♪ ho: good morning. wednesday, december fourth. this past sunday, president biden announced he was pardoning his son hunter.

the leader of the fbi promise to fundamentally reshape the , and the nominee for attorney general says "the prosecutors will be prosecuted this first hour, we are asking, you have confidence in the u.s. justice system? light or why not? -- why or why not? republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. you can send a text at (202)-748-8003. include your first name and city, state. you can find us on social media, facebook.com/c-span and x at --@cspanwj. welcome to today's washington journal. i would like to give you an update on the situation in south korea before we get to our topic. here's a front page of "the washington post" about yesterday, martial law and then

a reversal in south korea says south korea's deeply unpopular president stunned the nation by declaring emergency martial law, a risky power-play that launched six hours of turmoil and eloped military dictatorships that many south koreans believed had been consigned to history books. in a televised announcement late tuesday night, he accused the opposition of "anti-state activities," prompting protesters to demand a return to democratic government. they gathered outside the assembly were lawmakers convened to overturn the order, with police officers forming a barricade around the complex, some lawmakers climbed through windows to get into the voting chamber. before dawn on wednesday morning, he said he would love martial law in line with the parliamentary vote and withdraw

troops from the streets -- she would lift martial law in line with the parliamentary vote and withdraw troops from the streets. here are live updates, south korean leader fate in doubt as lawmakers move to impeach him. back to our topic of the justice department and your confidence in it. take a look at the christian science monitor henry gadd who wrote this, he sahe pardon comes as politic and the criminal legal sysll have becoreasingly intertwined. next month, mr. bill cede his office to donald trump, who has beenject to multiple fedeosecutions himself and has said he will use the federal justice system to pursue his political enemies. the episode represents another ow to public confidence in the justice system and its independence from politics.

mr. biden's pardoning of his last surviving son may repsent a measure of justice and compassion for some, but for others it represents more evidence that the system is corrupt and broke." you can go straight to our phone lines now. joe, maryland, independent. caller: good morning. thank you for listening. two things. number one, my child is not want to go to school, and we are literally having the school yell at us because my kid will not go to school. that makes sense for poor people, but for rich people, their son can buy drugs, guns, also, they just get away with so much. i'm at home scared that the police are going to yell at me because my kid ain't going to school, but this kid can get a pardon for who knows what he has done. it just shows you how our

justice system in our country works. it is for the rich, not for the poor people, and it is ridiculous. i have no confidence in anything other than the new world order because that is what it seems like. hunter biden and jared kushner, they both have the same attorney, a lowell. it isn't that weird? they all have the same people, yet they are on different teams. i apologize. my frustration is great. host: how old is your child? caller: 11 years old, and i have a 17-year-old. neither one would like to go to school. one of them got assaulted by a boy, he is 18 years old, and he threatened my daughter. my daughter has heart problems. she has issues, cancer battles and stuff like that. anyway, they don't like going to school anymore. it is scary because as parents, we face getting arrested. but this kid is just two

different levels of justice. we just have to be patient with each other. anyway, i apologize. i'm experts in personal opinions, but i'm in a county that started with the gesso it's, look it up. host: mark, new york, republican. caller: good morning. i do have confidence in the justice system because it is american, one person, one vote, we can go to the ballot box, we can elect the sheriff, the district attorney, and the representatives for us, and majority rule. so i do have some confidence in the justice system through that. however, was the pardoning of hunter biden, i really believe that joe biden did a disservice to all of us since he said he would not and that he did.

and that really is disturbing. he said he was above it. his supporters said joe biden was above pardon -- partisanship. but it showed how he is unscrupulous. he pardoned his own son after telling everyone he would not. terrible. host: here is mike in ohio, independent. caller: morning, mimi. last guy from new york is correct. biden turns around and says i won't pardon my son. anybody would pardon their son. i don't mind the pardon, it is the blanket amnesty over 10 or 12 years that his family and joe biden were involved in. ironing, are you kidding me? you have 122 llcs, twentysomething bank accounts, even others were involved in

this money laundering criminal acts that are going on. all of a sudden, you watch, joe biden is going to give immunity to everybody in his family and anybody who was involved in these corrupt enterprises that were going on so he can float away with all the money and foreign bank accounts. merrick garland should be put up on prosecution and i say we take this all the way to the supreme court because we have a long ways to go before we clean up that sewer behind you. the way. host: let's take a look at what "the new york" says. baker says, mr. biden stated rationale for granting the pardon will muddy the polit waters as mr. trump prepares to take office with plans to u the justice department and fbi to pursue 'retribution'against

political adversaries. mr. umhas aued the justice system has been recognized against him and he' victim of selective prosecution, much the way mr. biden has now said his son was." here is chris, democrat in new york. caller: good morning. host: go right ahead. caller: yes. the justice system is corrupt. everyone is calling about biden. we have a man that is going to be president with 34 felonies. no one has called about that. true, he should pardon his son. trump has pardoned corrupt father-in-law's, 34 felons, and he continues to down biden.

wake up, america. biden is better than trump, any day. yes, i am calling, and it is so sad how america sees biden as a very bad person. and no one has called and said anything about trump. look, black and white will suffer. take care and everyone have a blessed, blessed day. host: bill, tennessee, republican. caller: yes. i was strongly a trump man, but, you know, when i saw the riots he created and the storming of the capitol, do stupid stuff

he is talking about now about putting these enemies -- they are not his enemies. he created his own enemies. i've had a change of heart about him. there is something evil about trump. i don't know what i'm going to do. he is confusing people. and we are listening to this dumb stuff about how he is going to kill people, have them put in jail and all this kind of stuff. and why do we put up with that nonsense? i just don't know. this man. there something wrong with him. and i was a supporter of his at one time. i will never support him again. i will not become a democrat. i don't know what i'm going to do. two lack. -- thank you. host: we are taking your calls this morning, do have confidence in the u.s. justice system?

republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. we also have social media available. carl sent us on facebook u.s. justice system is fin osadministering it at the doj are a cancer, as are those deep state actors feeding the tumor. the reason this has occurred is that the mainstream media failed to challenge the blatantly biased injustices. willie says this on facebook -- some of the lower courts, but not with the likes of aileen cannon and samuel alito ruling by political philosophy instead of following the constitution. and this is the statement, part of the statement put out by president biden on his son hunter biden's pardon. he said this -- "no rsoble

person looks at the facts of hunter's cases can reach any singled out only because he isas my son, and that is wrong. i believe in the justice system, but i've wrestled with this, i also believe ritichas infected this process and it to the miscarriage of justice. once i made thi decision this weekend, there was no sense to delay it further i hope americans will understand why a father and president would come to this decision. -- this decision." rick, canada, independent. caller: yeah. i was about to say that for them to be looking at joe biden pardoning hunter and not look at them putting a criminal, those who voted for him, back in office is absurd. as a canadian, we look at this guy as if he is the lowest form

of any human morel for any country -- morale for any country, anywhere. that is all i would like to say. host: carol, new york, democrat. caller: hi, how are you? i'm losing faith in our justice system with the way the supreme court has acted. but as far as biden's pardon, i agree. i think he ought to pardon all of his family members because why are people so critical of that when trump used his pardon when he was president for roger stone, paul manafort. both of those guys are crooked. and then he says he's going to pardon all the january 6 guys. i mean, biden's son did not kill anybody. we had five people died on january 6 before the disaster

from that nightmare. that was a nightmare. people seem to have forgotten that trump was watching gleefully. i will never understand how this country could fall for all of his lies. it is just a cult and they just see one side. i hope trump has learned something and will do some good. i'm not going to write him totally off because i have to have an open mind, but i think biden did a wonderful job, and i cannot -- i don't know. all politicians are going to use their position to further some parts of their life. anyway, i'm very frustrated that we have a felon for a president and he is putting all these terribly unqualified people in office, in positions of power. it is very scary.

anyway, that is my opinion. thank you. host: amy, florida, republican. caller: yeah, first of all, i have two things to say. one is biden was found with documents from back when he was a senator that was illegal for him to have. so he certainly was not an old man with a poor memory then, and they totally ignored that. secondly, more people died of covid under biden than trump, which they totally ignore that fact. now he is pardoning his son, which is totally understandable, he loves his son and all of that, but then why did he keep saying he would not do it? why don't they look into all of the lies that biden has told?

one more thing before you cut me off because they are always cutting off republicans, you find me one juror that found trump guilty that actually knows what he was guilty of. nobody even knows because they kept making up these things and changing things so they could get trump. find me one juror who will come forward and say what they found trump guilty of. thank you. have a good day. host: this was democrat glenn ivey, congressman and member of the house judiciary committee, expressing concern that the hunter biden pardon will hurt democrats when they try to stand up to the trump administration on cnn. [video clip] >> on the other end, i have got to say even i don't think hunter biden would have been prosecuted under circumstances. a pardon at this point will be used against, i think, democrats when we are pushing to defend

the department of justice against politicizing it, which is certainly what president trump plans to do, president-elect trump. i think many of the other nominations, he will try to use it as a way to go against and put retribution on people, and i think this sort of gives him grounds to argue that both sides are doing the same thing. i know that there was real strong sentiment. you know, one team to protect hunter biden from unfair prosecution, but this is going to be used against us when we are fighting that issues coming from the trump administration. [end video clip] host: we are asking about your level of confidence in the justice system. son says -- i have more faith in the dall cowboys to win the super bowl this year. ura says -- in general, yes, i'm extremely concerned that the justice system failed to prosecute trump for his crimes

against the country. he seems to be getting away with everything. it is not right. this is kathleen, chicago, democrat. caller: how are you doing? two thing is, this guy, glenn ivey, he needs to shut up because trump has already said what he is going to do when he got back in office. so what joe biden did the other day he should have done. what hunter biden did, he paid back everything, he did not shoot the gun, but i wish you all would be more open. i know you all are not supposed to comment on what people say and let them say stuff, but why don't you put up a list of how many people, criminals, actually criminals that trump pardoned, and how many times his party called him bad. these people were actually criminals. not only did he pardon them, he turned around and put some of

them in his cabinet. how dare america. how dare america. they need to put a list up there. and then he wants to pardon the january 6 who caused chaos? that lady talking about find one juror, we saw trump sit there and his counsel with documents in the bathroom. he stood there while people destroyed the capitol. he actually lost the election. trump is a criminal himself, and the supreme court pardoned him. you can do whatever you would like to do, but so long as joe biden's president, he cannot pardon his child? give me a break, america.

i some how they felt about all the pardons that trumpeted -- ask how they felt all about the pardons that trump did. host: we have that list from newsweek with the headline -- who has donald trump pardoned? the fullest. . -- the full list. michael flynn, former national security advisor, roger stone, trump ally convicted of lying to congress, paul manafort, former trump campaign chairman convicted of financial fraud, alleged russian meddling in the 2016-u.s. election, conspiring to obstruct the investigation, charles kushner, father of jared kushner convicted of tax evasion, and witness tampering. recently dominated by trump as the u.s. ambassador france.steve bannon , convicted of lying to the fbi with his contacts direction intermediaries prior to the 2016 election. it goes on.

albert puro, the ex-husband of janine puro, convicted of conspiracy and tax evasion. rod blagojevich, former illinois governor convicted of corruption for trying to sell barack obama's vacated u.s. senate seat. lil wayne, rapper convicted on firearms charges, and it goes on from there. here is perry in bellflower, california, republican. caller: good morning. i lost faith in the justice system when a president was allowed to willingly and with forethought send semiautomatic weapons directly into the hands of mexican cartels with the sole purpose of creating murder and mayhem in a failed attempt to undermine the second amendment,

only caught because whistleblowers can forward. never forget those whistleblowers lives were destroyed for coming forward. it is funny how whistleblowers, depending on what president party is are either heroes or their destroyed. thank you. host: anthony, georgia, democrat. caller: i agree, good morning. thank you for my call. i agree with the last guy from california about the whistleblowers and the gun and the trade down in mexico. [indiscernible] seeing what is taking place in the justice system, there is so much injustice that has been pretrade upon black men and has destroyed our lives, and it seems like the white man can just live a lawless life.

host: and this is marcus, washington, d.c., independent. caller: god bless you. host: what you think? caller: first, i would like to say this, the story about joe biden pardoning his son, this exposes all the democrats as hypocrites. the ones who could've called in, trump pardoned this guy, paul manafort, yeah, but these individuals were not charged with what hunter biden was charged with or rather they were not accused of what hunter biden has been accused of. so we have a laptop that fbi said in the media said had russian disinformation, that is what they said on the media, they ran with that, and they

come to find that it was real. host: they said it was in line with russian misinformation. caller: exactly. so they duped the public into believing eli, and now we find out it is true and nobody would like to talk about it. wait a minute, democrats, what happened, guys? we got a laptop, we got some actual potential evidence of many wrongdoings and crimes. let's get a jury. let's discover it and open the book, but they don't want to do that because it will expose their party. that is all. god bless you all and have a wonderful day. host: senate democrats did reelect chuck schumer to be their party leader for the 119 congress yesterday. he spoke about the leadership team and how the caucus will navigate the new congress. to collect. -- take a look. [video clip] >> i know this leadership team will help us lead our caucus through rebuilding, reflection, and help serve the american people. serving as leader has been one

of the greatest honors of my life. and a large part of that honor is because my caucus is an inspiring group of people. i love them. they work hard, they have different views, but everybody talks to each other, we respect each other. over the last four years, when i've been majority leader, we've had one of the most successful senates in decade in large part because our caucus is so good. i appreciate that very much. we don't agree on anything. we have different philosophies and backgrounds. every member loves his intercountry, and everyone strives for unity. that's one of the reasons we have been successful after four years in the most productive and consequential years that senate has had in decades, it is galvanized by faith in this chamber's ability to get big things done for the country, even when there is such division, which there is now. most of the major bills we have passed, big bills like chips,

big bills like ira, infrastructure, gun safety, gay marriage we have done in a bipartisan way. that is the message to the new senate, to get things done, to get the most things done in a bipartisan way. senate democrats will continue to dedicate every ounce of our strength, focus and determination to fight and deliver for the american people. [end video clip] host: that was senator schumer yesterday on the senate floor. we are asking you this morning about your level of competence in the u.s. justice system. this is the only times that says biden pardon fuel debate over politics and justice. it says that i then said he issued the pardon after promising he would not because he felt his own justice department had treated his son unfairly. it says one scholar noted that the leaders of both major

political parties have now argued that the system is politically biased. what do you think about that? we will hear from ellis, florida, democrat. caller: good morning. first of, let me give some background. i'm an 81-year-old black male who grew up in mississippi. the justice department then, unbiased is a sore spot, for as long as i can remember, blacks have always felt the justice department was unfair. now we find that the upper level people are using it, and we would like to bring it out. but this has been going on. so the other thing i wanted to talk about is i hear them talking about the parties. i think that president biden should take the list of 50 people and give them all a

pardon. this is what trump said he was going to do. trump says he is going to arrest anybody that was his enemy. he talked about putting generals in front of a firing squad. i spent days in the u.s. navy. he's talking about putting military people who have done their job to protect this country in front of a firing squad because they don't like him or they said something different about him. you people need to wake up out there. wake up, wake up. it is time to be woke. thank you. host: this is cnn on who is--patel -- patel, trump's pick for fbi director, he has vowed to help dismantle the same organization he is poised to lead. former public defender, widely viewed as a controversial figure and one who is value to the

president-elect shared by their disdain for established power in washington. putting him in charge of the fbi would force out christopher wray , the current director, appointed by trump and 2017 before his 10 year term expires in three years. a future move that has already prompted bipartisan criticism. fbi director must also be confirmed by the senate, whose members are already bracing for how to navigate a slew of unorthodox elections. it says in his 2023 book called "government gangsters: the deep state, the truth and the battle for democracy," patel lays out his case on what he refers to the deep state and a term that he says includes elected leaders, journalists, big tech tycoons, and unelected members of the bureaucracy, calling for a housecleaning of the justice department, which he claims has protected high-ranking members of the democratic party while

unjustly targeting republicans and their allies. and here's anthony, new jersey, independent. caller: hey, mimi, thank you. appreciate c-span. just a quick background on me, i've been a democrat all my life. i switched. now i'm independent. my first vote was for carter. yeah, i think biden, anybody who would pardon their son is a good thing. i don't think there's anything wrong with that. i do have a problem with him giving him an overall pardon for anything he's did for the last 11 years. that is dangerous. and i would like to comment on that illinois lady talking about we have to always point everything back to trump because he did everything wrong in the world. i know you put that article on from newsweek which shows all the big names that trump

pardoned, like general flynn and all of these people, so i did a little research when i heard that. i went on wikipedia, and i said what were the number of pardons for each president. i will read those now, jimmy carter, 566. ronald reagan, 406. h w bush, 77. bill clinton, 459. george w. bush, 200. barack obama, 1927. so let's just use the math and the objective data. he pardoned 1000% more people than trump. it is dangerous when we give an overall pardon. and by then is going to pardoned

-- biden is going to pardon his own family and we will never hear from whistleblowers who said or brought that to the forefront and said this is a bad thing because they got all of these accounts and they are making a lot of money. all is going to go away because of this pardon. it is a bad thing. host: glenn, detroit -- gwen, detroit, democrat. caller: good morning. it is weird listening to this conversation today about whether or not biden should pardon his son. it is hypocritical because the same people would like to overlook everything. don't put your finger on the button yet. don't hang up on me please. host: my finger is not on the button. caller: ok, wonderful. anyway, i just got this point to get out, it is hypocritical

because trump has done so much. biden does one thing this time, one thing last time, trump is going to now have a right to do this when he already said he would do what biden did, pardon people. pardon the january 6 people. i mean people don't think that is terrible? as outrage and that? and c-span, we are constantly giving live viewpoints of the world i live in, but fax need to come out and the truth needs to step in. so people arguing about this pardon thing, like trump did not do this or that. it has to be brought out, and the facts need to show to stop

these alternative facts. you cannot live with alternative facts. we need truth to step in. host: all right, and we are going to go to open forum. you can give us a call. you can continue to talk about this topic of the u.s. justice system in general or any other topic on your mind. here are the numbers. republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. joe manchin, senator from west virginia, was on the senate floor yesterday giving his final four speech after serving 14 years in the chamber. here are some of his remarks. [video clip] >> since day one in the united states senate, i have worked -- i'm going to repeat this -- i believe with every ounce of blood i have, i've worked to

preserve the bipartisan foundation, and that is a 60 vote threshold of the filibuster. i believe with everything in it, i do. each of these victories, we urge senators to come together to find solutions. these were bills that made common sense. and when each side can take a little step to fight, and -- find common ground, big things can happen. legislation was overrun by the american public, bills that prove the lives -- improve, immigration reform, background checks for guns, balancing the budget, too many opportunities to fix what is broken in america has slipped through our fingers. not because of disagreements we may have had. these opportunities were missed because politics got in the way of doing our job. it stopped us from doing it. i'm not saying that politics is easy. it's not. and it is messy at times. i've had my share of tough

votes. at times, i felt like the whole senate was united in being upset with me, so maybe we were able to bring you together. i don't know. i tried. anytime i was confronted with a tough decision, i relied on where i came from, how i was raised and who raised me. i cannot explain this by:, it is not accents, i cannot vote for it. please don't be upset, it's you i am, and you all have been tolerant -- it's who i am, and you all have been tolerant at times. [end video clip] host: we will take your calls for another 25 minutes. "the washington post" says trump's lawyers site hunter biden's pardon as a new bid. they had to assure their client would be released from the case involving guilty verdicts on 34 counts.

joe, pennsylvania, republican. good morning. caller: there are two parts to mine, your question on the board, that is kind of the individual idea of justice because there are different judges all around, so i believe what was done in new york to donald trump was wrong through the justice system, and some of the federal things that have been done through the justice system are wrong in their political, but the second part is, i would like to know if anyone remembers the name of tanisha bannister. talking about the lady from illinois who got on grant that you showed some of the people pardoned by donald trump, tanisha bannister was one of the first persons released on the

first step backs, and other statistics, i know i have a little bit of time, people have been released by passionate release. they are the people donald trump worked with. that was a bipartisan act that benefits people. and that is pretty much commonplace, maybe not to the extent because we have a lot of news that covers that step, but i would like to make it clear to people like the lady from illinois that donald trump did do positive stuff while he was in his first presidency, and he gave to the people that he worked with, i know this is a bipartisan act, but for people to know that people have been

released through a compassionate move by donald trump that he was part of it, and that is pretty much my take on it, but i will say back to the beginning, the justice system i think is unstable because if joe biden himself does not trust it, why would anyone else trust it? host: here is james, ohio, democrat. caller: i would like to answer that last guy's question, joe biden doesn't trust the legal system, and it is a matter of trusting the people who are appointed to run the legal system that is the problem, all criminals. i would like to ask about donald trump being convicted on felonies with misdemeanors. there is a law throughout the

united states that if you have three or four misdemeanors, it becomes a felony, and that is all over the country. that is why trump was considered a felon in new york, because of the amount of times he broke the law. back to hunter biden, no one has ever been convicted in this country for tax evasion after paying their taxes. donald trump brags about not paying his taxes. donald trump has yet to release his taxes as he said he was going to do it, and nobody said anything about it, so you have to look at the law and understand what is going on. so we are having a tough time with people in this country, knowing what the law reads and understanding what government is. so right now what donald trump plans to do at this time, i hope

it works out anti--- and what he's doing, i hope it works. i don't believe it will, but there's always a first time for everything. donald trump is a true criminal in the white house. it is embarrassing. every country around the u.s. is embarrassed. one other thing and i will let it go. donald trump, he got information about all the spies that the u.s. had, and when they released the names of those spies, several people came up missing and never came back. england, germany and france said they were not released pertinent information to the u.s. anymore, so think about it, people. host: robert, ohio, independent line. caller: hello, how are you? host: i'm doing ok, how is it going? caller: i'm doing good. i would just like to say biden pardoned his son.

i would like to ask joe biden, are you gonna pardon the black men that was innocent? would you pardon them? that's the only thing i've got to say. have a great day. host: this is politico.com with this article, jeffries calls on biden to pardon more americans and says the house democratic leader says president should pardoned on a case-by-case basis the working class americans who suffered unjustly prosecutions for nonviolent offenses. it says -- hakeem jeffries quote -- during his final weeks in office, resident biden should exercise the high level of compassion he has demonstrated through his life, including toward his son, and pardon on a case-by-case basis the working

class americans and the federal prison system whose lives have been ruined by unjustly aggressive prosecutions for nonviolent offenses. it says that the comments echo the calls from other democrats who in recent days asked biden to use clemency powers for more americans in federal custody besides hunter and to address sentencing disparities, but it did not pass judgment on hunter biden itself. some of the caucus openly criticized the president since the pardon was issued and said it would tarnish his legacy and open a lane for donald trump to issue similar sweeping pardons. ron, denver, democrat. caller: i wanted to mention a couple of stories that "the liberal media" never got out. i wonder if a lot of republicans ever saw the video of congressman loudermilk giving a tour of the capitol the night

before the insurrection of maga people entering the -- taking photos of the stairwells before, and these people were at the insurrection the next day. that is one story. february of 2024, 10 months ago, the indicted fbi informant told investigators he got hunter biden dirt from russian intelligence officials, and the information in the indictment of biden, which blew up in smoke because the informant turned out to be a russian fbi informant, and this happened 10 months ago, and the media, nobody even knows it, but they all say, the emails on his hard drive or less than

one third of them are verified, and the one about the big guy was not. and all these emails about his family and brother, you know, from russia, they were russian disinformation, and people need to know that. anyway. host: ron, about what you said about representative loudermilk, this is pbs.org, it says the january 6 panel releases video of representative loudermilk leading a capitol tour the day before the attack. it says that it released the video by republican lawmaker the day before, showing participants taking photos of stables and tunnels in the capitol complex. that is on pbs.org if you would like to see that. gina, mississippi, republican. caller: good morning, mimi.

i would like to make a point to america and specifically the democrats who are so happy that hunter biden has been recused. how many of you people have family members or children or friends who are now in jail, paying big fines because they around with drugs in some way? so now all of your loved ones and everything, they have to suck it up and deal with all these charges that your loved ones and friends are having to serve time now, and now hunter biden is off scott free? nothing in america is fair

anymore. you have no way of knowing the truth about anything anymore and i just think democrats are making themselves look so foolish. get over it. you lost. you need to keep downing donald trump. you had your chance. you put a mentally deficient man in office, and then you ran without her primary, so get over it, people. host: let's talk to roland, detroit, independent. . caller: good morning. grand rising to you, as well. the america injustice system continues to be rogue, unfair, empathetic.

there are black inmates in a prison in virginia who are complaining that their conditions are so horrendous that they are burning themselves, literally burning themselves so they can get out of there and go to a major medical facility, just to get out of that situation, and the angola prison in louisiana, the conditions there are so horrendous that black men are committing suicide and worse. this is my solution. the cabinet nominees should be vetted by people from the community, organizations that work for justice and fairness, not by senators and all of those cats, but by people from the

community. in detroit, porter brooks, 22 years old, shot 32 times by the detroit police at 4:00 in the morning, he was in the middle of the street, carrying a pocketknife. this guy is thin as a pencil, and the detroit police shot him 32 times, shot him in places in the neighborhood, too. another 20 something-year-old in flint were shot in the back of a couple of weeks ago, running from the police and he was so afraid of the police. they lied that he had a gun and stuff like that. so what are we doing here in america? one thing i have to say about donald trump, he is a disruptor, and his disruption benefits african-american men in

particular than i'm all for it, i'm there for it, but we will have to see. but the government has to be returned back to the people, and these senators and representatives in the house, we cannot trust them to uplift justice. host: here is dave, silver spring, maryland, democrat. caller: hi, my name is dave. good morning, america. i've been serving in the department of defense for the past 30 years and just retired, supporting to advance technology in the u.s. military. i have a couple of things to say, the president of the united states and angola, [indiscernible] let me just tell you something, without africa, the world cannot

survive. everybody knows that. you take it with the intellectuals. so when you see the chinese are coming in because they go in africa. you barely cover africa in any news, but let me tell you, you will [indiscernible] you use it to benefit yourself. you take away the resources, you have something to pay for it. you barely talk about africa, but without africa, let me tell you, you would not be able to

survive. host: let's take a look at president biden yesterday in angola, talking about the history of slavery and that connected the u.s. to angola while he was there. here's a portion of his remarks. [video clip] >> the united states founded an idea, one that vetted the declaration of independence -- better the declaration of independence, that all men and women were created equal. we have not lived up to that idea, but we have never fully walked away from it either. that is due in no small part to the determination and dreams of african-americans, including angolan americans. proud descendants of the diaspora, who helped build the nation as they rebuilt their own families and own sense of self. they are the forbearers, as well, resilient, faithful, even hopeful. hopeful that joy would come in

the morning as it says in the bible, hopeful that our past would not be the story of our future, and hopeful in time the united states would write a different story and partnership with the people who brought here and change. it is a story of mutual respect and progress. that is the history that brings me here. the first american president ever to visit angola over time, and i'm proud to be. over time, our relationship has been transformed. today, our relationship is as strong as it has ever been. throughout my presidency, it has been the goal of the u.s. to build a strong partnership with peoples and nations across the continent of africa. through partnerships aimed at achieving shared goals, bringing

forward the dynamism of the expertise of our government to support aspirations of african entrepreneurs, experts and leaders inside and outside of government because we know the challenges demand africa leadership. one of every four human beings on earth will live in africa by 2050, and ingenuity, and determination of young africans in particular, like the young society and met with your today, will be undeniable forces in the human progress. [end video clip] host: that was president biden in angola yesterday. bob, connecticut, republican. caller: good morning. earlier this morning, a woman called in and mentioned the 34 charges and felonies against former president trump and nobody calls and talks about it. i would like to take 30 seconds

to explain to everybody with those felony charges are. i have not met anyone who can name one. and no one ever comes on the show and says these are the charges. from the grand jury, there were 34 charges and they were misdemeanors, keeping, accounting law, so they came over as misdemeanors, and there are three basic ones. don't panic, it will take less than 30 seconds, the first count was that an invoice was received from the attorney of the trump organization that was a retainer fee, count number one. count number two, a voucher was prepared, given to the bookkeeper, and an entry recorded the retainer fee as a legal expense. count number three, the bookkeeper wrote a check, and as we all do, didn't enter in the

book check stub. those counts are repeated 11 times. three times 11 is 33, and there is one extra entry in the books for some expenses on the retainer bill. and why was it entered 11 times? from february 2017 to november 2017, retainer fees were received from michael cohen. every time an invoice was received, the prosecution recorded three more entries repeating and the invoice was received, the bookkeeper made an entry and a check was cut. it was repeated 11 times for each one of those entries. those are the 34 felonies. host: bob, i do have here for people who would like to look it up, npr.org has the 34 felony

counts listed. specifically, the 34 felony counts in trump's hush money trial, charged with falsifying his records in the first degree. they haven't listed with each type, which is invoices for legal services, checks paid for legal services, and then ledger entries for illegal expenses, and it has all of them listed here with the date, if you would like to take a look at that at npr.org. and here is jim, new york, independent area good morning. caller: good morning. i have a couple of statements. the gop is not the gop, it is the trump and he ran in party, and i don't understand why the women in the united states did not do anything with trump with the abortion thing. they should've put the cowboys

and indians wound, like they did with general custard, and i heard he was going to take the stars and make them into a t on the flag, that is kind of scary. and the abortion thing, the women will probably have to fight for their rights to vote when trump said they won't worry about abortion when they are worried about keeping their rights. host: there's more to come. next, transgendered rights take center stage at the supreme court later this morning when it hears a challenge to tennessee's ban on gender affirming care for minors. we will get a view with katie buehler. later, a conversation about the state of higher education in america with the princeton university president, board chair of the association of american universities. you are looking at a live look outside the supreme court right now. we will be right back.

♪ >> be up-to-date with booklist as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews. you can find about books on c-span now, the free mobile apps or wherever you your podcast. since 1979 in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has

provided complete coverage of the halls of congress. from house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings, 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 governme. you ever miss any c-span coverage can find online at c-span.org. video of key hearings, events and other debates. these point of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos the timeline makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and cited in washington. scroll through andpend a few minutes on point of interest.

>> are you a nonfiction book lover looking for a new podcast? on q&a, you will listen to interesting interviews with people and authors writing books on history and subjects that matter. learn something new on book notes plus through conversations with nonfiction authors and historians. afterwards brings together best-selling nonfiction authors with influential interviewers for wide-ranging hour-long conversations and we talk about the business of books with news and interviews about the publishing industry and not fiction authors. find all of our podcasts by downloading the free c-span now at or wherever your podcasts washington journal continues. host: welcome back to washington journal. we are joined now by katie buehler, supreme court reporter for law 360.

we are talking about supreme court case on transgender health care. welcome to the program. i just want to note that you will be able to hear oral arguments live whenhat kicks off at 10:00 a.m.asrn, so right after this program over o c-span3. as you know, cameras are not lod inside the supreme court but we will have the audio of that for you to listen live. again, that is also on the web. tell us about the supreme court hearing, what is it about? >> this is about a law passed in 2023 that bans gender affirming medical care for transgender minors. both hormonal treatments and surgical procedures. specifically about those hormonal treatments today, and have a law explicitly prohibits transgender minors from accessing them while it allows

non-transgender minors access to the same treatments to treat other health conditions such as early or delayed puberty. >> and in the case in question, these minors to have their parents permission? guest: yes, they have parents permission and that usually been consulting a doctor for at least several months. host: and what can you tell us about who brought the suit and who is involved? guest: the lawsuit was originally brought my three transgender minors in tennessee and a doctor who treats transgender patients. the biden administration eventually also joined in to argue alongside of them, and they claim that the law is unconstitutional on federal grounds. the most important for today's argument is that it violates the 14th amendment equal protection laws. host: explained that a little

more. guest: the equal protection clause prohibits government from creating laws that discriminate against certain groups of people based on certain characteristics. so in this case, the transgender minors and the federal government are arguing that the tennessee law inappropriately discriminates against minors based on their sex and transgender status. host: in this case, if it was a treatment for a boy who is maybe going through puberty later than usual, he would be able to get testosterone treatments. but in tennessee, that would not be allowed for a biological girl who is may be gender dysphoria, she would not be allowed. guest: correct. host: tell us about the aclu

attorney, he's got an opinion piece in the new york times that says may please the court, trans health changed my life. tell us about him. >> he made history today is the first openly transgender attorney to argue in front of the supreme work. he will represent trans minors and their parents. he will get a smaller amount of time than the federal government will to argue, but he will be able to present their point of view, and he has said in press calls and interviews that transgender is did save his life. host: and how did the biden administration get involved and what is the role here? guest: the biden adminised riogh after the case was filed, and they joined in on the transgender minors side to argue

that the law is discriminatory. the federal government is allowed to do so and in certain cases that deals with the equal protection clause or that they believe are harming certain rights. so they've been kind of arguing alongside the transgender minors and their parents since the beginning. host: and the tennessee side, what is the argument they are making on the other? guest: tennessee's main argument is that this law is about regulating medical procedures, which states have historically been able to do and have the authority to do, and they argue it is not discriminatory because it is defining which groups can access those treatments based on their intended use. tennessee argues that because minors of each sex can fall into either the group seeking gender

affirming care or the group seeking treatment for other health conditions, that it doesn't separate them based on sex or transgender status. host: we will take your calls for our guest about that transgender case in heard in front of the supreme court. the numbers are by party, so republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. dependents, (202) 748-8002. the kaiser family foundation has a health tracker about youth access to gender affirming care. it says that there are 26 states that have enacted laws limiting youth access. it says that there are 17 states facing lawsuits challenging their laws, and 24 states impose professional or legal penalties

on health care practitioners providing minors with gender affirming care. let's start with that. what kind of penalties could health care providers face if they were to provide this kind of care? guest: in tennessee specifically, individuals could sue health care providers that provide prohibited air. in some other states there are criminal penalties attached to it. whether they are misdemeanor or felony charges for providing this care. it depends on the state. host: and i will just show the map so you can take a look at which states, what is in blue here are states that have enacted a law or policy against debtor affirming care. this is just for minors 17 and under. you're going to be at the court this morning. what are you going to be

listening for specifically? guest: the main argument will be whether the questions are aimed at deciding if this is a sex-based constitution case and if it is discriminatory. i will also be paying attention to whether they ask about some of the scientific studies that some in the united states have relied on to make their arguments. >> so there are scientific studies on both sides proving both sides? guest: they support both sides. some of the studies on the tennessee side have been disproven or found to be as proven by courts. so it will be interesting to see whether the justices bring up both studies and whether they bring up studies that tennessee has proven caller:. host: once the court does come to a decision on this, what kind of impact is that going to have

over these other states? either the ones that don't have policies against it, or the ones that do. guest: it depends on the court ruling. if a court rules specifically about tennessee law, it won't have that much effect. but the court could issue a broader world and whether transgender status is a protected status or not. and depending on how would rules, we could see more legal challenges to the other laws or we could see other states emboldened to enact additional laws if the supreme court holds that it is not protected. host: and it does that apply to other laws and people? things like bathroom utes, sports participation. what could happen? guest: it could. several of those laws are already being challenged under similar arguments, but if the

supreme court says for instance that transgender status is protected, most of those laws will at least be significantly challenged. there could be other arguments to support those laws, but they do delineate based on sex and status. host: we have dan first in el paso, texas, republican. caller: i was just wondering why educators think that it is a good use of taxpayer dollars to focus on gender studies. thank you. host: a little bit outside of our topic on gender studies but he did mention taxpayer funding. is there any gender affirming care that is taxpayer-funded, do you know? guest: not that i'm aware of. no. host: so i want to ask you about any other supreme court cases in the past.

as they waited into transgender rights in the past, have there been any other cases that they have taken up on this topic? guest: so they have, they have reviewed it in the employment discrimination context, in 2020 the court issued a ruling which ruled that the civil rights act prohibits employers from discriminating against employees based on their transgender status, and in that decision, justice neil gorsuch wrote for the majority that a person's transgender status is intrinsically linked to their sex, and so in that context it is sex-based discrimination, but it is unclear whether that reasoning will be transferred to this case. host: i wanted to show this article.

this is reuters that says putting numbers on the rise in children seeking gender care. thousands of children in the united states now openly identify as a gender different than the one they were assigned at birth. numbers surging amid growing recognition of transgender identity and rights even as they face persistent prejudice and discrimination. as the number of transgender children has grown, so has their access to gender affirming air, much of it provided by scores of clinics at major hospitals. reliable count of adolescents receiving gender affirming treatment have long been guesswork until now. reuters worked with help technology company komodo health to identify how many have sought and received care. the data show that more and more families across the country are grappling with profound questions about the type of care to pursue for their children, placing them at the center of vitriolic national and political debate over what it means to

protect youth who identify as transgender. so here are some statistics for you from that study. new diagnoses in the united states with patients ages six to 17, and you can see the numbers going from up here in 2017 to 2021 down here at 42,000. and this is select states of new diagnoses of medicaid patients, and that is some information for you if you would like to take a closer look. and here is john in massachusetts, republican. caller: yes, this is john. i want to talk about the transgender thing in the military and i want to get your opinion, how do you think that makes us productive by having people having operations and

being out of service? you've got people running total militaries sewer transgender. they are brainwashing our children with those books. they are evil people. host: what do you think. not about the people part, but transgender in the military. guest: i honestly don't have an opinion on that. this case is not about that, this case is about whether doctors and parents and transgender minors can collectively choose to treat gender dysphoria and that is what the argument is about today. host: so this is the u.s. army website. change the policy allows transgender soldiers to serve openly. this is from june 24, 2021. of course that might change.

also obviously the trump administration would be coming in in january. what impact do you think that could have on this case? guest: it is kind of up in the air. based on campaign statements and other policy statements, the department of justice will likely change its stance in this case but it is unclear whether that will influence the justice ruling in the case because it will have already been fully briefed and fully argued by the time the new administration comes in. they could change, it could provide the justices a way to come up for lack of a better word, dodge answering this question and for them to say that this case is moot, but it is also an issue that is prevalent in a bunch of other lawsuits and the case below would still exist even if the government wasn't involved because it was brought by those

transgender minors and their parents. it won't be a question that the supreme court can dodge for very long. host: if you would like to join our conversation, katie buehler will be with us to talk about this topic of the supreme case on gender affirming care. she will be with us for about 10 minutes, so you can give us a call. the numbers are republicans, (202) 748-8001. if you're a democrat, (202) 748-8000. if you are independent, (202) 748-8002. martin from chicago is asking how many cases have there bee of minors receiving any gender conforming surgeries over the last decade? as far as i know, it is. >> so that is part of the government argument. the standard of care for minors is that they don't receive surgeries, they would only

receive hormonal treatments unless they become of age and are older, than they could be eligible for surgeries. host: and irene on at says after gaining personal health care decisions decadeago, we are going back. decisions should be between patients and doctors, how are be back here? any comment on that? guest: this is a new area that states are trying to deal with. that is why we are seeing this surge and it is a hot topic. but this case is important for medical independence. if the supreme court does ruled in favor of tennessee, we could see other laws regulating other medical treatments such as ivf, vaccinations. it will probably embolden states to step into those areas. host: this is a time magazine

that set the stakes of a major trans rights case is a law which the biden administration, a doctor and three families challenge private doctors from prescribing pharmaceutical and surgical care for transgender minors that are looking to gender transition. tennessee is home to more than 3000 transgender adolescents and across the u.s., it says there are some 300,000 transgender youth according to the ucla school of law williams institute. we will just put that on the screen for you. some statistics to take a look at from that school of law institute, this is from 2022, by the way. they are saying that 1.6 million people, 13,000 identify as transgender. 1.3 million are adults, and 300,000 are youth, and that is

aged 13 to 17, making that 1.4% of u.s. youth. what do you make of those numbers? >> i think they've increased over the years because of the evolution of medicine. we've seen other diagnoses that are new and upcoming once the medical field understands what gender dysphoria is about. there's going to be more diagnoses, and depending on how open certain communities are, there will be more children and minors and adults willing to come out as transgender. host: do we know anything about the three youth that are named in this case, or are their identities protected because they are underage? do we know anything about their background story? >> there identities are

protected, they are just referred to by their initials, but the father of one has talked about his daughter who i believe is 16 who came out as transgender a couple years ago, and she's been receiving treatment, hormonal treatment for a couple of months, and that treatment is threatened and he said they would have to leave the state and go somewhere else for this treatment in order to continue that. guest: -- host: here is columbus ohio, democrat, good morning. caller: morning. i just wanted to comment on the importance of this. i am actually in the hospital right now recovering from a gender affirming operation and i am 30 years old. as a child, this would literally have changed my life.

i'm lucky to have made it this far. i know we have a lot of stuff going on and it is really disappointing to see. i think that we all deserve to be who we are. host: what do you think, katie? guest: that is an important point. the one thing i will say is that the ruling in this case could eventually affect medical care for adults as well depending on how the justices rule. if they do ruled that transgender status is not a protected classification, we could eventually see some more laws prohibiting hormonal treatments and surgical procedures as well. host: and greg in st. louis, missouri, says what is the definition of a transgender person? guest: so in this case a

transgender person is a person who identifies as a sex different from the one assigned to them at birth. host: last comment on what you are going to be looking for and what you think the implications of this case might be before we wrap up. guest: i will be looking for in these arguments the questions that justice neil gorsuch and chief justice roberts asked specifically, they because they were in the majority in that case that said that the civil rights act protects transgender status from discrimination, and i will also be interested to see the type of questions that justice ketanji brown jackson and justice amy coney barrett ask because they weren't on the court back then, so it will be interesting to see how they are approaching this issue. host: katie buehler, supreme port reporter for wall street -- law 360.

up next the conversation about the state of higher education in america with princeton university president christopher dash. he is board chair of the association of american universities. and later we will be joined by samuel morrison, a lawyer focused on clemency who spent 13 years in the justice department office of the pardon attorney. we'll talk about the hundred biter -- hunter biden pardon in the debate about how broad the pardoning power should be for the president. stay with us. ♪

>> are you a nonfiction book lover looking for a new podcast? this holiday season try listening to one of the many podcasts c-span has to offer. on q&a, interesting interviews with people and authors writing books on history and subjects that matter. learn something new through conversations with nonfiction authors and historians. afterwards brings together nonfiction vessel and office of influential interviewers for wide-ranging, hour-long conversations. and we talk about the business of books with news and interviews about the publishing industry and nonfiction authors. find all of our podcasts by downloading the free c-span now ap or wherever you get your podcastsp. >> attention middle and high school students across america. it is time to make your voice heard. c-span studentcam documentary contest 2025 is here. this is your chance to create a

documentary that can inspire change, raise awareness and make an impact. you documentary should answer the question your message to the president, what issue is most important to you or your community? whether you are passionate about politics, the environment or community stories, studentcam is your platform to share your message with the world with $100,000 in prizes. this is your opportunity not only to make an impact, but also be rewarded for your creativity and hard work. enter your submissions today. scan the code or visit studentcam.org for all the s on how to enter. the deadline is january 20, 2025. c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with the biggest events

with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span tv networks and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. scan the qr code to download for free today or visit our website. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. >> the c-span bookshelf podcast feed makes it easy for you to listen to all of c-span's podcasts that they should books in one place. so you can discover new authors and ideas. we are making it convenient for you to listen to multiple episodes with critically acclaimed authors discussing history, biographies, current

events and culture. about books, afterwards, book notes plus and q&a. listen to c-span's bookshelf podcast feed today. you can find it and all of our podcasts for free on the mobile video at or wherever you geto podcasts, and on our website. cease -- c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse our latest collection of products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan, and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. washington journal continues. >> welcome back. we are talking about higher

education in america with a of princeton university, christopher ice grouper. he's also chair of the association of american universities. welcome to the program. so you just started your term as chair of the association of american universities. tell us about that organization, the mission, and who the members are. >> is a great honor to be chairing the board. this is a group of about 70 of america's leading research universities. public flagship universities and private universities. what we share in common is a commitment to educating students at the highest level and the commitment to research of the highest quality that enables our country to enjoy prosperity and promotes the security of the country as well. host: so what are your goals and priorities going to be for the coming year? guest: it's important for the government to continue supporting the kind of research we've had in the united states. what we've done has helped tremendously in this country by having a partnership between the

government and its universities. that has proved practical for applied research and basic research and has laid the foundation for later discoveries. so one of the things that i want to do is work very closely and carefully with president barbara snyder to support that funding and congress. we will also help to make the case for what those institutions are doing for our students and the country. host: make that case. how would you describe the current state of higher education in america? yes: i think the current state of higher education is terrific in the united states. people all around the world seek to come to these universities as students and faculty members. the return on the investment for a four-year college degree, which is what we offer is tremendous. for many families, that investment in higher education be the best investment that they make in their lifetimes, judged

just by financial return and other benefits to getting a four-year college degree. the research that are universities produced as a difference maker in terms of our health and information technology, innovation and knobs. host: you talked about return on investment. a college degree has become extremely expensive and it continues to get more and more expensive. inflation, and it has been put out of reach for a lot of american students. why is that, why is a college degree so expensive these days? guest: i'm glad the rate that point because i think there are a couple of things and one of the very common narratives and i would love to be able to correct them. the actual cost that people pay for higher education hasn't been going up even at the rate of inflation, it has been going down. that is something you can find

in college or data. host: tuition itself has been going up. guest: the sticker price has been going up but what people actually pay is the sticker price minus financial aid. institutions including mine have been raising dollars from alumni and from endowments, so our educations are more affordable than ever. let us use some of our own data around that. 71% of the students at princeton are on financial aid. 71%. that involves scholarships that are larger than their tuition price. the average student on financial aid at our university is getting a part subsidy in addition to full coverage of the tuition price. we were looking at education, they have to keep two things in mind. one is what matters is the net price and all of the aau institutions are offering significant financial aid to

their students, so people have to look carefully at what they are actually going to pay. in the second is the critical question about education is that return on investment, figure out exactly what the net price is and pay attention to what you're getting from that. education isn't a consumer good to be simply used up in the way that something that we purchase our. it is much more like the kind of investments that you make for a long time and it is one of the best investments that you will ever make. host: nonetheless, there are people taking out a lot of student loans in order to pay for college. do you take a position on student loan forgiveness? guest: the aau doesn't have an official position on student loan forgiveness. we have a commitment to affordability. we believe that the government should increase the pell grants that enable students from low income families to attend college and flourish when they go there. we and other associations have supported the idea of doubling

the pell. one of the things i think people need to know if these narratives get out there through stories that i think often are outliers, that these financial aid arrangements, often students are able to graduate without any debt from college. princeton makes a commitment to its students that all of them will get financial aid that will allow them to graduate with zero debt. more than 83% of our students graduate every year debt free. the others are taking out relatively small loans on a discretionary basis. so the reality when parents are taking a close look at what colleges and other universities are offering is different. host: well you've got to get into princeton first. that's not easy. guest: that is not easy, and we have extraordinary students who are applying. so it's just say that is true in

different ways across this extraordinary group and that many colleges and universities that are outside of that, it is not is very selective universities were this is true. host: there has been a decline in enrollment across the board in american universities. is that a concern among university leadership and what is being done to address that? guest: we're seeing a generational shift. we have known that we will see declines in the numbers of college going students as demographic patterns change. the leading research universities in the applicant pools remain robust and students want to come to our colleges and universities from within the united states and outside the united states remains very strong. i think we are going to see

effects in the sector more broadly as these democratic -- demographic shifts take hold. host: if you got a question or comment about higher education in america, you can give us a call. i guessed is president of princeton university. the lines are by party and republicans are on (202) 748-8001. democrats are on (202) 748-8000. an independents, (202) 748-8002. we also have a line for college students. so if you are currently enrolled in college right now, please give us a call, we would love to hear your perspective on this as well. (202) 748-8003. there have been fewer protests on the gaza war than we have seen in the past. how are schools addressing this issue this school year? guest: what schools have to do

around this issue is to respect basically the principles that are part of our united states constitution. that for most of us are part of our university rules as well which is we respect free speech and at the same time, we insist that students and others comply with what are known as time, place and manner restrictions when they are protesting. in the city of washington, d.c. where our government is located to have more freedom to criticize our government than you do in just about any other country in the world. i think that is a good thing and you have to have that kind of vigorous free speech on college campuses where people can speak about controversial topics like the israel gaza war. on the other hand, we do have rules in the united states and on college campuses. you can't occupy a building, you can't display paint your message on the washington monument and the have to have the same kind of rule on college campuses.

that is will be done at princeton and with other universities have done. people have to make sure they speak up in a way that allows everybody to go about business on the campus and doesn't disrupt the activities of the campus. we have to be elevating the conversation. a lot of it is covered a lot of the news media. what gets the pictures are the students with the signs, but we've got to take those conversations and elevate them. the second i would say is we do want students to be engaged around the issue. there are people who go about their business and don't pay attention to the issues happening in the world. we want our students to grow up to be engaged leaders. it is a right to disrupt, not a

light -- a right to -- host: not just the protests, but the freedom of speech aspects. guest: i think we can a good job at princeton. when we asked him about the student experience, and we do this every year, last year students continued to report a high sense of satisfaction with student experience, in fact a little higher than the previous year. you mentioned that because we important have these tumultuous events, and people get hurt during them. but we are able to give students the kind of educational experience that they want. there are a lot of people who are upset with me about various things that happened on campus. we had students chanting slogans . i am jewish, i have relatives in israel, i fnd those slogans very offensive but i also felt i had an obligation under the

constitution and under our free-speech rules at princeton to protect the rof people to say things. we also had to enforce our rules when people were violating time, place and manner rules. we were very clear about what those rules were. but what i am proudest of is a number of different event that allowed people to explore these issues in more detailed ways. i'm just going to mention one very quickly. our dean is probably the most prominent palestinian-american and political scientist in the united states. she did a couple of sessions with her counterpart at columbia's school who is an israeli who was previously in the israeli military. the two of them became friends when they were assistant professors before they became deans of these schools, and in the fall of last year not to long after october 7 they were doing public events at both

princeton and columbia in order to model for students what it meant for people with very different backgrounds to disagree with one another and to civilly. those kinds of events don't get the kind of attention that the protest do, but that is the heart of what is going on on college campuses and they don't think it is happening in many other places. host: there is an article, why colleges are turning to institutional neutrality. can you first explain what that means and is that a good approach? >> institutional neutrality is a kind of slogan that describes a view about when universities should take positions and when presidents should make statements on issues. this has been something that has been discussed among university presidents and other people in higher education for a time and kind of exploded into view after some of those unsuccessful statements that were issued last year.

institutional neutrality at universities at a broad level, they ought to be restrained which is a word i like better than neutrality. the idea behind it is that universities ought not themselves to be the critics, they ought not to be taking positions as princeton university it should be the sponsor of critics, they should be enabling faculty and students to raise their voices. i personally don't like the phrase institutional neutrality. i don't think i've got a neutral institution. i have an institution that stands for the value of research and free speech and people of all backgrounds who should be able to lower it.

i think neutrality doesn't express this idea well but i do agree that universities have to be careful not to be taking positions as institutions except in a very limited of circumstances. host: that's talk to callers. syracuse, new york, republican. caller: i am a little bit surprised that we have this gentleman out here saying that he is saying you have to go to college to be successful. princeton is worth the money. mark zuckerberg, other people who have done. successful. mike rowe who has a show about dirty jobs, other jobs that you don't have to be successful. but i think one person who would agree with you that it was a good idea to get a college degree would be ted kaczynski, the unabomber who went to berkeley. i'm sure he put his degree to good. host: what do you think? guest: thank you for the question. and thank you for the opportunity to clarify what i think about this. i agree entirely that you can be

successful in a number of different careers without going to college and i don't think that everybody should go to college. and i think it is very important for us to recognize that as a country and for academic institutions as well as the government to support people who make other choices. on the other hand, what i do believe and what i did say is that the people who want to go to college and the people who make that choice, it is going to be a spectacularly good investment to go to college. if you just take a look at the data about my institution, or for your college degrees more generally, the return on investment is very strong. it provides you with a lot of other opportunities as well. that doesn't mean it is a smart choice for everybody, it just means that for people who are asking themselves the question i'd like to go to college, the

kinds of careers you get by going to college may sound attractive to me. will that investment payoff? the economic news is very good about that, but it is not the right investment for everybody just as other investments are not right for everybody. host: michael in denver, independent line, you're next. caller: thank you so much for taking my call and for being here this morning. i just have a quick comment and question. what i want to bring up is the issue of mental health at colleges. statistics have shown as high as 40% of students on college campuses are experiencing some form of mental illness. and many times i think the problem is a lack of action that students have in many cases to forms of treatment or services. so the question i was going to ask you about this, what have you implemented or what should be implemented in terms of

making sure that students have access to mental health care, and furthermore, identify mental health issues before it is too late? guest: thank you for this question which is so important for our colleges and for our country. what i would say first of all this we are facing a mental health crisis in the united states right now. it is especially acute among young people and that includes both high school aged and what we typically think of as college aged students. i put it that way because it is not as though this is worse for students were actually in college. the numbers i've seen suggested is actually a bit better for students in college than it is for their peers of the same age and you're absolutely correct. this is an issue that we need to worry about on college campuses and in the country. i will just respond to your specific question a little bit from my own institution at princeton because it is the one

that i know best. we work very hard to increase the availability of psychiatric services at princeton. we work hard to educate our students as well as our faculty to recognize signs of distress in themselves or in their peers. we've taken a comprehensive approach to mental health recognizing that mental well-being isn't just a matter of psychological services, it is a matter of making sure that people feel supported and have ways of talking through problems throughout their life in this academic environment. you are right to bring up the question and i think in terms of access to resources but in terms of understanding what are the sources of this issue? people point to things like loneliness, they point to the impact of social media.

we are providing on many of our college campuses better access to the services than people enjoy in their lives after leaving these institutions. we need to find ways to make sure we are producing citizens who are resilient and are able to live flourishing lives, and that goes beyond the care we are able to offer on campus. host: can in a texas says there's a great deal of waste which significantly adds to the cost. the seven attribute it mostly to administrations and paying for tenured faculty who do little teaching. yet these costs continue to rise. what do you think? guest: first of all, one of the things i do at the president and i did it before as provost, is always to look for ways to cut waste and find more efficient ways for the university to do things. when i with the chief budget

officer of the university i was maximizing the impact of mission-based dollars. but let me say a couple of things about why it is that any university is going to have to invest collectively and people both on the faculty side and on the staff side. i will just mention on the staff side the conversation i just had with previous caller about counseling and psychological services. all of those people are staff. they're doing critical work to support our students and other members of our community in order to enable them to flourish, and i think that is true of a vast majority of people who sometimes get grouped under the word staff for administration. faculty are the core of the enterprise at any great college or university, and they are doing teaching and research. both of those things are important especially at america's leading research universities. i think the thing that drives expense, whether you're at the university level or dealing with

high schools or elementary schools is that what matters is to get great teachers with great minds in classrooms with students that enable them to push those students. that means investing in talent and that is what we do and i think we do it well. host: thomas in michigan, democrat. caller: good morning. my name is thomas, i'm actually a princeton alum so it is great to speak with you and thank you for being on the show. i think princeton has done a pretty good job handling the complex issues and controversies that arise, however my question for you is how can students get the attention of the administration when they have important issues that they want to address like divesting from weapons manufacturing, divesting from institutions that might

support ideals that are not what princeton supports? thank you. guest: thomas, thank you for calling in and for other viewers, and service of all nations, the princeton motto now is in the nation's service and in the service of humanity. thomas, i appreciate the question. i think there are multiple ways that students and others can bring their concerns to the attention of myself for the administration. you may well know as an alum that it princeton, we have meetings with the council for the princeton university community. basically once a month during the academic year. it ends up being about six meetings per year. one of those is a town hall where just as i'm doing now, i take questions from whoever shows up, but i am present at almost all of those, as are my colleagues and we hear the concerns in the community.

people concerned about things like divestment have the opportunity to present issues to student, faculty and staff committee that considers issues about divestment or the use of university resources. there are a lot of different ways to do that. and by the way, it is permissible to protest. protest is fine, disruption is not. there is a difference between bringing up issues and getting attention on them and getting the particular outcome that a group wants. when you've got an issue and question about the israel-gaza war or about divestment, there are going to be multiple opinions on a college campus, multiple opinions and strong disagreement within the student body on those issues. and it may be the case that people bring up issues that are then discussed through a fair process where lots of different viewpoints come in and the university doesn't end up taking a particular position. that brings us back to

institutional restraint. some of these issues, the right thing is for the university to say i understand you are really excited about this particular issue that it is not one where the university should take a position. we encourage you to continue taking positions as students or faculty members. thanks for the question, i hope i see you every unions. host: let me justho this newly introduced bill called protect economic freedom act. it essentially cuts off federal student aid to colleges that participate in a commercia boycott against israel. it prohibits coland universities from receiving federal student aid if they engage in commercial boycotts dedicated by tse- dictated by those in the boycott-sanctioned divest movement and that comes out of the house education workforce committee. not expected to go anywhere, but your response to that. guest: i strongly oppose the

idea of boycotts in general. i put out a statement opposing boycotts in the first year of my presidency which was marked 12 years ago. i think that as universities, we depend on -- rather than creating walls. it is important for us to be interactive with other institutions around the world and with regard to what i would call institutional restraint, i just don't think is appropriate for the university is to be engaging in this kind actions. on the other hand i think there is a huge danger of congress starts looking at particular issues and saying with regard to these universities that make such a difference in the world that we are going to pick on this political issue or that political issue and use it as a reason to start cutting off aid. that ultimately make these institutions more affordable and enables them to do the research on which our country depends. host: austin, texas, independent line.

>> i'm going to speak fast because i know you were almost out of time. i do believe in higher education. and 61 years old. i wish i could go out to all these high school kids and tell everyone if you end up being an organic housekeeper like myself, and they also got to training at a job that does not pay well. that is my passion, i love it. i am for protesting as long as it is civil, but in austin, texas governor abbott brought in the state troopers and it got real violent because of the state troopers. i want everybody to know i quit buying into this propaganda years ago. i learned a lot. to me, doctors without borders, all these major newspapers say

these children have bullets in their heads, and yes, the students are passionate and we want that. i think the university should protest. with the republican house and now senate, anyway, thank you, c-span, forgiving the people to voice. host: any comments? guest: thank you for calling in. one thing i would say is we want our students to have engaged in passionate opinions that you have engaged in passionate opinions. and over this past year, they are sometimes protesting on the lawn with different slogans, and we think that is important, but we don't think it should be the university doing the protesting or the speaking in those circumstances and moreover, as important as protest is, it is really important for what we do to have these conversations like the one we are having here this

morning that take these topics and try to elevate them and get people to appreciate one another's side to the extend that that is possible and look for solutions that are going to make a difference for the future. host: we've got a text om doug in toronto, ohio wants to know your opinion regarding free college for all and i will just show this npr article, university of texas, m.i.t. and others announce free tuition for some undergraduates. guest: i think free tuition for some undergraduates is a great idea. as i said earlier, i think that the aau schools are all doing this in one way or another. we all do it on the basis of financial need. that is for students were qualified to attend our institutions and aren't able to afford to go to our institutions, we provide aid that makes it possible for them to do so. and for some students that makes it free. i don't believe in free tuition for all.

there are some people who are able to afford to make this extraordinary investment in college education. it is a good thing for people to do. host: m.i.t., as an example, it says that undergraduates with family income below $200,000 can attend tuition free starting next year. that is up from the current threshold of $140,000. as you know, big endowments at some of these ivy league colleges including yours at princeton. should those be maintained at that level, or should that be used to increase the amount of aid given to students? guest: it's a great question, i really appreciate the opportunity to speak to these. the endowments are meant to be used in the are using those endowments if you look at and its why it is able to do what it is doing, i talked earlier about

how princeton has 71% of its students on financial aid with its scholarships that are in excess of the tuition price and students as a result graduating debt free. that is because we are spending our endowments on financial aid, spending our endowments on research endowments. people sometimes think their savings accounts that set off to the side. they are not that. they are like annuities. we are currently spending 5.3% of our endowment every year to maintain the operating budget of the university across all that we do. -- the reason why i was able to answer your first question about the affordability of american universities getting better is that because for those of us with endowments we are deploying them aggressively to do things like what's happening at princeton, m.i.t., and the other schools you mentioned to create opportunities that didn't exist before. that's what we ought to be doing. host: christopher eisgruber is

the chair of the association of american universities and president of princeton university. thanks so much for joining us. guest: thank you. it's been a pleasure. host: up next, we will be joined by samuel morison, focused on clemency at the justice department. we will talk about the hunter biden pardon and how broad the pardon should be for presidents and that debate. we'll be right back. ♪ >> there is something for every c-span fan when you let your fingers do the shopping during our cyber monday sale. click now on our online store. save up to 35% off site wide. hoodies, sweatshirts, glassware, mugs, and more. every purchase helps to support our nonprofit operation.

shop our cyber monday sale, up to 35% off, or scan the co on the right. ♪ >> the house will be in order. >> this year c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979 we have been your primary source for capitol hill, providing balanced, unfiltered coverage of government, taking you to where the policy is debated and decided with the support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting, powered by cable. >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio is easy. tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio and listen to "washington journal," daily, important public affairs events throughout the day, and weekdays

catch important events throughout the day. tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable. >> nonfiction book lovers, c-span has the podcasts for you. listen to influential interviewers on the afterwards podcast. on q&a, hear wide-ranging conversations with nonfiction authors and others who are making things happen. book notes plus, hour-long conversations featuring the fascinating authors of nonfiction books on a wide variety of topics. "about books," taking you behind the scenes of the nonfiction book industry with industry updates and bestseller lists. find all the podcasts by downloading the free c-span now apple or wherever you get your podcasts, and on our website, c-span.org/podcasts. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back.

we are talking about presidents and pardon power with samuel morison, former staff attorney for the department of justice and the office of the pardon guest:. welcome to the program. thank you for having me. host: what was your reaction to the president's pardoning of his son? guest: i wasn't surprised at all. i know he said he wouldn't do it, but i expected he would. the impulse of a father to help his son proved to be too much and he had the authority to do it. i understand that people find it somewhat disquieting. i get that. but it certainly wasn't invalid. it was a lawful constitutional exercise of the pardon power. we can debate about whether it was a good idea, a wise use of that power, but it certainly wasn't legal. it's very broad and in that sense, unusual. the only modern grant that comes close would have's and the ford pardon of nixon.

that seems to be the model that used. host: we will talk about that. first i want to show a portion of the biden statement on his pardoning of his son, "no reasonable person who looks at the oer's cases can reach any other conclusion t hunter was singled out only because he is my son, and that is wrong. i believe in theusti system, but ave estled with this, believe that raw politics has infected the process and it le miscarriage of justice. onade e decthis weekend, there is no sense in delaying it further. i hope americans will understand why a father and president would come to this decision." i wanted to ask you about the line, "all politics infected the process," that signaled -- singled out hunter biden for prosecution. what was your reaction to that? guest: i thought the statement

was unnecessary. he didn't have to attack the justice system. he could just do it. people would've understood a father helping his son. was hunter singled out? maybe so. he did plead guilty to the tax charge and was convicted of the gun charge. there's no issue or dispute that he got to process and that. in that sense, sure, he came to the attention of the authorities because he came from a prominent family. that comes with a lot of advantages other people don't have. and a lot of people get targeted by the federal government. they have a conviction rate of 98%. the problem with what he said is that -- is he going to extend the same consideration to anyone else? one hopes that he will. it doesn't only apply to hunter.

host: you said before that the only person who received a presidential pardon so sweeping was richard nixon in 74 from gerald ford. explain the similarities and differences. guest: stepping back for a second, people need to understand that the presidential authority to pardon over committing a federal crime is broad, it applies to any offense that has been committed. it doesn't have to be reduced to a charge or a conviction. so, any time the president wants to pardon someone for an uncharged offense, there will always be the problem of that grant so that we know the charge you are talking about. in the ford pardon of nixon, he did it in terms of a date range. he didn't say any offense related to watergate. he said any offense from 69 to 74. the purpose was to get watergate

behind the country. he wanted to get past that. but on its face, that would have pardoned any crime, even crimes we didn't know about within that date range. that is what president biden did with his son. he said that hunter was pardoned not only for the two convictions that we know about, but for any offense that occurred from a date in 2014 two 2024. guest: why do you think he did that? guest: it's obvious, there are other potential crimes out there and he was afraid the trumpet justice department was going to continue investigating hunter for other violations and he wanted this to end and it was the only way to do it. some people have questioned -- is that a valid use of the power? he didn't specify the offenses. i don't agree. as long as they are readily identifiable, the supreme court will never constrain the president's exercise of the pardon power in that way.

i think it's lawful. if it were to be challenged, it would be upheld. but it is extraordinarily broad. host: if you would like to join our conversation with samuel morison or have a question about the hunter biden pardon or presidential pardon in general, give us a call. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats can call us on (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also text us at (202) 748-8003. going back through history for a moment, when does this idea of -- where did it originate from, this idea that presidents should have this ability to pardon a federal crime? what were the founders thinking? were they worry that it could be abused? guest: they discussed all those

things. it originates in the power of the king to grant pardons in england. that is the historical origin of it, it is modeled on that, in a sense. the founders were -- were creatures of the enlightenment, but they understood that no legislature could pass a law in the abstract that covered every single situation that might arise when you try to enforce the law, because the real world is always more complicated than we wanted to be. they understood there might well be reasons or circumstances that mitigate the guilt of someone, or that for public policy reasons, for larger political reasons, the president might want to exempt someone, even if they were strictly speaking guilty under the letter of the law. so, they vested that power in the president, in his discretion , and assumed that he, he, because he would care about his reputation, that he wouldn't abuse it.

so, it is a political power of the president. the remedy, the opponents of the pardon power, they raised -- what if he grants pardons to his cronies, his family, or himself? the answer was impeachment. so, it's a political power of the president. it's extraordinarily broad. host: and he -- but what if he does it right before he leaves office? guest: that's the constitutional loophole. it's a constitution, not a code, they didn't think of everything. there is some clients he in the joints there, this is one of them. yes, it can be used that way and there is little you can do about it. host: what is your opinion on president-elect trump pardoning himself? guest: my view is that he can, although it is sort of like the

pardon of hunter, it would be unprecedented in a bad idea and he shouldn't do it, but he could if you wanted to. the reason is, the supreme court has interpreted the pardon clause to mean exactly what it says. he can pardon any offense against the united states except for cases of impeachment. he cannot stop and impeachment proceeding. that's the political check. they also said any limits on the pardon power have to be found in the text of the constitution itself and i don't see any limits in the text of the constitution that implicitly prohibit him from pardoning himself. host: can a president pardon a future offense? and he just say -- look, anything that they could do in the next five years? guest: that's a good question, the answer is no, the supreme court has addressed that.

when it says offenses against the united states, it's interpreted as past tense. a pardon for a future crime, a license to commit a crime, would be voted. host: anthony, staten island, good morning. caller: good morning, sir. it's funny, if they really had evidence against trump, he would have been -- and correct me if i'm wrong -- this is the last chance for biden. he covered his son for 10 years, 2014 to 2024, which i believe that he only -- he knows that if they dug that they would have it lead back to him. i find it funny. how can you pardon somebody for 10 years, you can pardon someone from a crime they haven't been charged with? guest: yes, you can. the supreme court has said that several times.

it's the commission of the offense, not the charge of the conviction. host: st. louis, missouri, you are, patsy. caller: i think that president biden should pardon his son, because even though he was convicted of my new crimes, given that trump did such hideous crimes, for him to not pardon his son and here comes the presidency, the republican party, all the houses against him and the supreme court, trump is going to vindicate or you know, have revenge against different people, biden would certainly be one of they threw him in jail. or if they put trump in jail for his convictions, there are greater deeds than biden's son.

i think he should pardon his son. who would want there to son to be convicted under a regime where they put him in jail? i think that biden, since he still has a month or so to go, he should put trump in prison, he still president and he has been convicted. i sure wouldn't want to leave my son in there. i think he did the right thing. host: all right, patsy. guest: i certainly hope that president biden extends the same consideration to other people. lots of people have pending petitions requesting pardon. many of them except responsibility and ask for forgiveness. they are not challenging the validity of the conviction. i think that the only way to take the sting out of the political scandal around this pardon is to grant them to a bunch of other deserving people.

host: i want to show a chart from the bbc, biden has pardoned fewer people than most u.s. presidents in recent history, and this goes back to truman, who apparently had a lot during his term. it goes down all the way here. you can see commutations in yellow. -- obama had over 1500. biden with very few down here. what do you make of these numbers? guest: unfortunately, in modern time with the notable exception of president obama, presidents tend to wait until the end. they neglected at the beginning and then they find they run out of time, so they rush to get done what they can at the end and it's not as easy to do as it sounds, you have to vet the cases. that's why the numbers aren't so great. host: talk about that process of

vetting cases. you were involved in that? guest: i was, i used to work at the pardon office. by tradition, the office of the pardon attorney gets petitions for pardon and commutation of sentence on behalf of the president, investigates them, writes a recommendation and advises the president about whether he should grant it or not. the problem is it's slow and cumbersome and takes a long time. also, this is the justice department, they are party to every single one of the cases, so they have a conflict of interest. i actually don't think that trump in his first term was entirely wrong to be skeptical about the justice department recommendations, they almost always say no regardless of the merits of the petition. what trump didn't do is replace it with some other rational way to review the cases. so, it became a kind of free for all for whoever could get access

to the white house. that's not a rational way to do things. what he could do, what i advocate that he should do is simply move the pardon office out of department of justice and into the executive office of the president and have them report directly to white house counsel. doesn't mean that doj wouldn't have a role. it's appropriate for them to weigh in on cases. they just shouldn't control the entire process. host: larry, illinois, republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. i had a question. if somehow a foreign government official came forward with proof that hunter biden and his father committed treason during the 10 years he was granted a pardon, could anything be done to them or could they be brought into court or are they just scot-free with whatever they have done for the last 10 years? guest: any offense within those

10 years, hunter has been pardoned if it is a federal crime. it doesn't apply to the president, he didn't pardon himself. host: does that answer it, larry? caller: no. in other words, i'm a high official in saudi arabia and i give hunter 10 billion dollars to split with his dad. neither one could get in trouble because he is pardoned? guest: that's not what i said. i set hunter cannot be charged if his offense falls within those 10 years. if it is a completed crime within those 10 years, he has been pardoned. president biden has not been pardoned, he didn't pardon himself. if he committed a crime in theory, there's no reason he couldn't be prosecuted. host: can any pardon be undone by a future president, through an act of congress, anything like that, supreme court? guest: the answer is no. if it is a valid pardoned that is accepted and received, it is final.

host: michael, alabama, independent. caller: yeah. i'm concerned about the fact that everybody is concerned about president biden given a pardon to his son, but no one seems to be concerned about president trump threatening to release the january 6 people with pardons. can he do that? guest: i think he can, he actually can. there is a historical tradition of presidents doing that. when jefferson was elected in 1803, he pardoned everyone in prison who had been convicted under the alien sedition acts, and his view they were unconstitutional even though they were held up by the courts. host: what did they do? caller: they were alleged -- host: -- guest: he believed it

was political, similar to what trump is saying. i'm not trying to draw equivalencies, i'm just saying it's been done. he could, he saying he's going to, i wouldn't be surprised if he did. host: jefferson was the first? guest: no, george washington pardoned the participants in the whiskey rebellion. john adams granted a few pardons. i can't tell you how many off the top of my head, but there weren't many, there weren't that many prosecutions. host: sam, democratic line. caller: good morning. here's my point. i think that president biden changed his idea because he thinks that what trump is talking about with his vengeful attacks, he's going to use the department of justice to go after people repeatedly. didn't biden have a plea deal? i don't care about that, they want to keep him in the papers,

the press, they want to keep continually attacking them. i understand why he would go so broad. trump is vindictive and vicious and wants to hurt people that he feels has wronged him. can you comment on that? thank you. guest: you're right, that was their concern. that's clearly why they did it. they were concerned that there were other at least potential charges out there and that trump would pursue them, so this is a way of closing the door to that. host: joe, new jersey, republican line. caller: a previous caller said that hunter biden didn't commit any egregious crimes. he has all of these images out there they found on the computer of him naked, you know, drugs and guns, all of that. i don't understand how he could be pardon for that when other people can't get pardon for that.

it doesn't make sense to me. guest: that's what i said before. what's the big question is what will the president do with his remaining time in office. there's lots of time for him to do something, lots of pending petitions. we all hope that he grants pardons to a bunch of other serving people. as i said, i think that's really the only way to take the sting out of this a little bit. host: i wonder what changes you think should be made to the process. you mentioned taking the office out of the doj and putting it in the executive office. what other changes do you think should be made? guest: i think that would solve most of the problems. the pardon attorney would be independent and that's important. i'm not implicitly criticizing the people in the pardon office now. i assume they do everything in good faith, but they still have

a conflict of interest. they are still a part of doj and doj definitely uses that office to try to control the presidential exercise of the pardon power by controlling the information he gets. it's the only other thing i would do is make it more transparent. right now, a pardon applicant can submit a petition, but he doesn't get to see what doj says about it and can't respond to it. meaning doj gets to do this in secret. to me, that's a problem. in any other legal proceeding, doj, both sides get to see with the other is saying and respond. if the pardon attorney was independent of doj, the recommendation could be disclosed to the petitioner and the petitioner could respond. and then the pardon attorney advice to the president would be confidential.

at least the petitioner would have the opportunity to see what the doj is saying about the case. host: how does one apply for a pardon? guest: there's a normal application at a commutation application and you get it from the department of the attorney, you fill it out and submit it. guest: how many does the office get every year? guest: thousands, thousands. i would say they get it on the order of maybe hundreds to a thousand or so pardons. the rest are commutations. those are people in prison trying to get their conviction cut short, typically. host: what is the success rate, typically? guest: for the pardon office, it's extremely low, less than 1%. i can give you some concrete numbers that i know personally. when george w. bush was president, the office received approximately 80 five hundred

new commutation petitions filed after he took office. of those 8500, roughly, six got a favorable recommendation. essentially, none. of the six, three were almost already out of prison anyway. and only three cases was there any sort of acknowledgment that there should be meaningful relief. that illustrates the problem i'm talking about. i don't think anything is really meaningfully changed. this is what we are dealing with, essentially. host: mike, virginia, democrat. hi, mike. caller: the president has the power of the pardon. it's his right. people don't like it, that's

fine. the pope -- republicans went after hunter for political reasons, we all know this. many people commit crimes and are not charged, but they did it for political reasons. how is this going to change? what happens to inflation and borders, immigration and all of these subjects when we talk about hunter biden? this is ridiculous. come on. trump, convicted felon, became president of the united states again, and we are talking about hunter biden committing a crime? it just doesn't make sense. the system is not working right. host: how big of a deal are the crimes that hunter biden was convicted of? guest: in the grand scheme of things, the minor end of the scale and are rarely prosecuted.

in a tax case, if you pay the money back, you're often not prosecuted. at least if you don't live during the course of the investigation. that is usually why you get charged. the gun charge is there, it was valid. i'm not calling it invalid. it's just not used very often. it's unusual that he was prosecuted for that. that's all true. host: republican line, neil, cleveland. caller: for mr. montgomery, and it's interesting, he just discussed what i was about to ask, that case against hunter biden in which he had tax issues that were relieved by the statute of limitations, back some years earlier, but then when he was found to have

committed tax fraud for the current, they -- they convicted him of this, or charged him with that, i should say. so, when you are charged of tax fraud, my understanding is, you know, when you do something wrong in tax, if you come forward and pay, you are ok. but if they come and find that without you coming forward, you are guilty. these people that do that, whether they pay or not, my understanding was they go to jail. so i mean what mr. montgomery just said is not the case. he is saying -- well, he paid it, including the penalties. guest: no, i don't agree with

that. i didn't say that somebody like hunter biden would never get prosecuted. i asked what was typically the case, that's what i'm saying. it's often the case that if you self-report as you say and pay the fine and don't lie to the irs, you can probably work it out. on the other hand, it was a valid charge. he evaded taxes, admitted it. in that sense, there's nothing wronwith the conviction. host: quick question from jay, can you discuss the oliver north pardon? guest: it's only where the united states is the prosecuting authority. district courts, military courts, d.c. superior courts. the oliver north pardon. i'm not sure what he's interested in as far as that.

he was alleged -- i'm not even sure he was pardoned. he got an immunity deal. i'm not sure i follow that question. host: all right. that's samuel morison, from the office of the department of justice attorney, thanks for joining us. host: thanks for having me. host: coming up, more of your phone calls after the break in open forum. you can start calling and now. a little christmas update for you, last month the capitol christmas tree rolled in. this is a spruce from the tongass national forest in alaska. yesterday the tree was lit up on the west front lawn of the capital during a ceremony with the speaker of the house, mike johnson, and members of the alaskan delegation. take a look. [video clip] >> i know that it isn't a short trip from alaska.

thank you to all of our friends who are here and thank you to our senators and your members of congress who make great sacrifices to serve an extraordinary state. what a great thing, to share the culture of alaska here tonight on capitol hill. i also want to reiterate our thanks to the drivers who made the tree possible, to get it here 4000 miles, we for that so many times. it's awesome, they keep repeating it. i'm told that this hasn't been mentioned yet tonight, i think that john made the same trip the last time alaska had a tree here. i'm not sure how many in the history of the united states have made that track twice, but that is really something and we are grateful for their hard work. yes, indeed. we love this event every year. it's a great celebration for all the reasons stated. as this tree is placed in front of the capital, we remember that this is the people's house,

meaning that this is truly the people's tree. this holiday season more than 100,000 tourists will tour the halls of -- tour the halls to this monument to our great republic. you will be able to see the tree all away down the mall. it will be well decorated, of course, with colorful lights and ornaments. the lights symbolize something, symbolizing the like the season brings. the light of hope, happiness, and tradition. a life of joy that comes with having meals with family and friends. and the light of gratitude that comes with a reflecting on the blessings of the year past. as we dedicate this tree, we look up to see a star atop its branches and it's a star not like -- not unlike the one that guided the ancient wisemen, looking to the star above in the east who were filled with faith, hope, and love. they looked beyond.

beyond of the kings of the earth to see the birth of the king of kings, jesus of nazareth. it is the duty of congress to follow the example of those wisemen and look up with them, to look to god, our creator, who has so greatly blessed our nation. we look to him for guidance as we pursue the unity and well-being of this great and beautiful nation. all right, would you all join me? we will do a countdown, five down to one. and then rose is going to flip the switch here. ready? countdown from five. let's go. 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, there you go. hey. [cheering] ♪ [oh tenenbaum] ♪

>> "washington journal" continues. welcome back to>> "washington journal" continues. host: "washington journal." we are in open forum. a couple of things for your schedule, starting in about 25 minutes over on c-span3 we will have the supreme court oral arguments on their considering of the tennessee ban for providing transgender care to minors and violates the equal amendment clause. that's a live look at the supreme court right now. we will have that oral argument live, starting at 10 a.m. on

c-span3, c-span now, and c-span.org. then this afternoon national security advisor jake sullivan will give an update on the u.s. defense industrial base and america's war fighting capabilities at 2 p.m. eastern on c-span3. c-span now, our app, and online at c-span.org. before i get to calls, just a quick news update for you, "the wall street journal" reports that trump is repeating -- replacing with -- pete hag seth with ron desantis, because of the scrutiny over allegations of his personal life. it says that taking desantis would amount to a stunning turn for trump, but that he would also find in the governor a well-known conservative with a service record that shares trump and hegseth's view on woke

policies in the military. that is a developing story about the pick for the defense secretary. we will go to calls now. oregon, independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. earlier you had the president of princeton university on. i thought that was really interesting. but really i wanted to ask him about -- there were a couple of callers that talked about, like, cutting waste and the costs of education overall. i was curious, because i may, i'm a big sports fan and just recently, certain college athletes have started to get paid. which -- i'm not really sure how i feel about it.

i haven't heard a lot of information about it. i was curious where that money comes from and if it has caused any -- not just financial issues with colleges, but if it has caused any social problems with other students. i know the transgender thing is a big -- that's a big thing, but i would say if i was going to school and i wasn't an athlete, or even if i was an athlete that wasn't paid, it could cause some animosity, things like that. i was curious if there was other information on that. host: all right. martin, good morning. caller: if a federal judge set on a case with a family member, wouldn't he have two excuse himself? shouldn't biden, a federal

employee, have to excuse himself with his son and some of those charges? biden pardoned himself first and got off the charges that he was involved with his son? he excused the sun before he pardoned himself. host: florida, democratic line, good morning. caller: i'm glad that biden did the pardon for his son, because really he was only there because they were trying -- because of the person running for president at the time and had become president, he just needed a scandal to try and bring down biden so that when he ran against him -- he sent people all the way to ukraine to do that stuff and moved all kind of people out of the way to be able to get the biden, to his son,

who is just a private citizen. the people working with him had no -- it's like nothing happened to them. it's like they testified against him. but because the president himself, the elected president, trump, he is such a loathsome person -- i mean, i've never known anybody could expedite death row sentences. he has done everything else to harm people and be vindictive. he took the last part of his presidency before he left office to expedite death row prisoners and had at least, what, 13 of them killed over a short amount of time, just so that he could exercise all the power that he could have had? i thought that was ridiculous.

it never really came up. it was reported, but nobody ever said anything about it. that's my story. host: all right, that's our live look at the supreme court building there. some people holding signs in anticipation of arguments this morning in about 20 minutes on the transgender health care. it's a case involving the tennessee ban on genera affirming care for transgender minors. we will have coverage of that, live, starting in about 20 minutes over on c-span3. oral arguments of that case that you will be able to follow. we are in open forum until the house gambles in this morning. you can call us on our line. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000.

independent callers, (202) 748-8002. paul, independence. caller: $34 trillion in debt and we are paying to get our christmas tree trucked in all the way from alaska? wow. host: robert. virginia beach, virginia. good morning. caller: i wanted to talk real fast -- i know a lot of people have been breaking down why trump did what he did. i'm still sort of young, under 35, ethnic minority, i voted for trump because the inner-city crime is out of hand and the democrats don't want to stop that. i have been following a lot about it.

i've been on trains when these issues are unfolding. host: just to be clear, this is the situation with the un-housed gentlemen and the strangling? remind us of the case? caller: yes. so, there was an issue on the train and he, you know, i guess, wanted to come to the aid of someone who was targeted. it was a very, very scary situation. i have been in those environments. so, that's about all of my comments. i voted for trump to clamp down on crime. host: san diego, democratic line, bob. caller: muting my tv. i've been switching it back and forth between cnn and fox.

i was listening to the c-span conversations about the pardon and all of that. president biden, i think, had no choice but to pardon his son. i'm not a father, but if i was, i would have pardoned i son as well. i don't think it's very -- i think it's a bummer that it came to that point. cnn was breaking a story where a ceo at united health care was gunned down in front of a hotel in new york. real news happening right now. but the news should be reporting. switching to fox, of course they are reporting about new york, but they are reporting about migrants in new york. i'm like -- are you kidding me? [laughter] keeping up this migrant story so that we can have an incoming president come in, not many are

coming over the border right now. i live in san diego, there are no illegal aliens running through san diego. the united states is getting blown up in the news on tv is so business model oriented. the fox news business model is to undermine democracy so that they can be the mouthpiece of donald trump in his next presidency. you know, their ratings will go up even more. elon musk will probably purchase msnbc to gobble up more of the news media, you know? that's a conspiracy theory at this point. host: all right, bob. more from fox news, florida sheriff chad chronister withdraws a trump nominee -- withdraws as a trump nominee, saying that there are multiple issues he's committed to fulfilling and he has taken his

name out of the running to lead the drug enforcement administration. this is richard in arkansas. independent line. caller: good morning. i want to say something about the transgender thing. you know, using clothing, drugs, needles, surgeries does not create a gender. i defy anyone to show me any physical evidence of a transgender. when a forensic examiner finds a body in the woods, have you ever heard any of them say -- look, it's a transgender. find a different name for it, people. host: monica, michigan, hello. caller: hello, dear. god bless you for this program.

i think that mr. biden did the right thing. trump is right on his tail. and if he didn't -- if he didn't do this for his son, we don't know what trump would have done to him. trump gets away with everything. i'm a true democrat. i'm 86 years old. we are in trouble with dear mr. trump. i pray every day that we don't go to war. god bless you. that is all i have to say. biden is a great president. you have a great day. god bless you. host: the caller mentioned this breaking story, cnn, united health care ceo fatally shot in midtown manhattan, according to law enforcement officials. his name, brian thompson,

walking towards the new york hilton hotel to attend the united health care conference held in the ballroom. the gunman, who investigators tell cnn was waiting for some time before his arrival, opened fire from 20 feet away, firing multiple times, striking him. the 50-year-old was shot in the chest and taken to the hospital, pronounced dead there. details are not immediately clear, but investigators say it appears to be a targeted shooting and no arrests have been made so far. here is thomas, memphis, tennessee, independent. caller: my god, i just spilled my coffee all over me. how you doing? host: why did you spill your coffee? caller: leaning over, stepped outside to get some air, so you guys breaking the story on tv at the same time. what i want to say is --

everything is winding down a little bit, it's the holidays. we've got a great spring on the way. i'm just -- for everybody, i want to remind everybody that we all still have our own light that shines. not everybody can have that glorious spotlight where everyone's light impacts the next person. like diamonds, we reflect on each other, you know? i want to remind everybody that, speaking up, your voice is your light. your faith, too. you know, don't dim yourself. each one of us matters. we are supposed to be bipartisan . i'm independent. host: all right, thomas.

pat, north carolina, good morning. caller: goodness, i don't know where to start. first of all, trump, the people who hate him, it's because the national media has so demonized to the man. i want to go back to the gentleman who said president trump pardoned 13 inmates on death row. that is false. there were 13 executions during his presidency. i just looked that up. president biden is the worst president we've ever had. his family has laundered money for, gosh, three or four different countries. eventually, they are going to find a connection between him and hunter laundering this money. and his brother and his sister. but i just get so infuriated.

so many people out there are just ignorant to facts because they watch msnbc and cnn. it's like watching two different worlds. i don't know. i don't know if that's one reason the country is in so much trouble. there is so much missed information out there. host: pat, what do you watch for news? caller: i switch. i watch c-span a lot. i see a lot that goes on. i watch the committee hearings. there, there's a lot of things that come out of those hearings that aren't reported on. unless you watch fox. i watch msnbc, cnn, and fox, just to see what they are all saying. msnbc and cnn, it's like they are on another planet. they say things i get from

c-span, watching congressional hearings in the senate, that i know -- this is not true. or they have twisted it. but you know, people hate trump because they think he is the devil because he gets so much bad press from the elite media who hate him. host: all right. here's albany, new york, democratic line, john. caller: hello. i'm an 80-year-old democrat, living four miles away from where trump was born in queens, new york. the only thing i have to say there, 330 people -- 300 30 million people live in the united states right now. -- 330 million people live in the united states right now. those with the ability to vote, 150 million people didn't bother to vote.

75, 70 8000 voted for trump. 76,000 voted for harris. i consider the people that didn't vote, or who voted for trump, as willfully ignorant of what's going on in the world today. i'm 80 years old. i don't care what's going to happen to me, or my kids in their 50's, but i have five grandchildren. those are the ones who i fear for. i'm not going to be around too, you know, see them grow up, i wouldn't think. it's a sorry, sorry thing that i'm leaving this world two, to people who, who, you know, are completely ignorant of what's going on in this world. that's what i have to say. host: kentucky, republican line, bill, hello. caller: hello.

i'm 84 years old. i'm from eastern kentucky. my family was 14. my father taught us to vote. he always said that politicians make strange bedfellows. i didn't know what he meant by that until i was 80 years old. i know what it means, now. i've been a democrat all my life. i've been a union man. but i changed over to our republican because when i go to a mcdonald's and i get three dollars for a big mac and then i go for the last four years it went to $12 for a big mac. i lived in a house for 60 years and at one time i couldn't even get $100,000 out of it. now i get letters every day where they offer me $300,000. i see things like that and i

think this country is going to hell and back. my poor wife, before she left this world, before she went to the doctor and i stayed in the hospital with her, for four days when they asked her, for they took her to the hospital, they said that she was the president? after she told them who her husband was and where she lived. you know what she said? donald trump. the election never happened. she was a black lady. she was a lady of god. you know, people just -- i don't look at the politicians. i look at what's going on in the country. i look at what's going on. how can people not see these things? 100,000 to 300,000 for a house in four years? what in the world. host: all right, bill.

allen, tucson, arizona, democratic line, good morning. caller: good morning. after so many years with trump of how the u.s. elected a con man to be the president of the united states. him and putin have something in accordance with how they view themselves. i'm still surprised that america didn't see how trump expressed himself when he met with putin, how he walked behind putin. looked down on the ground. then the speech that he made, backing him up, putting the u.s. down. it's an insult to our country.

republicans, they are stuck in a world of fantasy with donald trump. it's an insult to the minorities , black americans, mexican americans, having a president who doesn't know what the heck he is talking about. it's a shame. america is going to pay a price. host: donald, raleigh, north carolina, independent line. caller: regarding the lady from north carolina who said the caller said that trump pardoned 13 prisoners? miss, that's not what he said. he said trump executed --

escalated their ascot -- escalated their executions, meaning that he required them to be executed. she spoke about hatred. she is so blinded with hatred that she misheard what was said. didn't even hear it. her hearing that he escalated the sentences, she interpreted that as saying he had pardoned those people. no, he had them killed, ma'am. one more thing, there was a gentleman that called earlier, i think it was in november, before thanksgiving. he said that he was hoping that for one day we could be above hatred. it was an elderly gentleman. hope we couldn't have any hatred on the line on christmas day.

regretfully, it seems that the maca america that trump -- maga america lies every day to support their hate. thank you. host: heather, good morning. caller: i fully support president biden pardoning his son. he should have. as a father, he's not only a president, but he's a father, that's his son. of course you will pardon him if you can. gerald ford pardoned nixon for the crimes he committed and future crimes. when republicans get all mad about the pardon, the thing about that -- think about that. host: steve, long island. caller: couple of quick points. i'm a survivor of an abortion in the 1950's. my mother had a miscarriage and the operation was classified as an abortion.

that's what a lot of women are going through today. like in florida. as far as trump, he hasn't changed a bit. the last point i will make is on inflation. presidents don't have a lot to do with the costs of burger king, big macs, or whatever. there was a shortage of toilet paper back in 21. was that the fault of biden or trump or whoever it was? people should just learn about inflation and other things. i will leave it at that, thank you. host: all right, steve. that's all the time we have for today. the house is about to n. thanks, everyone, for watching. have a great day. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] use will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker.