure your tv is turned down. caller: ok. i'll turn it down. host: great. caller: well, i have two

questions that they needed to answer. i want to know what john got too upset and want to get him in the meeting in closed doors to ask some questions. i would just take the fifth like trump did. they gave hunter biden that amount of money. trump denied his children who didn't know anything but the job they had. and i don't hear nothing about that. and she was spending our tax money. we was paying her. host: what was your second question, shirley? caller: ma'am? host: was there a second question that you had?

caller: trump children and son-in-law got clearance. trump had to give them clearance so they could be in the white house doing anything. host: ok. i think we got the idea. kevin, if you want to talk about congress's role and dealing with presidents with families. guest: yeah, what we're seeing is kind of symptomatic of the weaponization of oversight for partisan purposes. with an eye towards the next election. they're not doing this just simply for the sport of it. they're trying to bloody people off so that come next election, they'll be less electability -- electable. and the same thing, you know, this has been going on a long time. you know, it's a great thing for americans to have more transparency to be able to see inside the legislature, to see what's going on.

but it also create answer incentive for members to have congress to pay to the cameras and to engage in this sort of really nastiness. look, the purpose of congressional oversight is see if our money is being spent correctly and that laws are being followed. and it's also to examine public policy problems and to figure out like is this something that the government should do? we've got an bit away from that. some of these -- a lot of americans were grossed out by it the question is what can we do to make it stop and i'm not sure. host: phil this beaumont, texas, on our independent line. go ahead, phil. caller: hi. i'm calling about a comment a previous caller made saying americans need to study history more. i didn't agree with that sentiment. i disagree with him that i think the younger generation is more

well read. i'm calling to see if you're familiar with the book 18th -- host: the 18th what? caller: the 18th -- of bonaparte. guest: i've heard of it but why do you mention it? caller: well, the situation the book described is similar to where we are now. a business oriented party is in power and in the interest of maintaining the status quo, the pro business, you know, status quo. it's like picking grounds for outsiders to want more power to be dictators to come in and really, the business institutions who don't fight it. host: ok. kevin, any thoughts on that? guest: yeah. you know, i think there's a lot

of concern about are we fighting a soft dictatorship? you know, you mentioned reading history, being important. not long after the great depression, there were a lot of people ringing the alarms that we have slid into a -- of caesarrism. people were so upset about fdr's expansion of both chambers of congress overall all sorts of lie that have not been the subject of federal governance and they were worried that we were sliding into a softer dictatorship. so these cycles happen. often economic trouble feed into it. if we slide power towards one person, they'll be able to solve it but thankfully, our constitution system makes it very hard to do and we've not gone to that path so far.

host: deborah on our republican line in ohio. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i think we need a founding father's moment, several of them. one is with i would like to see regular order as a 28th amendment in the constitution and because it benefits the people. it doesn't benefit one party or the other. and you see the argument where is we combine bills that should never be combined. we have, you know, the border shouldn't have to be combined with funding for ukraine. they really should be separate issues. that's more of a common sense approach. and i think that this is part of the problem that we have is that we're not regardless of the party, we should always have regular order. a lot of people don't know what that is. i was just wondering. host: let's give kevin a chance

to explain it. we are a month away from the continuing resolution deadline. and do you want to make a comment about the regular order? guest: yeah. i'm a big fan of congress doing something that looks like regular order, mainly, you set prophesies for doing stuff. this is a process for removing a bill, a process for how much we decided to spend, great a budget and pass bills to work within that budget. yeah. we should have a procedure because i think as you hint at, if you're falling procedures -- following procedures, it creates fairness. it doesn't proceed that any particular party is going to win but it guarantees fairness. so whatever the jut put is, the people that participated in can say at least i got a fair shake. the process was not biased towards somebody else. unfortunately, you know, the partisan pressure in this incredible competition for

control of the chambers between the democrats and the republicans has led to regular order just breaking down and when you're following something that looks like regular order, everybody feels like the process is biased, it's not fair. and then they don't want to participate and they want to fight, fight, fight and it becomes this nasty circle that they get caught up in. i'm with you on regular order. host: that's all the time we have for you. questions and thank you so much, kevin kosar, who is the host of "understanding congress," the podcast from the american enterprise institute where kevin is a senior fellow. so thank you so much for your time. guest: thank you for having me on. host: that is all the time we have today for "washington journal." but you can join us tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern for another edition of "washington journal." have a great rest of your day. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy visit ncicap.org] ♪