from reprentatives derek kilmer and coriush. that will be on c-span at 9:00 tonight. again, follow along on the app and the dot-org as well. that's it for our program today. another edition of "washington journal" comes your way tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. we'll see you then.[captioning e national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] ♪ >> the genome is the entire dna instruction book of an organism. all living organisms have a genome, including us. ours is this 3 billion letters script. a, c, g, and t.

that's a lot of information. stacked it up on pages to try to see how tall it would be is about the height of the washington monument. that is a lot. when i was first getting intereste genetics, there was no reference copy of the human genome. we had bits and pieces of it scattered around. islands in the midst of a sea of ignorance. it became clear if we were going to really make any progress understanding human genetics, we needed to have that reference copy of all 3 billion letters. it needed to be done right so you could trust it. that was the postal -- proposal for the human genome project. >> we are showing encore presentations of our weekly interview program q&a. tonight, dr. francis collins discusses his book, "the road to

wisdom," on his work on the covid-19 and human genome projects. he talks about his christian faith, engaging with those whom we disagree, and the current distrust of science and government in united states. watch this program all week at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. >> during christmas week, each night at 9:00 p.m. eastern, c-span features interviews with departing members of congress. republicans, democrats, and independents from both chambers. they will discuss their careers, legislative achievements, the state of congress and american politics in their farewell speeches. tonight, michigan senator debbie stabenow and pennsylvania democratic senator bob casey. friday, delaware democratic senator tom carper and

california democratic congresswoman grace napolitano. what are interviews with departing members discussing their careers this week starting at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now, our free mobile video app, or online at c-span.org. >> witness democracy in action with c-span. experience history as it unfolds with c-span's live coverage in january as republicans take control of congress and a new chapter begins with the swearing at a 47th president. on friday, january 3, don't miss the opening day of the 119th congress, watch the election of the house speaker, swearing in new members, and the first day of leadership for south dakota's john thune as the senate majority leader. on monday, january 6, witness vice president kamala harris preside over the certification of the electoral college vote

with the historic session officially confirming donald trump as the winner of the 2024 presidential election. on january 20, tune in for our live coverage of the presidential inauguration as donald trump takes the oath of office, becoming the 47th president. stay with c-span for comprehensive, live, unfiltered coverage of the 119th congress on the presidential inauguration. c-span. democracy unfiltered. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies, and more, including wow. >> the world has changed. a fast reliable internet connection is something no one can live without. wow is there with speed, reliability, value and choice. it all starts with great internet. wow. >> wow supports c-span as a

public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. ♪ host: the washington journal for december 26. president-elect trump has promised to have a massive deportation effort on his first day in office. there are concerns by some on the efforts to impact u.s. migrants and how the effort could upset the u.s. economy. to start today, how do you feel about these promised masto quotation efforts by the incoming trump administration? if you support them,, call (202)-748-8000. if you oppose them, called on the (202)-748-8001.

for immigrants in the u.s., if you would like to give you perspective, (202)-748-8002. if you would like to text your thoughts this morning, (202)-748-8003. you can always post on facebook, facebook.com/c-span. and on x at @cspanwj. it was in late november that a poll was taken talking about and asking people about their thoughts on mass immigration. supports for the efforts dropped when americans consider potential consequences. when asked generally about the idea for support for mass deportation for undocumented immigrants, those who participated say they supported the effort, 52% said they supported, 42% oppose the effort. those numbers change slightly.

for example, the port for those mass deportations, if it ends up if you are paying into social security and medicare, that poll drops to 40%. it drops to 47% if it leads to labor market shortages. it drops to 43% if it was prices to support mass deportation. if families are separated in the process, the support drops to 38%. that is from a poll taken in november. when it comes to deportations and the technicalities, the associated press highlights a recent story of their sets is 1.4 million people have final orders of removal, and either have been convicted of crimes or face charges, but only 6000 officers within custom

enforcement are tested monitoring noncitizens in the country and finding and removing those not eligible to stay. the staffing numbers remain static as the caseload has quadrupled the past decade to 7.6 million. 10% of that workforce was pulled from the regular duties last year to go to the border at times when immigration spiked, and talking to the chief of staff, the number of officers needed to pursue those public safety threats are at direct odds with the goal of deporting people in large numbers. they will not be able to do these things with other resources they have or other offices they have. just the arithmetic, so those are some of the technicalities placing that upcoming trump administration. when it comes to the idea of

masto quotation, if this is something you support or oppose, call and let us know. if you support them, (202)-748-8000. if you oppose them, (202)-748-8001. for immigrants in the united states, (202)-748-8002. social media available as well. texting, you can text us at (202)-748-8003. most recent statements on last deportation took place last weekend, sponsored by turning point action, a conference they held. the president-elect talked about these efforts on immigration policy and mass deportation. [video clip] president-elect trump: for mexico, it just cannot continue.

the united states has lost 300,000 people year. everybody you meet said i lost my daughter or son to drugs to fentanyl, mostly to fentanyl, but to drugs. families are being destroyed, and we are going to stop it and not let that happen. we are also going to be doing something that i think will help a lot. we will do big advertising campaigns, just like running for president. we will spend a lot of money but it will small relatively. we will advertise how bad drugs are for you. they ruin your look, they ruin your face, they ruin your skin, they ruin your teeth, if you would like to have horrible teeth, take a lot of fentanyl. if you would like to have skin that looked so terrible, take fentanyl. we will show with these drugs are doing to you. no one has done that before and we are going to do it. [end video clip]

host: those are the recent comments that president-elect has made when it comes to mass deportation. you can go to c-span.org. we will start in new york, support line, rob, good morning. tell us why . caller: you don't have to look far to see that guy who said the woman on fire in the subway this week. he was kicked out, came back and let this woman on fire and watched her burn. this is happening all over. they are killing and raping people. this is ridiculous. before that pandemic, it was 20 million, and it now must be close to 40 or 50 million. our government under joe biden and kamala harris has ruin the country, and it will take decades to get these people the hell out of here.

host: in reference to new york, it was the abc affiliate. at 33-year-old man was charged with murder and the death of a woman he set on fire and the subway train, and according to that spokesperson, the man who committed that was an undocumented immigrant from guatemala. that is from the abc. another person on the support line in oklahoma. we will hear from guy on the idea of mass deportation. hello caller:. good morning, pedro. i just woke caps on a little groggy still. i'm a supporter of getting rid of the criminals. if 2000 rapists, 12,000 murderers, 14,000 murderers from the illegals being here the last four years as a media doesn't talk about it.

and 380,000 children. 380,000 children are missing. my god. 110 thousand people last year died from the fentanyl. we have to secure the military, the national guard, whatever it takes, and start with hard-core criminals, gang members, and people committing the crimes. if they are here, dreamers, let them stay. if they would like to be good citizens, let them stay, but we have got to get rid of these hard-core -- host: if the numbers are high, you see, what gives you confidence the trump administration will be able to do that deportation? caller: well, at least there going to try. it will take more support and money obviously, but they will do everything they can, and i believe that.

host: that was guy in oklahoma. you can call and support these efforts or oppose these efforts, and then immigrants, if you would like to give your thoughts , if you're an immigrant, go to (202)-748-8002. on our opposing line, that is (202)-748-8000. that is where we are now in maryland, vincent, hello. caller: hello, pedro and c-span. pedro, you, greta, john, mimi, etc., nbc, cbs, will you folks kindly state the truth. they are illegal. they are not undocumented. they are illegal. you give it to a straight. stop using euphemisms to

sugarcoat a horrible situation. host: if that is the way you characterize it, then why do you oppose their mass deportation effort. caller: that has nothing to do with it. you are not going to fool me with a trick question. host: that is on a trick question -- letter from rod on the support line in ohio -- let's hear from rod on the support line in ohio. caller: yes. i support deportation in any form, whether it be illegal immigrants or people here who are on illegal be said that is expired, or it is expired and should be rescinded. anyway, i will make it short and sweet. with the immigration problem, it has emigrated into our society and culture.

it has become part of our dna. like with covid. eight came along, but eventually will get assimilated into the general population and then someone else will come along. host: why do you support deportation on a mass level? caller: because you can get the biggest chunk of it. i'm try to get my thoughts going on this but it is like cancer. you can cut out a big chunk of cancer, but a lot of it will remain. you have to start with the obvious. everyone is screaming over the border, unchecked, people coming in. you have to deal with that first and then you can work backwards, hopefully, and start collecting all of it because for every illegal immigrant, it comes across unchecked. there are probably 10 people that came across legally at one time that we lost track of, of

something like that where they should have been, sent back to their home country. it is like just going back to world war ii pup, you had so many coming over. it is crazy. as bad as it was years ago is first infiltrating, right now, you have people coming over willy-nilly. it is really amazing that we are in good a shape as we are now. host: some of you posted -- we posted this on the facebook page not too long ago before the show started. some of those comments, when it comes to the issue of those already in the united states, give them all work leases, adding that we need immigrants to function.

we cannot afford a whole class of lawbreakers. david jenken this morning says he is opposed. but is there any realistic plan to make it happen? and then when it comes to these efforts to support them, this was not about refugees. that facebook.com/c-span if you would like to put those thoughts there. call us on the lines, just pick one that represents you. on our oppose line from marilyn, elizabeth. caller: i oppose mass deportation. immigrants who come into the country would like to work, and the service industry of the country, i'm sure is against the

deportation of migrants. we have migrants to fill all those jobs like in hotels and restaurants. the fast food places, the farms, the laborers on the farms in california, florid across the country. immigrants are coming in this country to work. what is wrong with that? our country is based on immigration. people emigratedrom europe and all over the world to build this country. what is hard -- what is wrong from having people come to this country to wk? th is all they would like to do, work. mass deportation would break up falies. children would be left you without parents. kids in school would be left without apparent. it would be terrible and i oppose it 100%. that is all i would like to say, thank you. host: the associated press adds that when it comes to the effort made by the administration, how

does law-enforcement factor into that? there story highlights that some cities and states work with immigration to turnover people who are not u.s. citizens, but many states and cities have century policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities in new york city and legislation kicking out nice. his successor has shown leanness to revisit the policies. the agreed on pursuing people who commit violent crimes. it goes on from there. just some of these efforts. newsweek published a map -- if i can get it to come up. it supports those with the idea to support mass deportation that

is planned by the trump administration. the map is here. those shaded green say, yes, generally, those states go along with ideas with the concept of nasty quotation, those states in the orange-reddish color. blue states, it is unclear, but if you tap the map and go state-by-state, it gives you the state, if it supports deportation, newsweek.com has that matter if you like to take a look and call us about the level you support or oppose. let's hear from cody in kentucky on the support line. good morning. cody in kentucky, hello? let's go to ben in virginia on our oppose line. good morning. caller: good morning. you can hear me? host: i can hear you. go ahead.

caller: i oppose this because i don't think that cost wise, stuffy wise, and people have got to be educated. there is a process for deportation already. the reason why it is not enforceable to do mass deportation is because, one, you need enough faculty. you need one to two law-enforcement to escort one person out of the country to their country of origin. and people are thinking you just drop them at the bottom. no. [indiscernible] you have people as far as china, iran, rizzo. you'll need two to three law-enforcement officials to escort them out of the country. it is costly.

number two, you have to process as criminals or individuals. you have to go through immigration. some of them have to go through a federal judge if they have any offenses or crimes they committed. they have to go through that process and then go through immigration. it is not possible to do it legally. the easiest way and foreseeable way is to [indiscernible] you need any investigation to work with the federal government. you can impose the same type of law to private citizens or you can enforce those laws and say, look, if we find an individual, you will be fined $1000, plus prison time, or prison time or 10 years.

host: that is ben mentioning the costs. dr. ebright holiday from facebook as part of -- stock when it comes to cost efforts, the new york post two days ago in an interview with tom homan who was tapped by the trump administration to do a border issues, as far as a price tag for the mass deportation, coming out of the interview, $86 billion. in the support line for these efforts, next up, hi. caller: good morning. i wanted to say, first off, your list of callers, i would imagine a lot of legal immigrants are upset that they are grouped in with illegal immigrants to call you because i think there are a lot of legal immigrants

were not happy with what is happening. we are changing our culture, and million coming into this country , biden changed the laws. how would anyone like that to happen to their culture, completely changed by this amount of people coming from the government? i thought we were the land of the people telling us what to do. i would just like to say that they would not be very happy. host: we have set aside a line for immigrants, (202)-748-8002. let's hear from mara in new york. good morning. go ahead. caller: i came here from another country, we were sponsored and

it took my family over 10 years to become citizens. my father had to go to my classes every week, twice a week. we had a b sitters. they have to speak english, they had to learn history. i think they should do with the right way. my family had to come here and do it the right way. host: what was their country of origin? caller: italy. my father came here for work. he did not have any work. he came here for a better life, but he did it the right way. so when i see what is happening, it makes me sick. host: as far as the deportation efforts that the incoming trump administration has talked about,

to a degree you support those efforts? caller: i think you have to be here legally. and unfortunately, i don't like what is happening to these children. they don't know where they are and that is very sad, but they came here illegally. my family has to to do it the right way, and it took us over 10 years to become a citizen, and my dad had to do everything the right way. host: let's go to richard on the oppose line. caller: good morning. thank you for having me on your show. i think the lines stand the potential to be jaded, we don't know how far that is going to go. in other words, you have people here from afghanistan, ukraine,

illegals going to spill over and apply to them, as well. i think we have to take a critical look at what donald trump is proposing, and we have to be very careful because, like i said, they can use his power. the next thing you know, they may be rounding up american citizens, so i think we need to take a more critical look and be more careful about how we go about trying to get these people out of our country. host: why would you think it would start with those who are not supposed to be here, but why do you think that would extend to american citizens like you said? caller: because this country has a history of using things mass deportations and it would start to ripple out and go out and start to affect american citizens or whomever they may

wish to do it. host: one of the people asked about deportation efforts and immigration efforts, the current homeland security -- homeland security secretary. mayorkas talked about biden's efforts on dealing with illegal immigration. here's a part of it. [video clip] >> december of last year, border crossings were at record highs. now they have dropped to the lowest level of the biden administration. how much of that drop off is because mexico is now stopping them from getting to that southern border of the u.s.? >> that is one element but not the only. the president took executive action in june of this year. that has been a key driver in encounters at the border. we are now delivering to the

incoming demonstration, a southern border at which individuals encountered and is well below the level experiencing 2019, the last year before the pandemic. >> since 2021, the immigration surge has been the largest in american history. incredible. >> it is. it is one element of the greatest displacement of people in the world since world war ii. this is a phenomenon that has not been unique to the southern border of the united states. it is something that has grouped the entire hemisphere in the world. >> i think one of the first things the biden administration did was ask congress to act in the earliest days, and then fast-forward, you had a bipartisan near miss on a border bill. all of that time passed. why wait until five months

before the u.s. election to put in place exiling restrictions that did cut off the flow that ended a crisis? >> margaret, remember where we were when the president took office. we were in the midst of a covid-19 pandemic. the prior administration had imposed title 42, which is a public health authority and enabled us to expel individuals, to continue to expel individuals at the border as the prior ministrations had done. there was tremendous pressure to maintain the workings of title 42, which we did. that held until may of 2023. he then turned to congress and asked for supplemental funding that was desperately needed to make our administration of a broken immigration system work better and we were denied.

we went back to congress a second time and requested supplemental funding, denied. we then turned to the bipartisan negotiations, each proved successful, which were then killed. the result of it, a really terrific solution, was killed, by responsible politics. [end video clip] host: that full interview available on the cbs news website. the incoming administration, do you support or oppose the mass deportation plans? if you support them, call us and tell us why at (202)-748-8000. if you oppose them, (202)-748-8001. for immigrants this morning, (202)-748-8002. that is how you can call that number and let us know. and the time that we have when it comes to taking a look at enforcement efforts, that was the department of homeland security, releasing a report you can find online, taking a look

at deportation efforts for fiscal year 2024. they will show you as far as with the biden administration has done, 271,000 plus noncitizens removed to 192 different countries, 88,000 plus, almost 89,000, 3700 known suspected or known gang members, 237 known or suspected terrorists, eight human rights violators. let's hear from martinez in oklahoma, a supporter of the effort. caller: yes sir. i'm into reporti illegal immigrants because a couple of years ago, i almost got killed. my dad was driving me to work, and an illegal immigrant stole a truck and almost got killed.

i went to the hospital. that is why i decided to be with it, you know what i mean? host: ok, and that is why you support the effort? caller: yes, and then that little girl got killed in texas. my goodness. we need to stop illegal immigrants coming into the united states. there are too many of them. too much. we need to control it and then tell them who they are and everything. you know what i mean? host: martinez, you said we need to control it -- what does that mean to you? caller: to control it, like order entry. let them come in and border entry, who they are, what you are coming for and everything. host: ok, martinez stared in oklahoma. vicki next in new york state on

the opposed line. hi. caller: good morning. first of all, it is ironic that the day after we celebrate christmas, that people would post immigration, even illegally, jesus christ was an illegal immigrant for god sake. but the ridiculousness that you pointed out at the beginning of this show, 6000 -- do the math. do the arithmetic. 6000, let's say this, 12 million illegal immigrants that you would like to deport. 6000 ice agents, do the math. 6000 goes into 12 million how many times? donald trump is very good at promising you pie-in-the-sky.

the greatest economy, and he is a new messiah, so i hope you enjoyed this christmas because the next one will be a maga christmas. thank you and enjoy the rest of your holidays. host: doug on the support line. caller: hey there. sorry for the confusion, i was calling to oppose. host: let me stop you there, and if you would, call in and pick the opposed line. on that line, make sure we have people calling on the correct line. it is (202)-748-8000 if you support the effort of mass immigration with the incoming trump administration. if you oppose it, (202)-748-8001 . and for immigrants, (202)-748-8002. to elaine on the opposed line in

colorado. hello. caller: hi. i oppose it because trump does things without thinking ahead or planning ahead. in the main thing is, people do not have labels on therefore heads. there are a lot of citizens in this country that he could just round up and there we will have to figure it out later. and he will not care about that. so i'm opposed to it because of that. and he got in there with money from musk and all these billionaires and he bought his election. so that is fake because of that. host: as part of those issues specifically, do you think the administration has a point on that front?

caller: yes, they do, but they need to do the right way and identify that they are actually here illegally and that they are criminals, and then that would be ok. i'm not opposed to that. host: how do you know that there is no sense of the ability to identify those, who are not supposed to be here, why do think that cannot happen? caller: well, they are out running around out and illegal i'm doing crimes, which that is the 1%, and how come they have not got them already? i just think it will cause a lot of chaos like it's a with children. and he is ok with that to make him feel powerful. this president, this incoming president is scary.

he is out of his mind. and half the country is going along with it which is even more scary to me. host: this is edward in new york. the support line. hello. caller: good morning. thank you for having me on. really, really quick question. i think trump will do two things. i think you will tighten up the illegal immigration. caller the ladycaller performer said it -- the lady caller performer said it took 10 years for her family to come in, and i'm helping someone now. more importantly, i go to the monthly in manhattan, and we have to understand there are 58,000 right now criminal

migrants here in the city. 58,000. and 75% of the arrests in new york are criminal migrants, so new york city is a sitting blue state. i'm sure this is playing out in communities all around the country. this pattern. the last thing i will say quickly is, you know, biden, they don't talk about this for some reason, but biden has enabled a travel business. the cartels have two businesses. they had the drug business, about 50 million, and they have 25 million travel business, and the travel business is variable organized. it moves people takes advantage of the experience that cartels

have had over the years, moving drugs, routes, what have you. host: listing out that 58,000 number in new york city, what convinces you the trump administration has the resources to not only handle the issues in new york city alone but the u.s. overall? caller: that is going to be very, very tough it will -- tough. it will take cooperation, which they will not find in the sanctuary cities, so this is a real dilemma. host: edward in new york city giving us his perspective. you can continue to do that by calling the numbers on your screen. lucy says i do not support domestic quotation plan. the only people i would like removed from communities are violent offenders, including domestic abusers and those guilty of sexual assault. this is joellen saying that

supporting the plan, we are a republic of laws and obviously they did not hear to our laws. how is it fair to those who follow the rules and enter legally? and then loretta saying also on the support, deportation of the illegal and we should all support what president trump promised to do. facebook, facebook.com/c-span, x is^ and text -- is @cspanwj and text is available, too, at (202)-748-8003. ej, opposed line, virginia. caller: good morning. best of the holidays. the reason why i opposed this, i found out interesting information over the holidays, someone in my huge family dated 23 and me on our very own

family, so it turns out that we are all immigrants. forget about the humanitarian part of this, that's pretend nobody is a real question -- real christian in this community. think about four examples. i know your audience is mostly older than me, so you have a cultural memory. how much money did it take to get one very rich alleged murder, probably murder, to go from pennsylvania to new york state? there were 785 federal, local and state people to get that luigi mangione or whatever his name is, to go from one state to one state. you could put him in a volkswagen and had one cup do the whole thing.

but, no, that is not the way the country works. you have to have 80 cops to do one job. think about alien gonzalez -- gonzalez, the little cuban boy at the back of the clinton years, federal, local, state, just to get that guy reunited with his father was like a military operation because of all the locals up against reunification to his proper father. inc. of david karesh -- think of david karesh. the federal government allowed him to kill five of their own agents, and we had a whole army surrounding that countdown for 55 days or something like that. that probably cost tens of millions in it return society apart because the heavy right wing, we have got --

host: if i take those examples, than it is a manpower and resource issue, that is what you are saying? caller: no, it is going to be a civil war issue free allow this to play out. if you don't like to accept essentially native americans -- i'm sorry you are fading out on me. host: i'm just saying, what is the point? what is the final point as far as your opposition to the efforts? caller: well, it is impractical to think that trump says we are going to have the biggest mass deportation and history. did he ever hear about the mexican repatriation act? host: let's hear from donald, north carolina, support line. hello. caller: can you hear me host:? host:i can. go ahead. caller: i'm against these

immigrants coming in, and the reason why is they are taking the reason that trump won, they are taking all the black people's jobs. they are taking all their jobs. and then two, mexicans do their job. that is wrong. i think that is wrong. and biden has shipped, they flew in plain loads and busloads coming in from the border. that is wrong. that is wrong. when need to charge biden ma can pay for them and plow them back. host: line for immigrants, charlie in new york. go ahead.

caller: back in the mid-1980's, i left new york to do construction in california and i had a hard time finding work because of the illegal immigrants living in san diego at the time. so i have always been opposed to immigration, especially illegal immigration, but, ironically, two years ago, i met a woman here who was here illegally and we fell in love. so my immigrant story has become more mixed in my opinion, as much as i opposed people entering the country illegally. there are times when it is necessary for persecution reasons, and the immigrants i met in the communities are hard-working, honest people i would like no part in getting in trouble with the law because that will get them kicked out right away, so this whole talk about biden, immigrant crime, is really a bunch of nonsense. you can find people committing these crimes with any color of

skin and in any immigration status in america and paste them all over the news. that is my opinion about it. i think people need to be open-minded and not just have a black-and-white opinion on the issue because it comes in lots of shades. host: the wall street journal, to show you the headline of a recent story, taking a look at the upcoming plans for the administration and the private prison industry. that is the headline from a recent story. private prisons and other companies that provide detention services are getting ready to cash in on what president-elect trump has built as the largest deportation effort in the u.s., including scouring for as many detention beds as possible and facilities and scouting sites for new buildings to house migrants. some executives are considering whether to take up controversial work obtaining families of

unaccompanied children and others are prepared to hire new staff, "this to us is an unprecedented opportunity," and telling investors on earning call days after, that pulling off deportation on the scale mr. trump promised would constitute an unprecedented logistical feet, including arresting, adjudicating and transporting potentially millions of men, women and children. he goes on from there. that story in the wall street journal. back to our calls, this is doug, chester, pennsylvania, on the opposed line. caller: hi, i'm glad i got back to you. i think this is a very, very serious issue, and i'm concerned about this whole immigration thing. it has only gotten scarier to me. i've listened to people's spirits our in the aftermath of

covid, and everybody's memory has gotten very short. during covid, wilbur ross intervened with tyson, the meatpacking plants, to make sure they stayed open no matter what. as the virus began to intensify. many of those people or people who were of questionable documentation to make sure food were still on our tables. in the tech industry, with the visa, people suddenly found themselves, when trump began mucking with the visas during the virus, without status, and it was almost like a servitude status. what alarms me the most listening to everybody talk about this, it is not possible

because it doesn't make sense logistically, and i agree generally, but what i would like to say is that perhaps these people are announcing to us is what they intend to do is to rely on people to take extrajudicial matters into their own hands should the plan that worked with the anticipated. it most certainly does seem just sickly impossible to eject people from american cities and to try to employ -- even like national guard, which involves many, many proud americans who were born here. you are not going to have these people go and eject their own families from their own cities. that's not going to happen. maybe what they are trying to say is that they are ready to let the brownshirts come out and do their thing. that is what we should be concerned about. these people have not

demonstrated a modicum of concern for human life. they let a million of us die, and they will do it again. host: thank you. that is doug from pennsylvania on the opposed line. continue to call in. don, sacramento, support line. caller: hello. these people sound like these [indiscernible] old [indiscernible] haoles to treat these indians and stove, and now they're try to get the mexicans as a way they did the jews in europe. now they are going to act like the brown people are the only people that are doing all the crime so they can get them out of america. host: do you support this idea of mass deportation? caller: yes, i supported, but

are they just deporting browns and black people? or are they going to include europeans in the deportation? how are they going to tell the difference between a european white person in a regular white person? host: why do you effort overall? caller: because there are too many of all of them here. arabs, mexicans, white folks coming from europe. host: we will leave it there. washington times this morning, this takes a look at what mexico was planning on doing, at least parts of it. shelters opened in mexico to prepare for deportation. it quotes the baja, california, governor, saying 25 new shelters have been open to house immigrants in preparation for the crackdown. in the meeting monday, they said

that the country is taking mr. trump's threat of deportation seriously. five of the shelters will be in the city of tijuana, the other in the mexicali capital of baja. the migrants will only be able to stay in the shelters that can house up to 500 people for a few days before they will be sent back to their hometown, some will hold the men, while others will hold women, families, and unaccompanied minors. there is more they on the international perspective of the plan of the incoming trump administration when it comes to mass deportation. that is in the washington times. let's hear from mo, california, opposed line. caller: good morning and merry christmas to everybody. i would like to say that i don't think you'll be able to do it. congress will not give him the money to do this. economists estimate it will cost

over $1 trillion. you really like to add that to our national debt? i'm afraid that that is what he would like us to lift the debt ceiling because he knows congress will not give him the money. also, if you list the debt ceiling, he is putting it on america's credit card. you know how credit card debt works, we will never get it paid off. besides that, we need these people to pick our strawberries and lettuce. i'm here in california, i see it every day. no one is flooding across the border. stop with all of that. stop, please, stop being so greedy with your freedom. host: it was at a recent senate hearing that the judiciary committees ranking member lindsey graham talked about republican control of the senate next year, the 119th congress as part of the judiciary plan when it comes to immigration purity

had some things to say about specifics. here is a portion. [video clip] >> most americans are sympathetic, kindhearted people who feel like the bite in administration was criminally negligent -- biden administration's criminally negligent in having a broken border and allowing drugs to pour into a country to kill thousands of young people, allow people to come in our country who are convicted felons, to do damage to families. that nightmare is coming to a close. in january of 2025, the republican senate will make its top priority a transformational border security bill that will be taken up and passed by the budget committee. increasing the number of bed space is available and increasing the number of ice agents to deal with people who should be deported, finish the

wall, and put technology on the border so we will have operational control of the border. but as to the senate, transformational border security goes first through reconciliation. over 8 million people were encountered during the biden years before being released into the country. there are 600 something thousand people on that nine to 10 document that have criminal records. and we will start sending people out of the country who present at threat to us and who should never have been here to begin with. [end video clip] guest: -- host: that is lindsey graham. on c-span2 for the time being, 24 hours of hearing previous

statements by expected members of the trump administration. one of them, tom homan, which would be the border security expert for the trump ministrations. this rusted department of homeland security and others, we are showing you as part of a marathon, calling trump nominees in their own words, and you have a chance to see on c-span2 things they said in some cases about immigration and deportation. follow along on that marathon today. c-span two is where you can follow along if you would like to watch it, and on our companion app, c-span now and c-span.org to see with these incoming members, should they be confirmed by the senate, have to say about various issues, including immigration and border security. on our line for immigrants, enid, dallas, texas, hello. caller: yes. my name is nina and my comment about the immigrants mothers, it

is wrong to separate the children from immigrant mothers. host: ok. caller: if they're going to deport immigrant mothers, they should not separate the children. they should be able to take their children with them. host: anything else you would like to add? caller: and children of the immigrants should not be engages , and they should not be separated from their mothers, the immigrant mothers. that is heartbreaking. that is suffering to the children, the mothers. host: calvin is next in alabama, a supporter of the effort. hello. caller: the main thing that i'm

against or opposed over the last emigrations because the many people who are legally trying to come into our country and emigrate are being cheated upon, with their money, their time, and doing everything that is legally possible for them to do to get into our country and become legal citizens, and to me it is like the ones that are crossing the border and the millions who have come to our country and they are cheating. they are jumping ahead of the line and they are not even taking that task -- test. they are taking the test and having the answer provided to them. and the others who are studying are being cheated upon, and i think it is wrong. we have a young man in our neighborhood who was working for

his citizenship and many of the people in our communities are helping them. it is not an easy process or a cheap process to achieve this. i think if our governments are going to do anything that they need to revamp the whole process , we are getting in here because of solid reasons, and those type of people need to be fast tracked. they need to figure out who they are, where they come from, and they need to change our system. and with the new technology we have developing now in the world, i cannot think that it would be much easier in the near future for them to be able to do that, you know, to be able to process people and make it faster because there are so many people that do need help and need the asylum of our country that would work and be great citizens, if we know we have

many of them in our neighborhoods but they were legal, you know, and they are all complaining that they did everything the right way. host: ok, got your point. let's hear from dorothy, louisiana, on the opposed line. dorothy, go ahead. caller: yes. i was calling from louisiana, this is dorothy. i think it is wrong for immigrants. the ones who live here, it is not right, and joe biden did all that he could to fix this. donald trump is the one who lost it. we let one man dictate this country and it is not right. host: ok, dorothy in louisiana.

one more call. this will be from thomas in georgia on our support line. go ahead. caller: hey, i finally got in here. i've been waiting for quite some time. look, this illegal immigration is a real problem. just look at our hospitals and our schools. we have teachers who are trying to teach class with a bunch of kids in there who cannot speak english. our teachers cannot speak spanish. it is a tremendous problem to our school system. look at our education system today. we are probably number 35 or higher where we used to be number one in the whole united

states, the whole world, excuse me, the whole world, we used to be number one in education. look where we are at today, and a lot of that is a problem because of this open border situation that liberal democrats have allowed into the united states. host: ok. thomas in georgia finishing this our of calls. for those who participated, thank you. if you joined us during the holiday hearing, we have had a series, our thor series we do year after year abt this time of year, inviting people of various political stripes to come and talk about their books and the issues revolving around them. coming up next, we will hear from jonathan alter who will talk about his book "american reckoning: inside trump's trial

-and my own." we will hear his thoughts when washington journal continues. >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span two. exploring the people and events that tell the american story. this weekend at 3:15 p.m. eastern author steven puleo with his book, the great abolitionist, discusses the career and life of abolitionist and politician charles sumner, who represented massachusetts in the u.s. senate from 1851 until his death in 1874. then at four: 40 5 p.m. eastern author elizabeth reese recounted the 1824-1825 trip lafayette took through the young united states when he returned after the revolutionary or. and at 7:00 p.m. eastern lead up

to inauguration day american history tv looks back at famous inaugural speeches. this weekend speeches by franklin roosevelt in 1933, harry truman's 1940 nine address, and dwight eisenhower's 1953 address. exploring the american story. watch american history tv saturdays on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> witness democracy in action with c-span. experience history with c-span's live coverage this january as workup -- as republicans take control of congress and a new chapter begins with the swearing in of the president of the united states.

on january 3 don't miss the opening day of the congress. watch the swearing in of new members of congress and the first day of leadership for south dakota's john thune as the new senate majority leader. on monday, january 6 the witness vice president kamala harris provide over the certification of the electoral college vote. and on january 20 two in for our live, all-day coverage of the presidential inauguration as donald trump takes the oath of office, becoming the 47th president of the united states. stay with c-span throughout january for comprehensive, live, unfiltered coverage of the 119th congress and the presidential inauguration. c-span. democracy unfiltered. created by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: washington journal's holiday authors week series continues on. if you have been joining us,

authors of vario political stripes joining us for conversationabout their books and other topics. eight days over the course of a total that we are going to talk about these public policy and political topics. today we invite author jonathan alter on. he is the author of the book "american reckoning: inside trump's trial - and my own." jonathan alter, happy holidays to you. welcome to the program. guest: happy holidays so great to be here. host: this trial, remind people what you were guest: writing about. guest: the trial i covered every day in the courtroom was the hush money trial that took place at the manhattan criminal courthouse and resulted in the conviction of donald trump on 34 counts. of business fraud. that conviction, as we speak, still stands. he is a convicted felon. we are waiting for the judge to determine sentencing. it is clear he is unlikely to

try to have president electron serve any of his sentence, given that he was just reelected president. but he might freeze the case and return to sentencing in four years. we are not sure exactly what is going to happen, but this trial, i guess you could call it a bittersweet experience for somebody like me, who i think, you know, feels very strongly -- and i think i speak for a lot of people. obviously not everybody. in believing that donald trump is a threat to our republic, a threat to our values, and it was important to try to hold him accountable for the crimes he committed. host: you wrote in the book, saying, my own reckoning with my image of america and its commitment to democracy is still underway. i have lost my claim to be an

idealist without illusions. i am idealistic, but it turns out i have more illusions about this country than i thought i did. i aim to show how a tawdry trial about payments to a point star came an inspiring locus of democratic accountability. a place where donald trump was forced to sit down, shut up, and face the consequences of his actions. is that part of the trial of your own, that the title of your book highlights? guest: i grew up in an intensely political family in chicago. my mother was the first woman elected to public office in cook county. i loved everything and continue to love everything about the president. i have has -- i have pez dispenser presidents at home. i have presidential spoons. i revere the office. i continue to revere the office.

as a journalist over the last 40 years i have interviewed nine of the last 10 american presidents, either before, during, or after their time in office, including donald trump years before he ran for president. the only one i missed was ronald reagan. i was a little too young to interview him. so, i have studied the presidency and i assumed wrongly -- and these were my illusions -- that the american people would not elect a con man as president of the united states. i was wrong. people something did not care as much about is rather long record -- you know, this was only one trial. the others are now being thrown out because he was reelected and he will not have his justice department, obviously, continue those federal cases.

in total he was indicted across a few different cases on 91 counts of various offenses. not to mention the civil judgment a year ago for sexual abuse. $83 million e. jean carroll was awarded. his university, trump university was shut down. his charity was shut down. this is a con man. so, my disillusionment is connected to just disappointment that more people did not see this the way i do. i respect people who are for trump. i just think that they are not looking at the totality of his character in making a judgment. but this experience was in some ways very inspiring and mother courtroom, because as you

mentioned in your excerpt from my book, this was a partial accountability. no matter what happens eventually in this case, even if he does not serve in jail, which he very much is not going to, even if he does not end up getting probation everyday in the courtroom he had to answer for really the first time in his adult life to a judge who controlled the courtroom. and i got a firm row seat on this accountability. the trial was not televised. so, while it was highly publicized, the stormy daniels trial, nobody got a good sense of what was going on in that courtroom if they were not there. and this is the only book about this case. it was a fascinating case. there was overwhelming evidence

of guilt on donald trump's part. so, i walk readers through -- i kept a very barbed, acerbic diary during the trial and i started the book explaining, you know, what i brought to coverage of this trial. which was not legal expertise, but as i mentioned, a long history of studying and appreciating the american presidency and american politics. host: republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. if you want to text him your questions, (202) 748-8003. you listed those various legal fronts the president had cases in. you chose this one. what stood out about this one versus the others? guest: i was originally credentialed for jack smith's case against donald trump for

trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election the first time in the entire history of our country that we have not had a peaceful transfer of power. or at least trump attempted to prevent a peaceful transfer of power. i was credentialed for that case and it was scheduled to open -- the trial was supposed to start in march of this year. then trump's lawyers appealed to the supreme court on the basis of immunity. and we all know what happened in that case. the supreme court ruled that a president cannot be held accountable for acts while he was in office. and this delayed that case so long -- it did not kill the case, but it delayed the case until after the election, and now jack smith has canceled that

case because, you know, trump has indicated all along that he would not allow the justice department to move forward with either that or the mar-a-lago case, which related to his refusing a request to return classified documents that belong to the u.s. government. so, he is indicted on that. those cases are dead. the georgia case is probably dead. so, the hush money trial, i thought of it as the runt of the litter, in terms of cases, but it was nonetheless an important case. the first time in american history that i president of the united states -- the president of the united states has gone on trial, and the first time a president of the united states has become a convicted felon. just to give you a sense, i know a lot of people out there are interested in the history of the american presidency. in 1872 ulysses grant was given

a speeding ticket for driving too fast on 13th street in washington in his carriage. in 1953 harry truman got a ticket for driving too slow on the pennsylvania turnpike. nixon was pardoned. bill clinton lost his law license. that is it in terms of the interaction of presidents of the united states with the justice system. so, you know, this was a truly historic set of circumstances, and i wanted to write a book -- and this is what i hope "american reckoning" does. it gives readers a tactile sense of what it was like to live through this historic circumstance and live, you know, through the disruption of our politics and values that donald trump represents. i try to give voice to it that

feels like. obviously i'm not giving voice to the way conservative republicans feel, and others who voted for donald trump. but there are still coming you know, tens of millions of americans who share my views about trump and might appreciate this front row seat to history and the way i hope, and sometimes in amusing ways, convey what happens in this case given host: we will ask you to highlight some of those but we do have callers ready to talk to you. let's start with tim in georgia, independent line. you are on with jonathan alter. the author of the book "american reckoning: inside trump's trial - and my own." good. go ahead. caller: good morning, you guys. i have two questions for you. really, one. in the hush money trial i think the majority -- and i'm an

independent, so i am an open-minded individual -- that the majority of people i talked to looked at it in two ways. one, they looked at it as, this is a man who committed adultery and was trying to cover it up. they could not see where the government or any trial should be brought forth on him for that. and two, a majority of them also saw it as the way of them trying to prevent trump from becoming president again. what i'm saying is that in most of the public's eyes, independents and conservative republicans, maybe some democrats, that this try was basically a sham, to keep him from becoming president again. i want to get your opinion on that because that seems to be the going thing with the hush

money trial. a lot of people don't even count that as a conviction. that is why they voted for him. i want to get your opinion on that. host: we will let our guest respond. guest: excellent questions. people say, this was selective prosecution, you know? actually there are more than 100 cases a year that just the manhattan prosecutor brings up. not to mention other jurisdictions. falsification of business records, which is what this case was about. prosecutors, federal, state, and local, they have offices of public -- offices of public integrity because they do use resources to go after politicians to send a message that no one is above the law. that politicians should not break the law. some people are going -- i think this is part of what you were hearing.

oh, this is just a bookkeeping thing. he was trying to cover up this fling he had with a pointed star cachet -- a porn star. years ago with president clinton they believed he should be impeached and removed from office. they now are on the others that issue, those republicans who believed that about clinton. setting that aside for a moment, the problem with that is it is not just a bookkeeping error. i was made aware of this by a professor at the harvard business school, who told me something i had not thought of. he said, you know, the integrity of business records, the fact that you are not allowed to use fraudulent business records, just lie in your business records, is actually the foundation of our successful

economy. that if you just let people falsify business records, as trump was convicted of doing on 34 counts in this case, then nobody can believe anything in business. you have crony capitalism. it is all about just, do you know the judge? business would become very corrupt. people would not be able to trust the courts to keep business records clean and we would have a much less successful economy. that is the way it works in russia and many other countries where they have pony capitalism. so, to say that you could have a legitimate argument about whether these charges should have been bumped up from misdemeanors to a felony, that is something you can argue about. it is not easy to make an argument that he did not do anything wrong. because he was clearly breaking the law.

just last week judge marchand ruled last week that the immunity decision by the supreme court, which protects presidents from being prosecuted for their official acts, things they do while president, that it is true that there was important testimony by a woman named hope hicks about things trump said about stormy daniels in the white house. that you could argue would be protected by that immunity decision. but what the judge ruled -- i believe rightly -- that there was such "overwhelming evidence of guilt," so many witnesses that corroborated michael cohen's testimony against donald trump. there was so much evidence of guilt that they did not even need what he did in the white house. that is why he has not thrown at

this convention. you have to look at it, should the former president be above the law? if evidence is brought to your attention and evidence cap coming in right up until the trial started in april. new evidence, new witnesses against him. he didn't put up any case of his own except for one very unconvincing witness that blew up in his face. it was so much evidence that for the prosecutor to look the other way and say, we are not going to enforce the law, we are not going to prosecute this guy. he was president, you know? we are going to be accused of trying to prevent him from being president again, so we will look the other way while he violates business records laws that are prosecuted every day. no. the president should not be above the law. that is one of the issues i deal with in this book.

how do we get to a place where so many people, including many independents, believe that, yeah, ok, if he is trying to overthrow the government navy prosecute him for that. i agree that the jack smith case was more important. much more significant than the stormy daniels case. you want to bring the defendant of justice where you can. host: ok. let's hear from edward in michigan, democrats line. hello. caller: yes, the whole idea of this hush money to the two women, to stormy daniels and the playmate, the whole idea was to keep those affairs out of the news so that the voters would not have that information in 2016.

because trump lost the popular vote in 2016. it was an extremely -- well, it was a close in the electoral college. it was a nailbiter in the electoral college. trump lost the popular vote. the whole effort, the payment, using the national enquirer or whatever, the whole idea was to keep this out of the news, cannot lose votes i assume trump had lost more women's votes he would have looked more like a philanderer or criminal. my guess would be if those two new stories had come out, the karen mcdougal and stormy daniels new stories had come out in 2016, trump would have lost the election by a larger margin, right? it was an important thing to keep those out. guest: if you are interested in any of this i really do recommend my book, because this

was an extremely important part of the trial. basically, you remember the situation with the access hollywood tape, where he was talking on tape about, you know, you can grab them by the you know what. if you are famous. and this came out in october 2016. this whole case is about the 2016 election. this is about him affecting the outcome of the 2016 race in illegal ways. the access hollywood tape comes out and at that point if stormy daniels -- and trump plummets in the polls and only recovers because the subject changes to hillary's emails.

people, they do not care that much about access hollywood after he says milani's advice -- milani's advice, that is just locker room talk. if karen mcdougal had come out and said, it was not locker room talk, this is what he did to me, he would have lost the election. it is hard to see how he would have survived that. trump was desperate to pay this hush money. he got michael: to do it and then that he got michael cohen to do it by pretending, falsifying records that michael: was just working for him in other capacities and that this money was not going for hush money. so, a lot of the case was really a paper trail.

it was not even reliant on michael:. who did lie about a lot of stuff. it was not even that reliant on his testimony because it was such a paper trail and other evidence that trump had engaged in this cover-up. which, by the way, covering up hush money is what nixon did. the cases are different, but there are also some similarities. hush money is not a minor thing, especially as the caller quite rightly indicated. a critical presidential election. maybe the most consequential in our history if you look at how trump is changing the country. it turned on this cover-up. host: let's go to bruce. bruce is in chicago. republican line. caller: i would like to ask the guest what his legal background is. he has expressed a lot of opinions on judge merchan being the next great supreme court justice, but anyway, i

appreciate the american reckoning and i just wondered if he is planning his book -- next book, taking money from our enemies abroad and distributing it through sham corporations and distributing it amongst his family? i just wonder if he had an answer for that and i wonder if that will be your next book if you are going to delve into the crime family of the bidens? guest: so, a couple of things. first of all, i'm not a lawyer that there have been many people that have covered trails for many years who are not lawyers. i had a retired judge who is a spectator in the courtroom who gives me a very nice blurb on my book. who i consulted with throughout the trial as well as a number of other lawyers who were covering it with me and were in my group

of guys hanging out in the courtroom. and, you know, i am plenty of -- plenty knowledgeable about the issues in this case. as far as the biden family goes, you know, hunter biden was prosecuted. and i think it was wrong for president biden to pardon him. but the allegations you just, you know, mentioned, of this being a crime family, there has never been any evidence of that that has been presented anyway. that is all just right wing spin and in some cases lies. and to just throw these charges around based on camino, allegations which in the case of some of the russians have been retracted, these allegations of what biden supposedly did in ukraine have been retracted, and

just to assume this man who i was very critical of, president biden, for running for reelection, i thought that was a historically wrong decision. and in american reckoning i tell the story for the first time about how nancy pelosi maneuvered him off of the ticket in july of this year. but to go from that legitimate criticism to just assuming that crazy conspiracy theories about joe biden are true, nobody has ever found any evidence to support them, i think does not contribute to the debate. host: we are in the middle of our author series here on "washington journal." jonathan alter is the author of "american reckoning: inside trump's trial - and my own." the new york post -- the

washington post had a recent editorial. it did make this point regarding judge marchand. the once-packed law -- mob of legal hit man gunning for donald trump is down to two halal out at holdouts. judge one marchand is refusing to count out -- while also refusing to sentence trump so he can finally appear. alvin bragg wants to keep the case on hold while trump serves a second term, fictive the putting a ticking time bomb over the sitting president's head four years. marchand and bragg ought to wake up, drop the pitchforks, and focus on serving the cause of justice. what do you think of that assessment? guest: needless to say, i don't agree with it. it is a right wing assessment. they were not in the courtroom. they did not see that judge marchand -- i'm not suggesting he deserves to be on the supreme court. but he did an excellent job in this case. very judicious. backed up all of his decisions

and so, this is not, you know, a ticking time bomb. it is actually rather common for cases to be frozen when a criminal has been prosecuted in various jurisdictions. sometimes sentencing is postponed. in one of those jurisdictions even for years. there is no statute of limitation. i hope that judge marchand does go with alvin bragg, postpone the sentencing until after trump leaves office. that seems, to me, to be an appropriate response. but to just throw it out because camino, an election went one way, that is very important, and i do think that what i call the big jury, the electorate, that their view on this needs to be very much taken into consideration in the way we assess its historic importance.

so, basically the american people have decided basically, n people have decided and i accept their verdict that trump's legal problems should not prevent him from being president of the united states. but they didn't vote for a judge to dismiss a jury's verdict. the jury deliberated and they were very attentive and in some cases through binoculars which one juror didn't appreciate me looking at him and checking him out through my binoculars. i really wanted to see how they were reacting to the testimony. they rendered their time and their at times physical safety. none of the jurors have come forth to write a book the way i did. they are understandably afraid.

mitt romney said a number of senators were afraid for voting for impeachment because of their physical safety. there is a physical factor here. the jurors i think were inspiring and helped restore my faith in our system in the way they handled themselves. and just say because of the verdict should be thrown out because the judge is a hitman or prosecutor is a hitman. how about the jury? are they hit men and women or did they listen to the evidence and decide that donald trump should become a convicted felon? i believe it is the latter. host: let's go to david in michigan, democrats lined for jonathan alter. caller: back in late september, early october of this year, the supreme court told all 50 states

that it was ok for them to purge as many valid votes as they wanted. 144 million votes for president should have been at least 100 78 million votes because 30 million teenagers turned 18 years old by 2024 and last voting, 2020, 100 55 million voters voted. this time only 144 million voters voted and it should have been about 170-175. that is how trump won because the supreme court told all 50 states to purge vote. i think vice president harris

should not certify votes on january 6 and let's see what happens. what do you think? thank you. guest: thanks for the call. i don't agree with that pier and she should very much certify the selection pretty was legitimate. if people are interested in my views on why donald won, i wrote a long article on my sub stack newsletter called "old votes," because i'm old boat, 10 different reasons why i think trump won the election. and actually, the supreme court decision is not one of them. a dampened turn out with reasons that had to do with way beyond the purging of certain voter rolls. there were two main reasons why

turnout was lower than it was four years ago. the first is that during that covid election, it was super easy to vote by mail. so millions of people, a good amount of younger voters, they didn't have to do anything and a number of estates sent them ballots automatically in the mail and it was much easier to vote in 2020 for reasons beyond the purging, which i am not minimizing. the second is that as canvassers in both parties found, there was diminished enthusiasm on the democratic side. there was more enthusiasm for trump ultimately than there was, at least at the margins, for him. some were extremely enthusiastic but not enough, particularly in the latino community where there

were huge shifts from democratic to republican, especially in male latino voters. there were a number of factors because i'm talking about the trial today at a number of factors beyond what you mentioned that were decisive. but imitating what trump wanted in 2020 and have the vice president not certify the election, that is a ruinous idea. this is what we really need to avoid in this country is after the electoral college is met and clear with the election returns are, even if they are extremely disappointing, we have to accept them and do what we can after donald trump becomes president again to hold him accountable

for his acts that hurt the economy and they started just yesterday on christmas where his tweet untruth social was unhinged. he is not saying merry christmas, everybody. he is attacking enemies and doing all kinds of very nonpresidential things. we are going to be back in this and it is going to be a bumpy ride. we need to focus on that rather than looking backwards at this election. host: on the republican line is built in connecticut. caller: clearly the doj, in my opinion, has been weaponized and it is a democrat doj, against trump. guest: the doj that prosecuted hunter biden? host: go ahead, call her.

-- caller. caller: just that the charge was changed from a misdemeanor to a felony shows what a sham this is . it is for trump. this is the type of prosecution that is done in third world countries. and if you look at the hush money issue, trump put it under legal expenses and i am asking you, what did john edwards and bill clinton put their hush money under? can you please apprise me on that. host: that is built in connecticut. guest: in answer to the first question come you talked about weaponizing the justice department. this is the manhattan d.a. not the department of justice that brought the case. it is to they had one lawyer for the that help them out and as we are waiting for the verdict, rudy giuliani's son talked about

how wrong that was in was never done before. in fact, it was quite common for doj to help out in a big case. this case was brought by the manhattan d.a. the decision to bump it up to a felony, which trump did not contest. he made many emotions but didn't make a single motion, his lawyers didn't make a single motion bumping it up from a misdemeanor to a felony which is done in many cases involving business fraud. this was not some unique case to bump this up from a misdemeanor to felony. aggravating conditions apply and been upheld by higher courts. a lot of the armchair legal analysts, many of whom didn't

spend a day in the courtroom and overflow spent one or two days there didn't read the motions and the judges decisions, and they are frankly not as informed as i am about the legal complexities of this case. i believe it will all be upheld on appeal. as to what bill clinton, who was by the way impeached -- he mentioned john edwards, he was prosecuted. see make it sound as if clinton and edwards got away scott free and by the way, there is not any evidence on them coding hush money payments as legal expenses. their cases are printed, somewhat, from the trump case. each of these cases vary a little bit. this one was very fascinating,

not just because of the legal complexities but because of the testimony about basically a conspiracy to change the result, to affect the results of the 2016 election, which by the way it is illegal under new york state law which also came into this case. so there were a number of statutes that were applied and it is why so many people agree with the judge that there was overwhelming evidence of guilt in this case. host: petty in new jersey, atlantic city. caller: good morning, and thank you c-span for taking my call. i so appreciate being able to ask a journalist to this question which is my theory

because i watch a lot of news and you don't get to talk to the journalists. so my theory is, i feel that the media kind of elected donald trump. the immediate with the help of the democrats who did nothing but bash president biden and focus everything in a negative way kind of normalize mr. trump. i am from atlantic city. and there is so much to write about donald trump, how he treated people and how he sued people. he never shook the hands of a construction worker, and that media should have been reporting things like his womanizing.

i don't understand how somebody could be elected but i feel the media kind of elected him. i think of a walter cronkite moment where he would take the piece of paper and say what president trump said say it, no, i am sorry, this is a light and throw it in the trashcan. when you normalize somebody where it starting with the cnn town hall, you can't normalize somebody who is the salesman. host: i think we got your point. we will our guest answer. guest: i think you are onto something. i am reluctant when you talk about the media as a whole because there were a number of good stories and a number of bad stories. so going back to the days when i was a media critic in the 1980's and 1990's, you need to draw

distinctions. i agree there was a tremendous amount of misinformation and normalization and the misinformation resulted from a new structure to our media and a lot of people didn't get basic information because they were just following twitter and had their views validated and they weren't getting some of the reporting you mentioned. in other cases they were getting at with a lot of spin. there was spin on the left too. but i also think there is a numbing because with trump, everything he think he has touched bottom he crashes through the floor and there is something else. and we have now been through this since 2015, 10 years into

what i think historians will call the trump era. and take what he did in the last couple of days. he called up wayne gretzky, the canadian hockey star and urge him to run for premier of canada so we could have one of his other people so he could run canada and referring to canada as a state, like he called trudeau the governor. he is trying to threaten panama on the canal, which was legally turned over to them 25 years ago and they have done a great job managing it and said they will always continue to manage it and not let the chinese or anybody else take it over, including the

americans. he was returning to issues that have been resolved and just acting in non-normal ways. so when the caller talks about normalization, she is really onto something. this is what we have to be on guard or in the next four years is that he said he was suspend the constitution in certain cases and use the government to seek retribution quote unquote against his enemies. we should be normalizing views as we move forward. host: we don't have time to explore at all but when it comes to the media criticism, you're a recent piece looking at the abc news decision when it comes to the settlement. we got into the conversation as far as how the media as you see it in this case. guest: that case, the abc news

case involved george stephanopoulos interfering nancy mace who had been a victim, she said, of rape. and stephanopoulos said there was a finding in the civil case in new york, not the case i covered, involving e. jean carroll to recovered $83 million because the jury believed that donald trump had committed sexual abuse against her. the judge in that case said that even though new york law defined that you could generally rate. so stephanopoulos used that term and trump suit and instead of letting it go to trial or

otherwise settling for an apology, abc news and dizzy which because of its experience with rhonda this laura, very much needs to get on trump's right side. they caved and settled where it most accounts they would have it won this case that was another act of what experts on dictatorship, anticipatory obedience, obeying in advance. this is what strongmen all over the world rely on, obeying in advance. you don't have to throw people in jail or do all kinds of things we associate with dictators because a lot of people will just bow down to them in advance so they don't get hurt. some of this has been wrongly

portrayed. but when you fold your cards, if you are a news organization and when you don't really have to, you send a signal that people should censor themselves, not just be careful as all journalists should, you don't want to libel and slander each other but what it does is sends a message to not aggressively cover the president and going back to the 1790's to the george washington administration, we have relied on the press which is the only industry it mentioned in the constitution to aggressively cover the president. we really should not be doing things like folding our tents in

advance that make it harder for us to do our jobs. host: washington monthly.com is where you can find that article. let's hear from robert in florida, democrats line. caller: hello. i wanted to ask him what his opinion is regarding why so many people of the electorate voted for an obvious con artist. of the leading trial in nuremberg when he was interviewed by the journalists and asked how did the nazis, such a small group of the nazis managed to persuade the german people to eliminate a major minority, the jewish people, the

handicapped and others and persuade them to take over europe which obviously was a hopeless calls ultimately and cost the german people so much in life and reputation. in the answer that hermann geary who was appointed by kittler to be his second in command of the third reich, he answered very briefly, lies. if you tell the same lie often enough, time and time again, little by little people begin to believe it. i am wondering what your opinion is as to how this obvious con artist managed such a major portion of the electorate and whether or not technology changes in technology, the disappearance of small-town newspapers that you people used to rely upon in the replacement of this form of media with the

social media run by billionaires, essentially, such as the one trump has made. host: got your point. why do you think people were willing to look past mr. trump's legal issues? why do you think that is? guest: i think that immigration and inflation just became more important for voters than trump's legal situation and i understand that. inflation hits everyone at -- and is in some ways worse politically for an income back. i wrote a biography of jimmy carter which the cover is right there and it destroyed his presidency because it hits 100% and unemployment hits fewer people.

inflation is disastrous politically and really hurt biden and harris. immigration, biden didn't start soon enough. and trying to address this problem. those were more important for voters. i get that and get that your sense of what the united states should be in terms of inflation may take precedence over even choice or whether the president is a con man. i share the caller's puzzlement about this. i think historians will be grappling with this for generations. and a good chunk of this book is about grappling with the exact question the caller asked,

including where the comparisons don't make sense and with they make a lot of sense and where it trump himself has brought hitler's into the conversation and mussolini. i tried to put trump into context with the strongmen and why do they succeed? because demagoguery works when you play on people's fears, it works. not all the time but a lot of the time. and what we had never seen before it was the demagogue who told lies and played on people's fears at the very top. we had joe mccarthy, huey long, one republican, one democrat, and other local or state demagogues in our history but nobody at the level of trump. the color also raised a really important point.

so local news, and i made a documentary for hbo to find local journalists and local news are the loans of democracy and have been since the formation of the republic. if you are not informed you cannot make good decisions at the polling place. all of the country local newspapers are closed and some have been replaced by local websites but not at the same level. you can actually draw a map of news deserts with a don't have any daily local newspaper. so is alarming because democracy requires at least a semi-informed electorate.

i am not saying that trump voters were not informed. in many cases they were very informed, like a lot of viewers today. they chose to vote on different issues and that is the right. i do think it is hard to convince people if they are not getting the news. there was an amazing clip this fall of sarah mark talking to a guy in an maga help is a veteran -- hat is a veteran. they asked support him and general kelly said that was a fascist and the secretary of defense was terrible for veterans and that were dead and

say they were and losers and this is firsthand testimony. sarah kelly is telling the guy and he said, he has been really pro-trump and he said i never heard that and never knew that general kelly and general matus said this because he is just in his silo and not watching c-span when democrats are on and not watching anything except fox and listening to talk radio and whatever his sources of information are. he didn't even hear that term had -- trump cap called were dead suckers and losers. if you believe that the longest chief of staff just made that up, you would have to be pretty far to believe that trump never said that.

so i just mentioned that to give some sense of how siloed our information has been and i deal with this. host: this is from jay in florida, a republican line. caller: regret that i was less person to call and i got to listen to you. if you do research on this author, you can see that his bias is worn on his sleeve and it is here on the show. it is disturbing to see that what i guess they call trump derangement syndrome has been ticked up a notch or two by this author. you have quoted a lot of things that are not true but the worst thing is, as i have been listening to this entire program, you have called him a racist, a con artist and have compared them to kittler. these are the things that divide

america. and if you want to continue to divide america, keep writing books like this and have c-span promote it. this is ridiculous, c-span. stop the hate. host: check the record of what we put on the air as far as what what mr. trump -- where mr. trump is concerned. guest: i have been a columnist for 40 years. i'm not like reporter for the associated us. you can call that bias. i call it opinion backed by reporting and fact. you talk about hate and you say that is people like me who are introducing hate. i write in my book about i had relationship with john, a republican. the fact of people like me are introducing hate and as a hatemonger for a decade, this is not really i think a fair-minded

assessment of who the major divisive figure in our politics is. donald trump yesterday on christmas had an opportunity to have a unifying message and say we are one country and wish everybody a merry christmas but instead voicing grievances and spitting out hate self with all due respect to the caller, it takes a lot of nerve for trump's supporters to say it is the critics who began the hate. that is not an under arranged assessment -- an underanged. but in terms of trump i have thought for a long time he is a

con man and he threatened to sue me for something i said that was true in a documentary. host: jonathan alter's his book is this week, c-span digs into the

archives discussing policy, politics and the relationship with the president-elect. friday, president electrons nominee for education secretary, linda mcmahon. our marathon continues on sunday with tulsa gabbard and then on tuesday, december 31 we will hear from dr. mehmet oz, nominee for fbi director cash patel. watch trump nominees in their own words this week at 8:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 2. attention middle and high school students across america. it's time to make your voice heard. studentcam documentary contest 2025 is here. this is your chance to create a documentary to inspire change, raise awareness and make an impact your 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 including a grand prize of $5,000. this is your opportunity not only to make an impact, but also be rewarded for your creativity and hard work. enter yourubmissions today. scan the code or head to studentcamrg for all the details on how to enter. the deadline is january 20, 2025. for more than 45 years, c-span has been your window into the workings of our democracy, offering live coverage of congress, open forum: programs and unfiltered access to the decision-makers that shaped our nation and we've done it all without a cent of government funding. c-span exists for you, viewers who value transparent, no spin political coverage and your support helps keep our mission alive.

as we close out the year we are asking you to stand with us. your gift, no matter the size goes 100% toward supporting c-span's vital work, helping ensure that longform, in-depth and independent coverage continues to thrive in an era where it is needed more than ever. visit c-span.org/donate or scan the code on your screen to make your tax-deductible contribution today. together we can ensure that c-span remains a trusted resource for you and future generations. with the close of the 118th congress, several dozen lawmakers are retiring. one of them is michigan democratic senator debbie stabenow. first selected the house of representatives in 1996, she successfully ran for senate in 2000, becoming the first woman to represent michigan in the upper chamber. during her tenure she served as the top democrat on the agriculture committee