♪ host: it is thursday, february 13. president trump and vladimir putin spoke by phone and have agreed to begin talks on ending

the war in ukraine. president trump spoke to ukraine's president zelenskyy in a separate call. defense secretary hegseth met with nato allies in brussels. he ruled out nato membership for ukraine and said ukraine's objective to regain all territory loss to russia is unrealistic. we are getting a reaction to those developments. here is how to call us. republicans,. --republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can send a text to (202) 748-8003. we are on social media. facebook.com/cspan and x, @cspanwj. welcome to the two hour washington journal. the house is set to come in at 9:00 a.m. this morning. we start with a portion of

president trump at the oval office answering questions about his conversation with vladimir putin. [video] >> when and where do you plan a meeting with vladimir putin? >> no. we had a great call. they lasted for a long time. over an hour. i had with president zelenskyy a good call after that. we are on our way to getting peace. president putin wants peace and president zelenskyy wants peace. i'm far -- it is a vicious war, heavily 1.5 million soldiers killed. i have pictures you would not believe. you would not believe what you have to look at. young, beautiful soldiers that are decimated. it will be nice to and it

immediately -- end it in medially. people -- immediately. people did not know what president putin's thoughts were. he wants to see it ended also. host: we are talking about ukraine this morning. the developments around that. nbc news. mark fogel, the american school teacher released yesterday. this is the news about what was exchanged. a russian moneylender to be freed in exchange for fogel. he will leave behind $100 million in digital assets in the united states as part of the deal to free him. the trump administration has agreed to send a convicted moneylender back to russia -- money launderer back to russia in exchange for fogel. he's an american custody and

awaiting transport to russia. it's expected to happen by the end of the week. as part of the deal to free him, he leaves behind $100 million worth of digital assets in the united states. that is a picture of him. he was arrested in greece. you can read the rest of that at nbcnews.com. sid first in upper marlboro, maryland. caller: good morning. i support president trump's cease-fire deal. pete hegseth is right. ending this war. there's a lot of russians in ukraine. there is no reason for nato membership. the fact that at this point really the best way to end of war is just end what is going

on. i support president trump's strategy. they need to start giving us back somewhere earth metals. all that money we gave to ukraine. host: sid, this is what is -- this is what sid was talking about with rare earth metals. this is not coming up for me. we will get that for you. let's hear again from president trump talking about his conversation with russian president putin about the cease-fire. [video] >> we talked about the possibility -- i mentioned the cease-fire to stop the killing. i think we will end up getting a cease-fire in the not-too-distant future. >> do you expect ukraine -- do you view ukraine is an equal member of the peace process? >> interesting question.

they have to make peace. there people are being killed. they have to make peace. i said that was not a good war to go into. they have to make peace. that is what i think. host: that was the president yesterday. we are taking your calls. sid mentioned rare earth minerals. i wanted to update you on that. u.s. treasury secretary met with zelenskyy to kickoff rare earth peace deal. this is scott bessent, the first u.s. official to visit ukraine. it says this. "bessent will hold discussions about critical minerals. energy resources and the future of state owned enterprises, according to a source. the announcement came after trump started floating eddie of exchanging mineral access for continued u.s. security support

on february 3. we are putting in hundreds of billions of dollars, trump said. they have great rare earth. i want security of the rare earth, and they are willing to do it. zelenskyy reacted by stating he supported the idea. "we are open to the fact that all this can be developed with fair partners who are both helping us to protect our land and pushing the enemy back with their weapons and sanctions packages. this is absolutely fair." that is what zelenskyy said on for every five." -- february 5." stanley from arkansas. caller: thank you for taking my call this morning. we do need to stop that war. the rare earth minerals, that's very important for trade and everything and for peace and everything.

we need to stop this were quick. another subject. this rev. al sharpton, i don't know where he got his paperwork. he is not surely know reverend when he talks on tv -- no reverend when he talks on tv. maxine waters is worse than he is. every time you see her on tv she starts riots. for a person only making $170,000 a year, where did she get that $5 million mansion? host: back to ukraine. here is democrat marcy kaptur. she was on the floor of the house yesterday to reiterate ukraine needs to be at the negotiating table in its original border has to be maintained. [video] >> lome zelenskyy -- bloated near zelenskyy has stated a

negotiated 2 -- bloated mere working with our closest and most valued allies in nato and the free world, the united states must do everything possible to bring full liberty to ukraine. and move russia back into her own borders. the international community must safeguard those borders and those negotiations are yet to come. we have some hope this morning if we are serious about making sure the dividing line between the free world and the suppressed world is clearly drawn and safeguarded. host: getting your calls this morning on ukraine. rush in pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning. you are the last person i talked

to on c-span months ago. i was still -- i was for bobby kennedy. i was up in the air. people always say i beat around the bush. you said, ok, who are you going to vote for? host: who did you vote for? do you not want to say? caller: trump. bobby will be confirmed here sooner or later. they are supposed to do it today. host: that's at 10:30. caller: on the ukraine thing, i listened -- i don't watch a lot of tv. i'm a big tucker carlson fan. i followed him for 26 years. when fox got rid of him -- all the podcasts have been fired from fox. napolitano.

o'reilly, megyn kelly. mainly i listen to napolitano. he had on professor jeffrey sachs from columbia. he gives the best description of all the world history the united states has been in. i even knew this one. in 2014, under obama, newland -- host: victoria nuland. caller: we overthrew -- there was a guy. we overthrew the government in 2014 to put another guy in because the guy that was in there wanted to be too close to russia and shift away from the eu, this and that. we got this other guy in.

i don't want to get into stupid stuff, the burisma thing, we know what happened there. i believe trump when he says the war would have never happened. everybody says he is a trump supporter -- you know, putin lover or something. heck. i believe him. i think he doesn't want to see people get killed. i don't either. i with vietnam. i'm 73 years old. host: do you think ukraine should be at the table or should this just be negotiated between the u.s. and russia? caller: no. ukraine will be at the table. zelenskyy was at the white house. it may have been either before trump was even elected. i'm sure zelenskyy -- here's the thing. zelenskyy made a comment less than a week ago.

the united states has given us [indiscernible] hello? caller: we are here. caller: they have given us $177 billion. i've only seen $77 billion of it. there is a lot of the stuff going on here, not just with the ukraine but with everything. they are not going to get that land back. host: you say they are not going to get it? caller: the one that borders russia, those are a lot of russian people. they are not going to get that land back. i think hegseth might've said that yesterday. host: he said pre-2014 borders are unrealistic. here is what zelenskyy said in response. "i had a long and detailed conversation with president trump. i appreciate his genuine

interest in our shared oppounities and how we can bring about real peace together. we discussed many aspects diplomatic, military, economic. president trump informed me about what putin told him. we believe america's strength, together with ukraine and our partners is enough to push russia to peace." john in easton, pennsylvania. caller: hi. the reason the war started is when nato was formed, ok, poland and then were moved to the other side of the wall to communist europe. ukraine was not included. neither was crimea and those other countries here. host: you are saying ukraine was not included in nato? caller: yeah. the border.

if it was, putin would never have been able to cross the border into ukraine. they would have been a nuclear stockpile there. there would have been a military presence there and everything else. putin -- host: there was nuclear weapons as part of the soviet union. they gave them up -- oh, on the american side. caller: right. europe, germany, all that. host: what are you thinking about? caller: we weren't there. ukraine was wide open. host: what do you think about what's going on now? caller: putin is getting old. pisa dictator. a -- he is a dictator. a dictator needs a place to go and is not a country in the world will take him except the united states. the minute trump was elected

that was his ticket to come here. he wants to get his hands on his money. putin has been stealing from the russian people for years. he has trillions of dollars alone the freaking world. that is all trump wants to do, get his hands on that. putin will be living in this country and we won't even be knowing it. who knows? we might have a chance of getting the rock history --democracy in russia again. host: erica new hampshire. -- eric in new hampshire. caller: that putin coming to america thing, he has money to go anywhere in the world. anyways, it's a great development. it took trump a month. he said he would do it overnight but you have to give him credit. he did it in about a month. i think that's a great thing. one of the things that will come out of this, our funding of

the ukraine effort. we sent billions over there. we can't even reconcile our own dod books. as has been well acknowledged. for eight years we don't know the money goes. how do you think they'll end up with the billions of dollars we sent to ukraine for a country half bond out? -- bombed out? he answered more questions in the last month than joe biden did in his 40 years combined. you know what? i'm glad that the fort liberty is back to fort bragg. second airborne all the way. host: jeffrey in henderson, nevada.

democrat. caller: hi. host: go right ahead. what do you think about ukraine? caller: i think ukraine is fighting for their freedom. we in america stood for freedom. we should back ukraine as long as they are being attacked by another country. i thought we stood for that. give me liberty or give me death. i think ukraine is doing a good job fighting for their freedom. host: do you think ukraine should give up land in exchange for peace? caller: no. no. host: how does the war end? does it just keep going? caller: russia should stop attacking them. russia started the work. russia should pack up and go back home. host: how do you get russia to do that? caller: you continue to fight them as long as they are being attacked.

like if somebody came into your home and taking over your home. lay down your arms, i'm taking over your home. your life belongs to mina. -- your wife belongs to me now. host: let's see what pete has egseth said about the administration's approach. [video] >> we are at a critical moment. as the were approaches its third anniversary, our message is clear. the bloodshed must stop. this war must end. president trump has been clear with the american people and many of your leaders. stopping the fighting and reaching an enduring peace is a top priority. he intends to end the war by diplomacy and bringing both russia and ukraine to the table. the u.s. department of defense

will help achieve this goal. we will only end this devastating war and establish a durable peace by coupling ally strength with a realistic assessment of the battlefield. we want, like you, a sovereign and prosperous ukraine. but we must start by recognizing returning to ukraine's pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective. chasing this illusionary goal will only prolong the war and cause suffering. a durable peace must include robust security guarantees to ensure the war will not begin again. this must not be minced 3.0. that said, the united states does not believe that nato membership for ukraine is a

realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement. instead, any security guarantee must be backed by capable european and non-european troops. if these troops are deployed as peacekeepers to ukraine at any point, they should be deployed as part of a non-native mission -- non-nato mission and not covered under article v. there must be robust international oversight of the line of contact. as part of any security guarantee there will not be u.s. troops deployed to ukraine. host: defense secretary yesterday in brussels. we want to know what you think about that. the numbers are on your screen. brian in venice, florida. independent. caller: thank you for having me on. i'm really concerned about this. i feel as if we are almost living in britain in the 1930's.

pete hegseth, he shows up. the used to show up at work drunk all the time. now he is secretary of defense. all the republicans are terrified of trump so they just vote for all of his people. hegseth is like having neville chamberlain. peace for the world. he held of this big piece of paper coming back from berlin talking to at all filler -- ad olf hitler. host: what you think it will look like? caller: i think putin will get everything he wants. he's like trump. if their lips are moving, they are lying. they will destroy ukraine. i don't trust him. host: what happens if ukraine is destroyed? caller: well, he will be a

bigger threat to the rest of eastern europe. especially poland. places like that. the data rinse i hear coming from maga supporters. i'm sorry, maga supporters. you think you know all this history. i'm sorry but you don't. you watch what happens with this. not only that, trump wants us to practically pull out of nato. that is what kept peace for so many years in europe. that is crazy. that is insane. we can't have that. trump, he just thrives on ignorance and anger. ignorance and anger. the united states -- i never dreamt in my life a president of the note states would give up everything to a dictator --

united states would give up everything to a dictator like putin. please wake up, people . host: chevy chase, maryland. republican line. jim. caller: good morning. i'm tired of these democrats calling up. trump does not want us out of nato. he just wants those countries to pay their fair share. i love what trump is doing. he's in there a month and has done so much on all these issues that are so important. the border, taking care of the wars. in terms of ukraine war, i feel the solution would be to have russia keep the land they have occupied but have the ability for ukraine to join nato. i know pete hegseth says it can't be done but that's the solution. if ukraine was part of nato,

that would an attack from russia and stabilize the area. host: you think russia would accept that? that is kind of a red line for them. caller: it is a red line but they could keep the land they have occupied. it is a win-win for both countries. that would stabilize the area. russia would not be able to go into ukraine because the nato countries would defend him. host: we have got on the screen the ukraine and area we are talking about. russia controls all the area in pink. there is a sliver of land in russia in the kursk region the ukrainians are controlling at this point. do you think they should be allowed to keep that? caller: yeah. that can be worked out. the main point is that russia -- i don't think they want to give

up the land they have occupied. pete hegseth said that would not be a point. it is clear if you tell russia they can keep what they have, but in the future you will not be able to attack ukraine anymore, the ukrainians would be happy. they know the area would be stabilized. that would be a solution to this area. host: let's talk to james in newark, new jersey. independent. caller: love c-span. love y'all. [indiscernible] hello? host: we are listening. caller: good. i really think it's a good deal. i know [indiscernible]

i think it is a good deal. host: we don't know what the deal is yet, james. what do you think it would be? caller: john mccain in early 2000, he turned against me for that. what should happen to ukraine? the russian people, etc., etc. yeah. [indiscernible] the russian ukrainians should move to eastern ukraine. host: let's hear from more from

secretary hegseth yesterday. [video] >> safeguarding european security must be an imperative for european members of nato. as part of this europe must provide the overwhelming share of future lethal and nonlethal aid to ukraine. members of this contact group must meet the moment. this means donating more ammunition and equipment, leveraging comparative advantages, expanding your defense industrial base, and importantly, leveling with your citizens about the threat facing europe. part of this is speaking frankly with your people about how the threat can only be met by spending more on defense. 2% is not enough. president trump has called for 5%. i agree. increasing your commitment to your own security is a down payment for the future.

a down payment, as you said, mr. secretary, of peace through strength. we are here today to directly and on a big u.s. leaks press -- unambiguously express that which keeps the u.s. from being focused on the security of europe. the united states faces consequential threats to our homeland. we must and we are focusing on security of our own borders. we also face a peer competitor in the communist chinese. with the capability and intent to threaten our homeland and core national interest in the indo-pacific. the u.s. is referred ties in -- is recognizing the reality of scarcity and making the resource trade-offs to ensure deterrents do not fail. host: i want to share an

editorial from bloomberg. get your reaction to it. "talking to putin is not enough to end the ukraine war. he will not negotiate seriously until the cost of fighting are steeper. later this week, white house on voice plan to discuss with european counterparts had in the nearly three year war ukraine. for any negotiations to produce a durable settlement, the u.s. and its allies must show they are willing to enforce it. to date, president putin demonstrated no serious interest in peacemaking. russia controls about a fifth of ukraine and believes that holds the upper hand on the battlefield. putin set out to subjugate the whole country, walking away with parts of four regions after taking more than 600,000 casualties would hardly be a triumph. he denied ukraine's sovereignty and set preconditions for talks, including forcing ukraine to effectively disarm and abandon

its nato ambitions designed to make it easier to restart the fighting." you can read the rest of that at bloomberg. we will talk next to catherine. plymouth, massachusetts. democrat. caller: good morning. i was calling in reference to donald trump seemingly siding with putin on the settlement. i am as old as donald trump. he's three much older than me. i don't understand why he doesn't remember chris jeff at the u.n. -- kurschev at the u.n. he was saying we will bury you. my feeling is that everything donald trump is doing is to bow down to putin. putin started the war. i'm so sorry that he lost 600,000 troops. he devastated the ukrainian economy and the population there. i think about out to his demands

would be giving into him. i do believe when kruschev retired, he lived in florida. i'm wondering if that was -- i was laughing when her the guy saying when putin retires he will move to the united states. i'm sure trump will have a spot for him at mar-a-lago. i say stand firm, and unfortunate for the united states with donald trump there. i don't know what the solution will be. i just say he should bring up the words of kruschev, we will bury you, cap remind himself of that before he makes deals with putin. thank you very much. host: a couple of things for your schedule later. this is at 9:00 a.m. today. the senate will have the vote on kashatel's nomination to be fbi director. 9:00 a.m., the vote for kash

pa the senate judiciary committee. that is not the fullate vote. that is the senate judiciary committee vote. nominee as education secretary's a mchon testifies at her confirmation hearing before the senate health educa committee. she led they deing with counder of world wrestlingsirst entertainment. that is 10:00 a.m. eastern live on c-spa both you can s at c-span now and online at c-span.org. rfk junior is said to have his confirmation vote at 10:30 a.m. this morning. that will be followed by a vote on brooke rawlins as agriculture secretary. be sure to stay with the c-span networks for all of those.

chris, virginia, republican. caller: good morning. i have enjoyed the show this morning. i'm so entertained by these democrats talking about trump's lining up with putin. the ukrainian invasion happened on joe biden's watch. all these putin aggressions happened when democrats are in the white house. if you want to talk about who is lining up with putin, they allowed these things to occur. donald trump is going to fix that. the american people have decided he's the only one that can do it. there is nothing funny going on other than donald trump fixing the problems that democrats created with their week leadership -- weak leadership. host: what do you think the deal should include her ending the war in ukraine? -- for ending the war in ukraine? caller: there will have to be

concessions of land. the important thing is the fighting needs to end. this president will do it. make no mistake. when he does, the democrats will have some problem with it. lives will be saved. the world will end. donald trump will do it. host: josephine in livingston, new jersey. independent. caller: good morning. unfortunately, when you get older you have been there, done that. observe what's going on. -- observed what is going on. i have to give a new name to trump. neville chamberlain. appeasement. he has already given of his chips. oh, you want to create the soviet union again? that is putin's words. he spent in power for 25 years

that he has been in power for 25 years -- he has been in power for 25 years. watch trump's insane little stunt. he's already told him you want that 20% of ukraine, you got it. you want to not to be in nato, you got it. he already told putin, what do you want? i will baldoni kiss your feet. you got it -- bow down and kiss your feet. he said he will make the soviet union again. he went into georgia. please trying to go into moldavia. -- he is trying to go into moldavia. the man is a killer. they have a thing on cnn. what is wrong with you? he is a murderer. you don't negotiate with a murderer. thank you.

host: david in lynchburg, virginia. democrat. caller: i see you got my house in the background there. i'm a vietnam that. [indiscernible] host: we are having trouble hearing you. say that again. caller: i said [indiscernible] host: david, call back on a better line. we are having trouble hearing. we definitely want to hear your comment. caller: i'm a vietnam vet. host: got it. frank in inglewood, florida. republican. caller: good job on the nonbiased reporting. first of all, i think these monday morning quarterbacks, the individuals calling and criticizing our president for what he's doing, they need to

spend more time on their knees and away from the tiki bar as far as i'm concerned. the president is doing his best to end the war and the massacre of so many young people that are dying in these wars in ukraine and russia. it has to come to an end. he said he was going to try to bring the war to an end. let him try to bring the war to an end. yes, they will be compromise. yes, there will be a loss of land. the war needs to come to an end, just like the hostages need to be released immediately. for president trump to do all this within three weeks is incredible. what i see is the hand of god moving across this country, moving across this world to carry out his will. guess what? god uses people to do it. if he uses trump, so be it. no matter if you like him or you don't like him, god is going to

have his will and way carried out in this country and the world. that is my take on this whole thing. host: this is politico. trump and putin stone you are -- stun your for peace plan with ukraine. the plant will start to be really after his defense chief warns that ukraine's peace goals will not be met. that is a politico.com. carol from sacramento, california. caller: i don't know how much i can contribute to everything but i do agree with one previous caller that the war has to end. i do have to commend, although i'm sure we will get a lot of nasty from people about biden giving equipment and artillery and the things they needed to try save ukraine's democracy.

the problem will be when you put two narcissists together, putin and trump. the man with the most money will win. that may not be good for us. we need to think that when we supported ukraine, i'm sure there were some deals about we will give you this trillions of dollars to save your democracy. we may have needed some other raw materials but don't you think that tesla and elon are going to need this raw materials? let's think about that too. we -- tesla raped australia for raw materials to make their batteries. now we will do that to ukraine because there is some deals going on that we are not aware of or things that are not being transparent? i don't know. i want the war to end is much as anybody in lives saved -- and

lives saved. i'm glad we did not center our troops over there and i don't we should. host: this is a posting on xy anders rasmussen,ormer nato secretary-general. "president trump is a businessman. he must know it would be a mistake to give away leverage before negotiation eve begins. peace through strength is a winning formula." we wonder what you think about that. whether the defense secretary should have said immediately that ukraine would not get what it is looking for, their territorial integrity prior to 2014 or nato membership. jonathan, a democrat in north las vegas, nevada. what do you think about that? jonathan, you have got to talking into your phone. mute your tv.

jonathan, are you there? no. jim in grand forks, north dakota. republican. what do you think? jim? grand forks, north dakota. butch. temple hills, maryland. are you there? caller: yes. host: oh good. go ahead, butch. caller: i can't figure out that everybody see and know that trump is not honest about anything. he lies about everything. he didn't have the education to be president. yet these oligarchs are in place to destroy america. most republicans somehow for some reason do not understand

anything. thank you. host: marty in van buren, arkansas. republican. caller: good morning. my thoughts on it are reminding us how we got here. we say that trump is easy on putin and he is sympathetic. i think we forget putin's biggest problem with this thing is pushing nato towards his border. i would think of that as if china and north korea and russia had a military pact to come to each other's aid and they call canada and say we want you in. we would have an issue with that just like putin. i don't think his -- some of his concerns are to be brushed off by the u.s. i think trump is wise to hear

him out and consider. i don't think that the war is necessarily justified. i don't think -- since the 1990's, a chain of events has gone on that is far more complex that we can have any two-minute conversation. the best thing to do is to understand the history and what's going on rather than blaming biden or blaming trump or whoever. where we are now is more complicated than anyone listening in the radio will ever know. we are not in those closed-door meetings. host: let's talk to fritz in clarksville, tennessee. independent. caller: good morning. i can't believe the ignorance of people about this situation. my wife is russian. she was born in odessa, ukraine. we travel back and forth to russia a couple of times a year for the past 12 years or so.

the russian economy is doing great. there is new construction everywhere. they are not losing. they are not going to lose. as far as being worried about russian aggression, how is austria doing right now? that has been a neutral country since 1950's i believe. unaligned. russia never attacked -- the soviet union never attacked austria and they are doing fine. that is what they want ukraine to be. neutral. guys, they could have traded with russia, with the west, been independent and no problem. no, the net estate did a cook -- the united states today coup with victoria nuland and john mccain in that bunch. we started that war.

russia put a red line in the sand and said nodding ukraine. they put up with it in poland and the baltic states. host: you are not saying that russia was justified in invading ukraine? caller: absolutely they were. what will we had done if russia put -- china had put in -- tried to move new mexico and been on our border and make mexico part of some alliance? host: a defensive alliance, which is what nato is? caller: yeah. where they defensive when they bombed yugoslavia? host: all right. tulsi gabbard was sworn in yesterday as the director of national intelligence. i want to share with you what

mitch mcconnell said on why he voted no. he said, "the nation should not haveo worry that the intelligence assessments the president receives are tainted by a director of nl alarming lapses in judgment.of edwa snowden's treasonous portrayal -- betrayal of the united states and its activities endangered sources, methods, and lives. japan is among america's closest treaty allies and the risk of conflict in the region is t product of chinese aggression, not western thr inflation. unprovoked war of aggression against u threatens american interests and is the responsibility of vladimir putin. entrusting the coordination of the intelligence community to someone who struggles to acknowledge these facts is an unnecessary risk."

that was senator mcconnell, the only republican to vote against tulsi gabbard's domination. she's in route to munich to meet with allies there on her first trip, her first day. this is michael in madison, wisconsin. democrat. caller: i want to say that shows how stupid mcconnell is. he shouldn't be messing around with our money and our government. this whole pile of garbage that we have right now with -- i do want to start a war with the maga's but you asked for it and you got it. that is where we are sitting right now. host: looks like we lost him. butch in sandwich, illinois.

caller: good morning. i think we deftly need to end the war between ukraine and russia because it has cost us so many billions of dollars. i truly believe things are going to calm down, just like they are over there in israel. in five years, 10 years, it will be all over again. we are never going to be out of wars. it's a constant thing. i think the people in poland agree. they realize -- they rely on gas and oil from russia, delta? they are -- don't they? they are suffering too. one more quick thing please. host: go-ahead. caller: people are complaining

about the money being spent. it is the democrats and republicans both. they pass these 400 page bills. i wish you could show where ronald reagan said the bill is 10 pounds and this one is thousand pages or whatever. he said if you give me one more bill like this i will not sign it. we have to start passing these bills one at a time. thank you so much for your time. bye-bye. host: mike pence posted on x yester "ukraine will only be russian someday if the united stes abandons them to putin's brutal invasion as you just shen america strong, the world is at peace. stand firm. if ukraine falls, it's only a matter of time before russia

invades a nato ally." he was referring to news headline where trump says ukraine may be russian someday. that is on x. abigail in nashville, tennessee. independent line. caller: hello? host: what do you think about ukraine? caller: i find it very interesting the negotiations are between trump and putin. why isn't zelenskyy there? they will decide what putin wants and trump will tell zelenskyy here's the deal. why should trump and putin be negotiating without zelenskyy? the warden succumbed to an end

-- war needs to come to an end but trump and putin are looking for what they can get. trump especially with the raw materials that ukraine is rich in. they are weak. nobody in his cabinet that was voted in by everybody is qualified to be in the positions they are in, just like trump isn't. it is going to get a lot worse before the four years is over. we just hope our democracy will survive it. host: in other news, the new york post is reporting this headline. the department of justice announces lawsuit against new york governor hochul and attorney general james over sanctuary status.

that is in the new york post. roy in wake forest, north carolina. republican. caller: i have a question for you. why do all these democrats believe there are the strong ties between russia and donald trump? do you know? host: what do you think about that? caller: it is because of the faker russia, russia, russia hoax which was investigated and found out to be fake and purchased information from hillary or by hillary clinton. i think mccain even had something to do with it. it was investigated. that was all false information. is that not correct? host: go ahead with your comment. caller: well, you won't even agree to that? you correct republicans all the time. host: sandy in orlando, florida. democrat. caller: hi.

my dad was in world war ii. his brother was with patton going through. he helped to go into the camps and free some of the people that were -- the jewish prisoners. we all know trump is a draft dodger. he doesn't know anything about war. he did not want to go to work. he gave up -- to war. he coordinated an agreement with the taliban in afghanistan. what happened there? the other thing that bothers me is who is talking about the 10,000 kids that supposedly putin and russia took from ukraine? trump doesn't care about kids.

why doesn't he make that part of the deal, they get the 10,000 kids back? he won't even know how to do that because they will not have a way of tracing that. he doesn't care about kids. he doesn't care about the war. he wants to build some kind of hotel or property in russia. this is all just, you know, this has nothing to do with trump wanting to have peace in the world. he wants to have real estate in the world. that is my only comment. host: volker in minnesota. caller: good morning. about three years ago, i called about the same subject. i said first time in written history europe is united from finland to spain. never had that before in

history. to me, it's an indication, the trust towards the east bloc, that gets worn down. people get weak. sure, three years is a long time but we should think twice. our government here should think twice before making a deal with russia. yeah. i don't think they are trustworthy. my opinion anyway. host: this is steve in muskegon, michigan. republican. caller: how are you doing? host: good. caller: i have something to say. trump and the people he picked

-- trump and elon musk are businessmen. america is a business. as far as negotiations going on over there and all these wars, he is trying to negotiate two different wars. they were started under the biden administration. one was ukraine. they have a right to be in nato. i know that is a red line but we have enough power to stop them from going any further. they have already taken a fifth of ukraine. ukraine has taken some of russia. there will be a land of loss. there is no way trump can come in and try to bulldoze putin. one of the things that needs to be done is negotiating -- that lady was right. there are 10,000 kids were more taken.

they need to be released back to the ukraine. putin needs to be satisfied with what he's got. that the ukrainians -- let the ukrainians be ukrainians. they were russians. they didn't even really want to go to war. putin made him go to work. -- them go to war. we tried to defend is much as we could for ukraine by sending billions of dollars over there. this is got to come to an end. it doesn't matter if the democrats think [indiscernible] that is just an absolutely ridiculous clinton statement. that is something he has no interest in. he just wants the war to come to an end before becomes a world war iii. if it gets any closer to the europeans and the europeans go

to work, we will be drawn into that war. dave needs to stop. -- it needs to stop. host: this is what representative joe wsosaid on x. "a land swap is a fair deal. ukraian occupied russian territory for russian occupied ukrainian territory." that is all the time we have got in this segment. coming up, we will talk to two lawmakers about president trump's legislative agenda and congress' role. we have harriet hageman of wyoming, member of the natural resources committee, and later we have democrat glenn ivey of maryland of the appropriations committee. ground zero for government spending battles yet to come. we will be back. ♪

>> starting next week, watch c-span's new members of congress series, we speak about their early lives, previous careers, families, and why they decided to run for office. on monday our interviews include democratic congresswoman janelle bynum, the first african-american elected congress from oregon. >> my mother graduated in 1970 from one of the last segregated high schools in the state. in the country, rather. i think about all of the opportunities that were not afforded her coming out of segregation. and i bring that perspective to oregon, saying, you know, my mom was a rural kid who did not have a lot of opportunities, but i'm going to make sure i bring that forth for all of the kids in oregon.

>> watch numeraliz of congress next week, starting at 9:30 p.m. on c-span. ♪ >> democracy is always an unfinished creation. >> democracy is worth dying for. >> democracy belongs to us all. >> great responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies. >> american democracies is bigger than any one person. >> freedom and democracy must -- be constantly guarded and protected. >> we are still, at our core, a democracy. >> this is also a massive victory for democracy and freedom. ♪ >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse through our products,

apparel, books, home decor, and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan, and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. we are joined by representative harriet hageman, a republican of wyoming. come back to the program, congresswoman. guest: it is great to be here. host: he served on the judiciary committee, so i want to ask about the recent attacks by elon musk and other allies of president trump, attacking, essentially, the federal judiciary and saying they don't have the right to rule and that they should be investigated. elon musk saying that the judges should be impeached. what is your take on that? guest: i'm going to disagree

with your basic premise. i don't see it as an attack. we are able to criticize anyone in public service. whether they are in the judiciary or legislative branch. i think it is appropriate to criticize a decision if you disagree with it. as an attorney i have done that in the past. i don't think that is all that atypical. where i would agree with elon musk and president trump is, i find these decisions to be strange. reason i say that is, we have been just bombarded for years with the idea of this all-powerful executive branch, and that is the bureaucracy and administrative agencies, and the president has the right to do things such as under the last administration claiming that the president had the right to forgive billions of dollars or millions of dollars in student loans. hundreds of millions of student -- dollars in student loans, allowing the president to forgive student loans. they were doing that through the

department of education, and saying the president has the right to do that because he oversees the department of education. host: who said that? the judiciary blocked it. guest: they did, but there were many people in media who were comfortable with the idea that the president had the authority to do something through an agency that is contrary to what congress -- host: let's stick with the three branches of government. do you think the judiciary has overstepped its bounds? do you think there is any ambiguity as far as what their role is as compared to the president and congress? guest: it is not a matter of rules. they are defined by article 1, 2, and three. it is whether their decision is the right decision. that is what they are attacking, elon musk and the president, they are saying what these judges are saying, that their decisions are not legally sound. we all have the right to criticize or disagree with a judge if they issue a decision that we disagree with.

i don't have any problem with them saying these decisions are legally suspect and they should not stand. what are they going to do? they are going to do what we always do. they're going to appeal them. they are going to appeal them up through the process. the president has already said that. and that is the correct process to follow. host: the department of government efficiency, the subcommittee in the house led by representative marjorie taylor greene, held their first hearing yesterday. he covered it on c-span. if you missed it it is on our website. i want to play you a portion of the top committee democrat. this is representative melanie stansberry. she had some remarks, and then i want you to respond. >> i also want to point out that literally while we have been sitting here for almost two hours getting lectured on fiscal responsibility literally the republicans just released their plan to raise the debt limit.

while we were sitting here. and they want to raise it by $4 trillion. ok, guys. like, literally, i am just, like, without words. inflation is going up, you want to raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion, you want to cut medicare, you want to cut medicaid, you are talking about going after social security after promising you wouldn't. what the heck is going on here? we are not trying to take down elon musk as a businessman. this dude is literally breaking the law inside of the federal government, and for a party that is supposed to be the party of law and order, i really do not see you holding him accountable and doing your most basic constitutional responsibility in the separation of powers. host: what do you think, congresswoman? guest: well, i don't think she

understands the relationship with the debt ceiling and in terms of what we are doing in terms of the budget and what doge is doing. raising the debt ceiling is to pay the bills that have been incurred. i find it rather strange in light of the fact that we are only one month into this administration and we have got those coming due because of the last administration. so, we are raising the debt ceiling so we can pay the bills incurred by joe biden. i find it to be a very strange argument and i find it to be rather bizarre that she is attempting to equate cutting spending through doge and identifying programs we don't want, don't need, and should not be funding, with paying the bills that have been incurred. host: she also said that elon musk is breaking the law and that you, the republicans in congress, are not holding him accountable. guest: what i would ask is, how

is he breaking the law? no one seems to be asking that question. he has been appointed by the president -- again, just like any other appointee or special employee of the presidential office. he has been appointed and tasked with going in and looking at how the government is spending money. he is doing that. i cannot for the life of me figure out how that would be breaking the law. i think that is the question we need to be asking these folks. it is easy to throw things around. i would like to see the proof of how he is breaking the law. host: if you would like to join our conversation and ask representative harriet hageman any questions you can do so. she will be with us for about 20 minutes. the lines are republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. and independents, (202) 748-8002 . earlier this week a group of about 30 house democrats led by representative glenn ivey of

maryland -- he will be our guest after your segment -- they wrote a letter to the senate judiciary committee urging them to reject kash patel as fbi director. i will just read you a little bit of that. we will put it on the screen for folks to read. the nomination of mr. patel, an individual with almost no law enforcement exce and history of politically charged statements is clearly eak from tradition and one that deserves extensive sy as result. he has published a list of political appntments in his book and has promised shut down the fbi headquarters on his first day in office. the fbi director is not a position for an erratic political actor focused on retribution. he continues, but i would like you to respond to that. guest: i think the rhetoric and hyperbole is off the charts in terms of making those accusations. kash patel has extensive

experience in dealing with the issues he will be as the head of the fbi. one of the things to understand is that prior to 9/11 it was the field offices for the fbi that did the vast majority of the work. there was obviously an fbi office in washington, d.c., but our field offices were fairly independent and they actually functioned much better. it was after 9/11 that the head of the fbi brought everything here at washington, d.c. and stockpiled all of the power here. if you talk to people who are long-term fbi employees they will tell you that is when the fbi became politicized. work back out where it should be and reducing the footprint in washington, d.c. i see as a very positive thing. what i think you are seeing is the caterwauling that we words dart to take power out of washington, d.c. and returning

it to the states where it belongs. again, there is nothing stated in that paragraph you just read that is highly accurate for what is happening. kash patel is absolutely qualified. host: including he has published a list of political opponents in his book? guest: i would like to see how that is written, because i think it is common to take things out of context. i don't know what they are referring to there. again, let's read the book and see what it says and compare it to the letter and i can comment on that. just commenting on what they say about what he allegedly wrote, i don't know if that is accurate. host: you have not read kash patel's book? guest: no. host: kyle is in buffalo, new york. hi, kyle. caller: good morning, c-span. thank you. i think the problem is some people are just nervous, i think, with the whole elon musk issue. whether it is illegal or not i

think the problem is you have a billionaire who is in charge of slashing government waste, fraud, and abuse. that is the problem. i don't know the legalities of it all. and that is pretty much what i really have to say. host: why does that bother you, kyle? caller: you know, i don't know if it is fake news or not, but you hear about his bride -- his background with apartheid south africa. any time were talking about a billionaire is just a tough situation because you know they did not get their money honestly, you know? i'm sure a portion of it is, but there is a lot of people you have to step on and crush to get into that type of position. so, i just think a lot of people are uncomfortable having a foreigner in charge with our

books, i think. host: let's get congresswoman hagemann to respond. guest: mr. musk is a naturalized citizen of america. i don't think there has been any legitimate allegations about apartheid or anything, him being associated with that in any way. apartheid ended in africa several decades ago. as bad as it was that has nothing to do with elon musk. whether he is a millionaire or billionaire is irrelevant to whether he is identifying waste, fraud, and abuse we should not be paying for. one of the things i find interesting about this discussion is when he identifies these programs in the way our money is being spent would bet you 80% to 90% of the people in this country in a debt, we are spending a trillion dollars a year on our interest payments?

our interest payments are higher than we are spending on defense and we are playing -- paying for what in guatemala? i think it is legitimate to pull up the hood, start wrangling around in their and see how money is being spent. that is not the wrong thing to do. host: want to ask you about something on the front page of the new york times this morning about elon musk. under trump shakeup benefits for trump -- for musk empire. firings undercut litigation and inquiries. it is talking about federal agencies affected by those moves have more than 32 continuing investigations pending, complaints, or enforcement actions. into mr. musk's six companies. you know he is a major government contractor as well.

does that give you pause? do you feel that might be -- that his actions with doge could be enriching himself? guest: identifying ways in which we are wasting money has nothing to do with enriching elon musk, number one. number two, it is very, very common -- host: isn't it convenient to have federal employees investigating you're fired and say, we are saving money? guest: i'm not seeing that happen, so i'm going to object to the premise of your question. i have a hard time believing things in the new york times after they pushed forward with the russia, russia, russia collusion hoax for years and have yet to apologize for all of the dishonesty and lies they told during the course of that, and many other things. the new york times is not known for being necessarily accurate in their reporting. that is number one.

and number two, having dealt with administrative agencies through 30 years of litigation and trial experience, it is not uncommon for them to bring enforcement actions against people and they have done absolutely nothing wrong. that is why we are innocent until proven guilty in this country. having an enforcement action or administrative proceeding does not mean a lot until it is resolved. host: patrick is a republican in huntington, maryland. good morning. caller: morning. how are you? host: fine. go right ahead. caller: i have been register republican my whole life, and having to vote this last cycle, it is part of my duty as a citizen, i had a hard time voting for him but i did so because of the things he promised. work is hard, and i have to pay bills. i have to feed a family of five.

he's not making things cheaper. things are more expensive, including gas. i don't see how routing through these departments and putting people on leave, especially you offer people buyouts, but the only ones taking them are the ones that were going to retire already, so you are actually costing us more money because these people are now getting nine months of free pay before they retire. and i heard yesterday that they are buying $400 million worth of armored tesla's from musk. that doesn't sound like cutting government waste and spending, buying electric cars that only have a 300 mile range. maybe you could explain why my tax dollars are going to be going towards buying electric cars that are armored? i'm assuming it would be the cybertruck. why would we be buying $500 million worth of those? host: congresswoman? guest: i'm not aware we are going to be buying $400 million

worth of armored tesla's. you indicated you heard that yesterday. i'm not going to deal in rumors, number one. number two, he has been in office one month. the inflation rate you are seeing is 3% year-over-year. again, that is not donald trump's fault, that is because of the profligate spending and the policies for the past administration. i think that it is very disingenuous to try to blame someone who has been there and attempting to cut the cost of government for an increase income -- increase in costs. the fact he is going in and attempting to cut that federal spending tells you we will eventually be able to bring down inflation down. as far as gas prices, is entirely -- entire energy policy is based on the fact that we need to be energy independent

and produced domestically. the increased cost is when we have to import energy. have all of the energy in the united states not only to meet our current demand, but into the future and be a net exporter. between our coal, oil and gas, uranium, etc. we have the ability to be energy independent. as we move toward that and continue or start yielding the infrastructure necessary, you will see prices decrease. host: congresswoman, this is what i found about patrick's question. this is fortune magazine that says state department might i-4 hundred million dollars worth of armored tesla's from doge head and tesla ceo elon musk. the state department included a line item in its procurement forecast by armored of electric vehicles valued at $400 million amid musk's cost-cutting spray. guest: i think we ought to look at that and see if something --

if that is something we should buy. i do think we ought to be buying electric vehicles, so i'm with you on that. [laughter] host: patrice is in spartanburg, south carolina. good morning. caller: first of all i love your jewelry. i'm so glad you are on here today. but let me go ahead, because -- host: move things along, please. caller: i think it is ludicrous folks are complaining about the transparency in government spending. what does this administration plan to do about child trafficking, the media, and then the trees that has gone on? -- treason that has gone on? host: the treason? could you be more specific? caller: there has been a lot of treason that has gone on with

this last administration. guest: in terms of the human trafficking and child trafficking it is one of the most horrific legacies we will have of the biden administration. they lost over 300 thousand unaccompanied children that came across the borders. what that means is they are working in sweatshops, being sex trafficked, or are no longer with us. it is a horrific state of affairs and it is the fault of both hhs and the department of homeland security. mayorkas and the head of hhs allowed 300,000 children at a minimum to disappear. the human trafficking over the last four years has been off the charts, and slid women and girls and children are the ones that have suffered. i know that mr. homan is working toward that. i know kristi noem has also made that a priority. it is a horrific situation. i have often said that mayorkas was the largest human trafficker in u.s. history and i will stand

by that statement. it was devastating what happened over the last four years. over 12 million illegal aliens have come into this country, any of them children under abusive situations, paying coyotes and the drug cartels, the human traffickers. it is a tragic and we need to get our arms around it. we need to make sure it never happens again. host: richard, a democrat in augusta, georgia. you are next. caller: i have a lot of issues with the congress, but i'm going to start off with this, congressman hagerman. do you support the george floyd police reform act, and also do you support the john lewis voting rights bill? i know for a fact that burgess, donald, and senator scott, three black men, voted against the bill. how can they do that when we

have been struggling to have our right to vote for the longest? now also, about elon musk. is he running the country or president trump? those people he working for him have security clearances to be doing what they doing? i'm a veteran. i had a top-secret security clearance and i know what it takes to get one, ok? why is it that you guys want to keep supporting a man that is a convicted felon, a criminal of sexual abuse and fraud for all of these years, and you talk about efficiency? the country has not built a refinery. we have been producing oil since the barack obama years. host: we have a lot to handle there. guest: we have a lot to unpack. it should, thank you for your service. i appreciate that. as far as the security clearances, i'm confident that everyone of the people working with doge and under president

trump have the necessary clearances to do the work they are doing. it is president trump who is running this country and i find it rather rich that you would ask that question. you can see how incredibly active and intellectual president trump is. especially when you compare him to president biden, who we all know was suffering from dementia for several years as far as him being a convicted felon, again, the law fare against president trump was off the charts, and as an attorney i was horrified as to how our courts have been weaponized against one man for political purposes. that is not who and what the united states of america is. as far as the voting rights bill, everybody has the right to vote. we have worked hard to make sure it is easy to vote, but we want to make it hard to cheat. everything a person who has a right to vote in this country can vote and it is actually

easy. so, i'm going to push back on that. as far as the refinery, i agree with you. we need to be building refineries. have not built a refinery in this country since 1979. host: and the george floyd police reform act? guest: i'm not going to get in the middle of telling the police how to do their job. i think they have a difficult job in new york, in chicago, in atlanta. i mean, i think it is difficult and i'm going to support the police if they do something wrong. we address it. they are there to take care of us and they take their job seriously and i'm going to support our law enforcement. host: let's talk to joe, hackensack, new jersey, independent line. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span. i was wondering listening to you, you are such a breath of fresh air. have you ever considered for

2028 running for president? [laughter] thank you. that is my question. guest: joe, you are so kind. i like representing wyoming right now, but thank you for the compliments. host: jerry is a democrat in sewall, new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to give you credit for coming onto c-span. because i see how aggressive mimi is with you and the questions and how she addresses you. and i give you a lot of credit for standing up to that. i am a registered democrat. i have never been so embarrassed by my party as i have an trump got in. i am watching them lose their minds and watching the media lose their mind and twist and turn different things. i watch every station. newsnation, cnn, msnbc, fox,

newsmax, and i cannot believe the lies and the way they can twist something, and i am very proud, i really am, of president trump exposing all that he is exposing. i hope he can save us all money. i hope he can keep us out of wars. and i don't understand how people are not in agreement with that. host: jerry, can i ask, did you vote for president trump? caller: i did. guest: i think what you have voiced is the fact that he is actually appealing to a very broad base of people. everything you have said is very common sense. i'm going to tell you that i do work with some very good democrats. glenn ivey, who is going to be the next guest, i think he is a very thoughtful man. i think he is a good man. i have to question the approach

that the democrats are taking to where we are for the very reason of what you have described. as a democrat you voted for president trump and what he promised he was going to do, which is cut spending, root out the waste, fraud, and abuse, return power to the states, produce domestic energy, be stronger on the world stage. all of those things. i think we can all wrap our arms around that. that is why i'm surprised that is why i'm surprised at the reaction to doge, because exposing these things, again, i don't care if you are a democrat, independent, republican, or you have never voted, when you look at the way usaid has been spinning our money it is common sense to say, i don't think we should do that. i think we ought to make sure the kids in philadelphia can read and do mathematics. we need to be focusing domestically because a strong america makes for a safe world and a weak america makes for a very unsafe and unstable world. it is important that we focus on

the issues here and i think that is what you are saying. have to put these differences aside and do it is best for america. host: oakville, tennessee. ronald, you are on with representative tenney command. caller: hi. i don't think this country realizes how close we come to losing everything we have. these democrats ought to get a backbone and realize what trump did the last four years when he was president. had he not got in there all you democrats would have lost everything you had. look what he's done. check what he has done. host: ok. let's go to rochester, minnesota. a democrat during john, you are next. caller: yes. yesterday a local small business was rated here in rochester, minnesota, home of the mayo clinic. this local small business employed two individuals for

many years. legally, but they were valued, skilled employees. now this local small business is being forced to shatter their doors. what is congress doing about this? we hear nothing about immigration bill that was -- what is being done about immigration. to provide for these small businesses. now, our congressman is silent. he is like a cockroach, hiding in the dark is. we hear nothing from him. no town halls. we are not hearing anything. what is going to be done? thank you. guest: john, i was just in your lovely state last week. beautiful. my mother is from minnesota. we already have immigration laws on the books that address this. and if you need to have foreign labor there is a legal way of doing so through a variety of visa programs. to the extent people believe they have to have that kind of labor i would encourage them to

follow that law. i'm not going to apologize for enforcing the law. and i'm not going to apologize for our department of homeland security. i'm just not going to. we have 12 million illegal aliens that have come into this country over the last four years. i think the number is higher. i think most people think the number was higher. that was the official number that came out of the biden administration. we have to be able to secure our borders and to do that we are not going to be addressing with immigration reform in the way that you are suggesting. we have to be able to enforce our borders. i'm sorry that happened. i'm not going to apologize for enforcing the law, but i'm not going to promise we are going to change it because of that situation.

host: i just wanted to update on that situation with the cybertruck. this is the latest we got, which is from business insider. state department removes mention of armored test laws from its 2025 procurement list, replaces it with armored electric vehicles. so, that is the latest. we want to be complete the accurate about that. that is $400 million. it says it will be buying armored electric vehicles instead of specifically tesla's. guest: i come from an oil and gas estate. i kind of like gas-fired ones. [laughter] host: that is. hageman, republican of wyoming. guest: thank you, and i think you do a wonderful job with me. host: after the break we will be joined by glenn ivey of maryland about how democrats are pushing back on the trump administration. we will be right back. ♪

saturdays, then set events up to the present day. grant was a famous civil war general who won the white house in 1868. his campaign slogan was "let us have peace." issues included reconstruction, the payment of civil war debt, voting rights, and fight against the kkk. watch american history tv's series first 100 days saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span2. starting next week watch c-span's new members of congress

series, when we speak with republicans and democrats about their early lives, previous careers, and why they decided to run for office. on monday at 9:30 p.m. eastern hour interviews include democratic congresswoman janelle bynum, the first african-american elected to congress from oregon. >> my mother graduated in 1970 from one of the last segregated high schools in the country in south carolina, and i think about all of the opportunities that were not afforded her coming out of segregation, and i bring that perspective to oregon, saying, you know, my mom was a rural kid who did not have a lot of opportunities, but i'm going to make sure i bring that forth for all of the kids in oregon. >> watched newman was of congress next week, starting at 9:30 p.m. on c-span. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. we are joined by representative

glenn ivey, a democrat of maryland and on the appropriations committee. looking to the program. guest: thanks for having me. host: your district borders washington, d.c., home to a few thousand federal employees. another 20,000 to 30,000 federal contractors. i want to start there. you recently held a town hall meeting with federal workers. can you tell us about how any people attended and what you all talked about? guest: it was about 20,000. many people who are interested in the government employment issue. because that was the focus of that town hall. there is a lot of confusion about what the trump administration is doing with these executive orders. there have also been a number of court rulings that have put in injunctions in place that have delayed some of what is going on with what the trump administration is trying to do. they are trying to figure out

what their rights are and how things might play out for them personally. the larger issue is the impact of if you scale down the government and fire a lot of employees, what services won't be delivered to the american people and how that is going to have an impact on them. host: what are you telling your constituents? the ones that are either afraid of losing their job or have already lost their jobs? guest: the ones that were afraid of losing their jobs, there are some in different places. if you are on the probationary period there are very limited rights you have. but if you are not, government employees have a series of rights in place to protect them from unfair termination. and rightly so. they got these jobs based on merit and competition, so we want to make sure they got protections so they are not forced out for political reasons. there are also collective bargaining agreements unions

have reached with the government that provide an extra set of rights as well. we talked through those issues with them and how we think things might play out. we offer up information to them as things become available. this is rapidly evolving, so a lot of them have questions about how things might be changing. another issue was whether they should take the "buyout" that was proposed by the trump administration. our recommendation was, no, for a couple of reasons. one was, we did not think the money had been appropriated to do what was proposed. a sickly the offer was, if you reside today we will pay you for the next six months or so. even though you are not working. there is no money appropriated for that as far as we know. also we were concerned about enforceability. if you accept the agreement the terms that were floated in the contract that the trump administration sent did not have any kind of enforcement clause. if you accept it but they renege

on the deal what do you do? it is not clear based on what was sent. but lastly, the government is supposed to be providing services to the american people, not paying people to not show up for jobs. as i have been telling people, the sopranos have no-show jobs, the federal government shouldn't. host: are all federal employees when they are initially hired in a probationary period? and how long is that? guest: it is one year, and not all federal employees, but most. there are many that are hired, like for example, and i was a federal prosecutor i did not get civil service protections for that position, so i was essentially an at will employee for my term there. most people have probationary periods and then if they get into the civil service structure after a year they do have a degree of protections. host: those that are in favor of what doge is doing is saying, what is wrong with going through

the federal government and seeing where the places are that we can save money, if there is fraud going on, if waste is going on that should be a good thing. guest: i agree that going after waste, fraud, and abuse should be done, but they are not doing it the right way. just a couple of points to make on that front. every major department in the federal government has an office of inspector general. the first thing the trump administration did was follow all of the ig's across the board. windows came in the ig's were already gone. instead of consulting with the people doing these investigations -- and some of these investigations might have been, you know, midway down, they be not even completed -- they fired them and move them out and decided to start from scratch. they brought in a group of people that did not have any kind of investigation experience.

the other part of it is none of them seem to have gone through any kind of vetting process. they don't seem to have security clearances and are being given access to highly personal information. medical data that we don't want to necessarily have made available for any circumstances whatsoever. you want to make sure the people that see it have the clearances and protections to handle it in the right way. the biggest issue with the musk effort is he has obvious conflicts of interest. he owns businesses that are doing work with the government and have major contracts and there are open investigations with respect to two of his companies i'm aware of, and he had access to some of that information, which he should not. there is a lot of concerns about what musk is doing, but there is a right way to do it. a lot of this could have been

done, instead of firing employees or trying to force them out, do the investigation first. if you identify waste, fraud, and use, fire people or send them to be prosecuted by the department of justice. they put the cart before the horse. they started firing people right away and not doing investigations. host: how are congressional democrats responding to this? guest: we are opposing what musk is doing from that standpoint. we have seen protests and demonstrations at some of the departments. the department of labor was one hours at. maybe a week and a half ago. in some instances we have had members of congress go to these buildings, but they were denied access to even getting in the building, which is astonishing to me. even the public, everybody should be able to get into the building. senators and congressmen should be able to get in and make legitimate inquiries as to, what are you doing and looking at? host: who stopped them from

going in the building? guest: security at the building that i think was told to do that by the trump administration. we had never had that happen before. host: we have congressmen glenn ivey with us until the house gavels in in in about 20 minutes. if you would like to call in you can do so now. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. and independents, (202) 748-8002 . the white house press secretary addressed charges that the trump 's actions were causing a constitutional crisis. i want to play a bit of that and then have you respond to it. >> before i take questions i would like to address an extremely dishonest narrative we have seen. many outlets in this room have been fear mongering the american people into believing there is a constitutional crisis taking place here at the white house.

i have been hearing those words lately. the real constitutional crisis is taking place within our judicial branch, the district court judges and liberal districts across the country are abusing their power to unilaterally block president trump's basic executive authority. we believe these judges are acting as judicial activists rather than honest arbiters of the law and they have issued at least 12 injunctions against this administration in the past 14 days, often without citing any evidence or grounds for their lawsuits. this was part of a larger concerted effort by democratic activists and nothing more than the continuation of the weaponization of justice against president trump. /to these judges. 77 million americans voted to elect this president. each injunction is --

as the president stated yesterday, we will comply with the law and courts, but we will also continue to seek every legal remedy ultimately overturn these radical injunctions and ensure president trump's policies can be enacted. host: congressman ivey, your reaction to that? guest: it is interesting. the first injunction on birthright citizenship was put in place by a ronald reagan appointee. her suggestion that these are all liberal judges, i think, is factually incorrect. beyond that i think if the trump administration wants to criticize judicial decisions that is one thing. i think where we get more concern is where you have people like vice president jd vance say things like, we might have to remove some of these federal judges, and i think elon musk actually went even further yesterday and talked about impeaching these judges. that is problematic because that is an -- that is an intimidation

. judges were not doing anything wrong, even one that was reversed yesterday with respect to an injunction, i'm not saying because he reversed his position should be impeached. remember, impeachment is for high crimes and misdemeanors. when they start talking about impeachment that is another level because it goes to the heart of judicial independence and undermining that, the way that i think that is not based on preserving separation of powers and checks and balances the framers put in place. host: she mentioned the media were fear mongering that there is a constitutional crisis. do you believe there is a constitutional crisis in this country? guest: i can't say we are there yet, but it feels like based on some of the things the trump administration was saying, certainly about judges, is heading in that direction, laying the foundation for it. i don't know that we are there

yet. the other piece too was congress, republicans controlled the senate and house. house and senate republicans were not doing anything to impose any checks and balances on the white house. that is their call, but the bigger concern is the impoundment conversation coming out of the trump administration. impoundment means we are going to ignore the constitutional power of the purse that was given to congress and say, look, we don't care if you appropriated money for a particular purpose, the president is going to decide to hold the money and use it for what he wants to use it for. then if you do both of those you totally undermine the separation of powers and the three branches of government. if you get to that point that could be a constitutional crisis. host: we have got callers waiting to talk to you. first is parry in montgomery, alabama. democrat. caller: good morning. good morning, representative ivey.

democrats come on these shows and they don't understand about the talking points the republicans have to give to these people, why these people vote for them. so it is going to take something to hurt them to realize you are voting the wrong way. but when it comes to the democrats you have to understand also that they push everything they say and they are not going to listen to anything else, but c-span, msnbc, and all of those other places are not going to push your points for you if you do not come up with some kind of means you are going to let these people know about these policies that are going to hurt them. so, these policies that are going to hurt them is going to hit them hard and they are going to turn back around and say they are thinking it should be a democrat that rescued them. it's going to be too late by the time you get through four, and five, and 10 years. some of these things are going to hurt people for years. host: go ahead, congressman.

guest: i think there is good points there. the communications issue for democrats is significant. i think it is one of the main reasons we lost the white house in 2024. he didn't do a good job of explaining to the public the positive things the biden administration had done, certainly from an economic standpoint. trump was very effective in communicating his positions and he did it through not just the legacy media, but also a whole network of whether they are podcasts or other means, where he was reaching republicans and persuadables. as far as the other aspect of that, depending on how this plays out a lot of people could be hurt by some of the policies he is putting in place. especially from an economic standpoint. if he moves forward these tariffs that is basically a tax increase and increased cost for americans across the country. and i'm not sure why he would want to do that. the economy he got from biden is in pretty good shape. we are doing better than most of

the western world on that front. but, you know, he is not doing the things he said he would do. he has done a big flurry of activity, but very little to address the economy in ways he talked about, and i hope he will get focused on that in the near future. host: here is john, a republican in texas. caller: good morning. i have a couple of concerns. first, you just mentioned that your concern about the independence of the judiciary. we all know the democrats attacked the supreme court. chuck schumer stood on the senate steps and threatened the supreme court. he threatened to pack the supreme court. so, your hypocrisy is unbelievable. what really concerns the american people is that the democrats don't seem to care. this is not your money, ok? the fact that you can sit there and go, the process is, and lie about medicare. we are not going to take it away.

government is corrupt to the bone. we need to fix it. if you don't want to do it, then quit. but it is not your money, it is ours, ok? which part of that do you not understand? host: ok, john. guest: i have voters who sent me here to congress and they feel a bit differently about it than you do, as far as how the money should be spent. for example, title i dollars for education. i think we should be sending money to help low income districts in red and blue states hire more teachers. i think that is a good thing. meals on wheels is a good thing. cancer research i think is a good thing. and i think most americans support those things. you might not, but i think most americans do. but the democratic process is aimed at making a decision about where the money should go based on what the elected leaders determine. i'm on the appropriations committee. that should be the function of what we do and the president obviously has a say, but i think that is the way it should work. on the judiciary piece, you know

, i never took a position about impeaching supreme court justices or federal judges. i have just never said that. i think it is ok to disagree with judges for the rulings they make and the decisions they reach, but to start talking about teaching them, just because you don't agree in this instance with the injunctions they put in place? that is not the right way to go and it certainly is not the structure the framers put in place. this worked pretty well for the past 2.5 centuries. host: here is harry, an independent in afferent, florida. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. congressman ivey, i wanted to talk about the elon and doge. i think the bigger concern is not so much that they are not qualified or they don't have the background checks. the problem is that they are basically hackers, and camino, this is a data heist.

elon owns a data center in texas , and a starlink network. if you are able to suck all of this proprietary data into the data center and train the data center -- you know, to train the ai, you would have chatgpt meets jay groover, if you will. so type in the congressman's name and up comes everything, basically, all of your bank information, medical information, everything you have ever watched on netflix, everywhere page you have ever been to, on and on. that information could be weaponized and used for doxing purposes to oppress and manipulate the united states. unfortunately i think that is what is happening and there is nothing so far that has been stopping in. that is my concern. guest: i think that is a fair concern, and there are other aspects of that too that go to

the conflicts of interest issue. taking all of this information and using it, for example, to benefit some of his companies. the issue potentially that was raised with respect to the consumer protection board, that was just shuttered, or they are trying to shut down, was that he has an interest in moving forward if a business interest that could be regulated or limited by what the cfpb does, and they wanted to get it out of the way. i don't know if that is true or not, back to my original point of vetting these people. we need to make sure we know what interests he has got, what conflicts there might so we can separate that out. if there are too many then you cannot wall them off, and frankly that is what it feels like. he is a multibillionaire with a web of interest across-the-board. maybe he should not be in that position to do that. i think that might be too much power and access to information for him to have under these circumstances. host: he is steve in mentor,

ohio. good morning, steve. caller: good morning. congressman, what do you think about the separation between the democrats and the republicans and just moved to states where the democrats want to live, and then let the republicans, you know, do whatever they want to do? there is an old saying. you can lead a horse to the water, but you can't make him drink. so, if they want to go down that road, i think there is a peaceful separation, people that are democratic leaning, let them move to the states, people that want to, you know, not drink the water or drink the kool-aid, let

them do whatever they want to do, period. thank you. guest: well, i appreciate the comment. there are a lot of people voting with their feet. one of the things of political segregation, i will call it, people are moving to places where like-minded people live already. i think there is a lot of that underway. the challenge, though, is i think there are a lot of decisions that have to be made for the country as a whole, especially with respect to foreign policy and national security and the overall economy that i think we need to be thinking and working together. even though we don't necessarily think alike we need to think together and try and work to do the best things for the nation as a whole. and move it forward in a positive way. because if we do it the right way the rising tide will lift all boats. host: congressman, i know you have to run, so i want to be respectful of your time. representative glenn ivey of maryland is on the appropriations committee. thank you so much for joining us

today. guest: thanks so much. host: we have about five minutes left before the house is scheduled to gavel in. a couple of things to bring to your attention. that is for your schedule later today. judiciary committee will meet to vote on whether to send kash patel's nomination for fbi directthe full senate for consider this comes after an initial boat was delayed by one week at the request of democrats on the mmtee who continue to call for a second cotion hearing with mr. patel. you can watc committee vote live, 9:00 a. just under five minutes away, on c-span3. that is also on our app and online. oday at 10:00 a.m. presidentmp's nominee to serve as education secretary, linda mcmahon, will testify

before the senate health, education, labor, and pens committee. she led the smalness administration during the first trumpet term and is cofounder of world wrestling entment that is 10:00 a.m., c-span3. also on the app and online. we are expecting the vote for rfk junior for health secretary to be at 10:30 a.m. this morning. that should be followed by a vote on brooke rollins has agriculture secretary. so, a lot happening today. if you missed anything from yesterday, including the discussion at nato headquarters with pete hegseth, that is online at c-span.org in its entirety. just to make sure you have this information, this news from the hill. judge won't halt musk federal worker buyout program. so, federal judge inclined to

pause a federal government buyout program enabling the government to forge ahead with its fork in the world program the judge had extended the timeframe for employees to decide whether to take the unusual offer, which gives employees eight months of pay and benefits if they wish to depart government. on wednesday the judge found that unions who had sued over the directive did not have standing to do so. he said, "the unions do not have the required direct stake in the fork directive but are challenging a policy that affects others, specifically executive branch employees. this is not sufficient." that has happened, however it says opm -- here is that from the administration. the office is pleased the court has rejected a desperate effort to strike down the deferred resignation program. as of 7:00 p.m. tonight -- that is wednesday night -- the

program is now closed. there is no longer any doubt the deferred resignation program was legal and valuable. so, thatas closed down. that is not available for employees to take that if they wanted to take it, so, again, that program closes at 7:00 p.m. yesterday. let's go back to calls. this is anthony in pikesville, maryland. hi, anthony. caller: good morning to you. i did have a question for the congressman before he left. i wanted to ask if he felt that the federal employees who were going to be forced to take this buyout will actually get paid? because congress does have the purse strings. as far as the judicial system is concerned i have been retired a

wild and have been watching the trump administration since the first term, and really don't have any hate in our judicial system. they seem to be afraid of him and i don't think we are going to get any fair treatment there. but i would like to know if people will get paid. host: are you a federal employee? caller: no, i'm retired after 35 years. i have a lot of friends who are still working that are going to be stuck at this, including my two neighbors. host: what did they decide? caller: one of them has not made a decision and the other one is considering selling their home because of -- they, like me they had quite a bit of time in and take the early retirement. host: all right, anthony. we are going to take you over to the house, set to gavel in any minute now. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] the clerk: the speaker's rooms. washington, d.c. february