welcome back to the falkirk center. we are freedom caucus, members of the freedom caucus, i think we have about 14 members covering china with us we will start off this panel with ralph norman, and we just started by asking you, china were at work, everyone a free freedom caucus said. how to characterize with the folks in addition think when we're at war? either willing to take action on it or are they just curious still? >> i think it's a combination. one, they call it for what it is. this came out of china. this wasn't something that came from north carolina or virginia or florida. it came from china. secondly, it's given them a bigger awareness of issues that we face that they didn't know about. confucius institute as an example. people now come and we have one at a school in south carolina where they are teaching, taking our brightest, taking our intellectual property under the guise of scientific study. and so it's a maid, given them a witness. it's given them i guess a wanting to learn more about it. look at what

let's welcome her to the falkirk center, everybody. >> i appreciate that.ate with you all today. i've already heard from some of you. i know that you are aware that last week, i published a paper on what to do about china. 120 specifichan recommendations of what we need to be doing as we work to unravel this relationship with china. for those of you who have not seen it, it is at blackburn. senate.gov, china white paper. i encourage you to take a look. it's not that big, so it's not that heavy reading. but it is a good guideline for what we should do. i did it because when i'm out and about in tennessee, people will say china is a problem. then they will say somebody needs to hold them to account. then the follow has always been what are we going to do about china? one of the reese's i put -- one of the reasons i put the time and effort in creating this ther, i'm seeing right now same marxist philosophies used by the chinese communist party filling the streets of portland, chicago, and even a few blocks iny from right where we are washington, d.c. now these

i want to thank them on behalf of the falkirk center let's give them a big round of liberty applause.ou gentlemen for all you do. [inaudible background conversations] booktv on c-span2 has taught nonfiction books and authors every weekend. coming up saturday at 5:30 p.m. eastern time, authors elizabeth hinton, robin kelly, Ãbtalk about the black lives matter movement. on sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern on afterwards university of california berkeley law professor and former deputy assistant attorney general in the george w. bush administration john you was his book defender in chief" looks at presidential powers and the u.s. constitution. he is interviewed by mark roselle, author and george mason university founding dean of the school of policy and government. watch booktv this weekend on c-span2. jonathan horn is a former speechwriter for president george w. bush, he spoke recently at george washington's home mount vernon where he discussed the final years of america's first president. >> george washington is torn, he feels he cannot sit on the sideline if everything he's worked his whol

wall: in the united states, i would say richards or falkirk. it does not matter. the district court might believe the government has a bad motive to do all sorts of things, favoritism or something else. but everybody agreeing that the united states cannot be made to bring a prosecution even if it even ifeven if it is -- it's motive is not regular or impermissible, the same is exactly true of a prosecution. there are checks on that. judge griffith: what would be an appropriate hearing for judge sullivan to call on these facts in this case? what are the outer limits of what he could do or what the government would think is appropriate? mr. wall: i don't think there is one on the facts of this case. we have the house of the defendant -- you areiffith: so saying no hearing at all would be appropriate? mr. wall: even if you need to understand the motion. as a substantive matter to try to get behind the motion for some motive or another, no. judge griffith: what do you mean if he needs to understand -- i am trying to get at what you think would be an appropriate hearing

matty gale filmed these pictures from his hotel room near falkirk.scotland. those imagesjust coming in areas, particularly in scotland. those images just coming in this morning. he's had to brave the elements and hike over glass and stones, but today major chris brannigan completes a 700—mile walk — without any shoes and socks on. chris set off barefoot from lands end 38 days ago to raise money for his eight—year—old daughter, who has a rare illness. we'll catch up with him in a moment, but first let's take a look at what's been an epicjourney. so here i am in lands end in the south—west of england, about to take my very first steps on a 700—mile barefoot march. he's 17 days into his 700—mile walk. smashing it at the moment. so challenging. so painful. 0h. hip—hip! hooray! what a journey. chris joins us now from the town of lauder, just south of edinburgh good morning to you. first of all, how are your feet? they are not great, to be honest. i've been walking for 34 days now. i've had infections in both my feet. they are battered and bruised and cut

. >> i didn't understand anyone to dispute that though i do rely on falkirk. they are talking about the dissent tot create content in judicial power in one doing judicial role. office they couldn't involve the court and that but in any event here it has to be. >> it doesn't involve. >> you're here wanted the attorney general's policies. >> i'm lookingll for an hypothetical question. >> that not make a mockery of the judgment? >> i'm not for a minute talking about this case to the excellent clear.r. >> i didn't understand most of your hypothetical to be a mockery but the question is what the government's motive was and what it was saying was a brady violation. seemed like the kind of thing that can be granted through lots of other cases without any question at all. i ticket to beat the judge has a question about what the real motives are and as a prosecutor has filed a motion. >> the district court does not wish to be privy and party to closing the deal. granting the motion will do. >> yes if the motion comes in and says that there's a brady distant -- but the