Skip to main content

tv   Jason Chaffetz Power Grab  CSPAN  October 12, 2019 6:01pm-6:56pm EDT

6:01 pm
i hope to see you there. thank you so much. [inaudible background conversations] that wraps up our first day from the southern festival of books in nashville. if you missed any of the programs that aired earlier today you can watch them all online at booktv.org. tune in tomorrow for more from nashville live starting at 1:00 p.m. eastern. >> the new c-span online store now has book tv products. go to c-span store.org to check them out. see what's new for booktv and
6:02 pm
all the c-span products. [inaudible background conversations] welcome to heritage, thank you for joining us. we are going to have a real fun discussion today about jason chaffetz new book "power grab". introduce them is senator mike ãgreat friend of heritage and best friend of the constitution. >> hello. it's a pleasure to be with you. this marches several of my interests. the constitution conservative politics, books about those things the heritage foundation and my friends jason and julie take us. i've known the chases for a long time. i first came to know the name jason chaffetz over 30 years
6:03 pm
ago when he became the placekicker at byu.he is really good to this day he holds records including the most successful poinsettia touchdown scored in a single game and i think in a single season. he was also famous for the fact that immediately after he kicked a field goal or pat the helmet would come off and then he had this awesome slow jog to the sideline. he became famous for that. he became known as the chaffetz and resulted in something called chaffetz rule. but i think it played a key role in his success as a statesman in the state of utah. people came to know him. they knew who he was i remember many years later long after he played for byu and had a successful career as a businessman i met him in person for the first time, i was quite
6:04 pm
starstruck because he was a big deal. i met him while he was running governor huntsman's campaign for governor before he was governor huntsman. jason chaffetz himself convinced me that john huntsman was the man to become utah's next governor in 2004. we had a long conversation about it at the utah county republican convention. several months after that after governor ãgot elected he called me and informed me i was under consideration for a position within the huntsman administration and i said i didn't apply and he said i don't care what to talk to you anyway.we went over there and had a chat. jason chaffetz and john huntsman and i. we hit it off and went about working together. i ended up serving as governor huntsman's general counsel at the time when jason chaffetz was the chief of staff. my most important role during that time period was when i
6:05 pm
became jason chaffetz's chauffeur. [laughter] he and i lived closer together than any other two members of the senior staff and at one point jason broke his foot, long story we won't get into that. it sounds like the punchline to a joke and it was actually quite serious. he fell and broke his foot and had to be in a cast had to be elevated for several months at a time. i would go pick him up at his home in alpine utah he would sit in the backseat of the car so he could keep his foot elevated and i asked him if he wanted me to get a hat chauffeur had and i didn't charge him anything. the only thing i charged him was he had to agree to be subjected to my lengthy rant on constitutional issues and listen to tape-recorded supreme court arguments. [laughter] which who wouldn't want to do that? [laughter] but i digress. we are not here to talk about any of that. we are here to talk about the fact that jason chaffetz is a
6:06 pm
hero when it comes to defending individual liberty and fighting against big government. someone who is willing to call out the left, both those who identified themselves as part of the left and those who just want to build big government. he is someone who understands the fact that there is something of a zero-sum game when it becomes dumb it comes to defending liberty. if you are a government as you get bigger and become more powerful as a government you do so at the expense of individual liberty. he understands the fact that the government itself is not and never can be never will be omniscient and omnipotent or consistently benevolent. the government itself is the use of collective force, organized force and it's run by fallible mortal individuals. consequently we have to carefully constrain its power and we have to make sure it's
6:07 pm
not abused. in his latest book "power grab" jason chaffetz explains how although levers of government power have been orchestrated in such a way as to effectively weapon eyes the threatening power of government in a way that advances the political agenda of the left or another way of describing it might be, advancing the political agenda of those who would expand government at the expense of individual liberty. he blows a whistle on how they have weapon eyes the use of criminal investigations in order to achieve a particular political outcome. to be clear, as jason chaffetz makes clear in "power grab" emma this isn't a simple question of the red team versus the blue team. this is a question of liberty versus centralized government power. we fought a war over that and
6:08 pm
we won that war. and we shouldn't be eager to go back to a system in which government knows best in which government holds all the power. we as a people are the sovereigns. we can't go back to a time where that is not the case. that's why jason chaffetz's book power grab is such an important tool for those who want to live in a land where they are free. whether you call yourself a conservative or liberal or libertarian or something else it shouldn't matter. what should matter to you is the concept of liberty. the concept that government exists for a certain limited purposes to make sure we are secure and to make sure we have an enterprise that uses collective force for the purpose of defending life liberty and property.
6:09 pm
the more we deviate from that, the more we run into a very real risk of a power grab where we become less pre-and less secure in our lives and liberty and property. there is not a day goes by that i don't miss having jason chaffetz serving in the house of representatives. he was someone who in addition to being a trusted friend and colleague when we worked in governor huntsman's office he is someone who i came to trust and love working with when he was serving in the house of representatives and during my time in office in the senate. it's hard for me to remember an issue where he and i took opposing viewpoints. he and i worked together on countless issues. i take comfort in the fact that
6:10 pm
he is able to do an enormous amount of good where he is and informing the american people about the risks of big government and keeping them informed of what's going on in washington. is exercising a lot of influence by writing books like "power grab" from which i highly recommend. with that, please join me in welcoming jason chaffetz, the author of "power grab". >> thank you, thanks for having me, thanks for being here, thank you to senator lee, i appreciate it. he is had a vote because now he is another vote on the floor. probably best to do that. now i get to tell mike lee's stories while he's not here. [laughter] that's even better. >> i first met mike this is amazing because we were at the utah county convention there is literally a thousand plus
6:11 pm
people at this event and this gentleman comes up we start talking and he introduces himself as mike and i said do you have a card? what is your full name and he said mike lee and i said i knew he is a spitting image of his father who had been the president of brigham young university and he said, mike lee and i said any relation to rex lee and he said that's my dad.i could tell, i already knew that before i asked the question i could tell rex lee was the solicitor general for ronald reagan and he argued some 100+ cases before the supreme court. fast forward to ãone of the best things i did when i was chief of staff it's true i broke my foot for a couple months i broke my right foot so i cannot use the accelerator
6:12 pm
and try to convince my wife that i could drive left-footed and he she said you are not doing that. he would drive me to and from everyday and what he didn't tell you is that he had a cassette tape player in his car and he would like to listen to his dad argue the supreme court cases so he would literally put the cassette tape in their, that's how much the guy loved the law and we would listen to the oral presentations before the supreme court. i learned a lot but that's what mike does for fun, he's not listening to music or something like that. you gotta love a guy who is not committed to it. mike is going to walk us through a few things. i want to acknowledge my wife julie who is here with me. i appreciate her being here. i appreciate all of you being here i want to think the heritage foundation for making this all possible. the good that heritage does in terms of informing people being
6:13 pm
a resource, while those in congress even after i've been in congress. it such a great resource and so many good minds thinking through tough issues. so hopeful. the quick of why i wrote the book as i say at the beginning stephen covey who is from our congressional district he wrote seven basic habits, highly effective people. seek first to understand then to be understood. i wholeheartedly believe that. i also believe what margaret thatcher said in that she said first you need to win the argument and then you can go out with the vote. i always felt even before i came to congress even before i ran certainly become more evident once i was there that republicans conservatives we were very pathetic in our communication. first of all, we were getting no help from the mass media the national media was not going to be a conduit to which we could get our message out there and have the platform or time to be
6:14 pm
able to do that. it was compounded by that. i always felt that we as conservatives had the right message we just didn't say it very well. we did say it enough. i remember when i was first in congress i met with eric cantor who had a senior position at the time. i had been invited to be on fox news i couldn't believe it so i called up eric cantor and i said are you all right if i go on fox news and he said jason are you kidding me? you need to go out there as much as he possibly can to get out our message and go on every other network you can possibly get on and talk about why you believe what you believe. it was the right answer it was good advice and i would argue that we need more people who can get in front of those cameras to go on all the networks to talk about what it is we believe and give that perspective.
6:15 pm
i don't buy into the idea that you need to just sit back and they are not going to give us a fair shake so we will not go on. i did probably more interviews on msnbc and cnn, you probably didn't see them. [laughter] i'm sure many people didn't see them. [laughter] then i did even on fox news. 8.5 years in congress that i left and very blessed to have this contributor relationship with fox. i always felt like i could still contribute in the public square because now more than ever i can get out there and talk about issues that matter for our country and at least from a conservative standpoint. it's been very blessed to have this relationship with harpercollins who did my first book called the deep state it was new york times bestseller. then we just launch this book literally like seven days ago "power grab", which is sort of
6:16 pm
bifurcated into two different areas. how is it that the democrats are using the levers of power they currently have to do things that you all wouldn't necessarily see unless maybe you had been in congress or really paying attention but you need somebody to draw your attention to them. and then what are the things they are doing outside of congress to change the dynamic in the narrative. those are the first two chapters of the book that should scare the living daylights out of you because they are doing some things on the left that will affect all of us whether you realize it or not. we as conservatives and republicans don't play offense nearly enough. democrats are always playing offense. that's what i think i articulate here. mike skinner walk us through it and i think we will do q&a. full disclosure at work former congressman when he was the chairman of the house oversight committee. a lot of the stuff in his book
6:17 pm
are some memories of the good times we had when he was running the committee. we will go through a couple of those. i would like to start with your final town hall right if the trump was elected things got ugly. i think that's a good table setter for what the environment looks like now. can you tell us a little bit about that. >> him i read about this in the forward. i had won my first term in the congress i was blessed to get 73 percent of the vote and this was roughly four or five weeks i recall after donald trump had been sworn in so we are talking the heart of winter in utah and all the sudden i'm having town hall meeting. i had had i don't know how many town hall meetings i love the town hall meetings.usually a group about the size people can interact. the quick of it is democrats hold of this and they have this group called indivisible utah
6:18 pm
which had a national presence for the specific manual about how to take over a town hall meeting. this thing blossomed and blew up into 1000+ people that were showing up and they wanted to create this illusion into recurring theme. they wanted to create this illusion that a conservative republican in a safe district who just happened to be the chairman of the oversight committee with the newly minted president of the united states donald trump was that his borders were mad. they need to do his job he needs to home the hold the president accountable and do this and that and they have this long list of demands of things they wanted me to do. most of which i didn't think was in the purview of the united states congress. so much so that it got out of control and you got to read the account.
6:19 pm
it's 30+ police officers you had people and people openly carrying weapons with masks in the parking lot we had swat teams. it turned into quite a fiasco. the highlight of which i will give you there were two members of the national media that has shown up. i don't remember ever having national media show up to my town hall after i won my fifth election with 73 percent of the vote we are weeks into the 115th congress, really? this one reporter she insisted she interview me and i said let me talk to her on the phone first. i said to her, why are you here? why are you here? >> we have a source in san francisco that says there is going to be a riot and perhaps a fire. i said, really? i said did you ever think that may be, did you tell law enforcement about that?
6:20 pm
did you call my office about that? you are only telling you this because i asked you why you are here. she said, no. i said, you are going to literally put a thousand plus people in danger if you think there's going to be a riot and a fire potentially you are telling me people might die you believe there is enough credibility that's why you are here and these people were doing live shots from my town hall meeting. i call it the last town hall because it's the last one i ended up doing but this is how these people play. there is this recurring theme in here that they really do believe on that radical far left side, they throw these labels like fascist and these really negative terms on donald trump but what i see them doing is exactly what they claim the president was doing. that in order to protect our
6:21 pm
freedom they need to take it away. in order to make sure the first amendment took place they need to take away our rights under the first amendment. it's just a recurring theme. i could go on and on about this particular town hall meeting but it was used as a tool and a prop they pay people to come in there with people from all kinds of states there but they want to create this media that was organic utah phenomenon in a conservative republican district and they would run these stories and say look how much problem donald trump is creating for everyone which was not true. >> in your book you get into a lot of examples of double standards or hypocrisy. what do you make of that?
6:22 pm
>> think about it. how often have you heard the republicans or party of no that because we are somehow opposed to a public policy position that barack obama and the democrats championing that we were the party of no. but if all the sudden you don't wear the liberal credentials unless you are anti-trump no matter what, no matter what position you possibly takes they are going to take the opposite. i did that when i was like in third grade. yes you did, no you didn't, yes you did, no you didn't. they didn't know how to answer the question. it's very true. i saw somebody today on the street wearing a black shirt with white lettering that says resistance. they were proud they were part of the resistance movement. let's be a little bit more adult about it, tackle the issue by issue if you disagree we disagree but let's have the debate. i really believe that the more conservatives actually have the
6:23 pm
debate and win the debate. i've been going around the country telling people and i want to share this message with you, i really believe we can't be afraid of having that discussion but let's also talk from our hearts, i'm tired of conceding the compassion card to the democrats. we talk about principles. no matter the issue let's go back to the principal. my guess is if you're here with me at this meeting this day you have a set of principles. you believe in. but i think a lot of
6:24 pm
conservatives forget to step one let's talk about why you believe what you believe then we can argue about how we get there in the individual policies. that's not democrats want to shut down the debate they want to create this evil appearance that how dare you? that's why all the polling we do day after day on television and newspapers is just a bunch of hogwash.people don't want to admit out loud they will vote for donald trump as opposed to hillary clinton because they don't want their neighbors or someone else to beat them over the head with it. to try to embarrass them. one of my favorite part of the book is when you put your investigator hat on and start digging through the tax returns of a bunch of big nonprofits on the left. what you discovers in how the operations are financed in the shady accounting tricks. full disclosure i'm glad i learned about these tricks from
6:25 pm
the first time in this book. don't do any of that. this is what i think people need to understand if you look at the priorities that they put forward in congress and you look to any poll out there about what are the most important issues you will hear about healthcare, you're going to hear about the economy. you are going to hear about immigration. why is it that nancy pelosi has hr one house resolution one, what is her first bill? anything to do on fuse top 20 top 50 issues no it doesn't. hr one is not about how to reconfigure elections. she wants to reconstitute how we do elections in this country. it's their calculus, my theory that i layout of the book, that they have to reconfigure how they do voting in the country in order for them to win long-term. one of the weapons of war, i
6:26 pm
think, is something that i'm guessing 98 percent of you have never heard of before and that is that they have learned to weapon eyes not for profits. planned parenthood, southern poverty, aclu and i've got a laundry list of others, we been through a 990, 990 is a form they need to fill out essentially as the top line tax return for a not-for-profit. what you are going to see consistently in these 990s is a for-profit entity called grassroots campaign incorporated there are hundred different types of organizations that this douglas phelps has been involved with, he's done from fundraisers for joe biden, barack obama, wet and work for this organization, credited ãbas teaching them all he needed to know about how
6:27 pm
to win campaigns. believe him, believe barack obama, this is how they learn how to do this. here is the way it works. you are a 501(c)(3) which is non-for profit and if you get make a donation to get a tax write off. then there's 501(c) four which are allowed to engage in more politics but have a different tax treatment on how you can write off your taxes. but these 501(c)(3) organizations as a not-for-profit this gentleman could go make a $10 million donation is going to get a tax benefit from doing so but that's nonprofit organization is hiring a for-profit organization, grassroots campaign incorporated who will do fundraising. they will put on t-shirts, aclu, southern poverty law
6:28 pm
center, planned parenthood, then they will start knocking doors. planned parenthood will go knock on the door and say raising money $50 for planned parenthood. are you with us or against us. what does that tell you about that end what does that tell you about that person? do you think they will vote for the democrat or the republican there is a voter that we identified we don't we don't want to have voting in the next election. the for-profit entity has now gathered all the information then they go and work for the d triple c the dnc in swing states and they can go out and target individuals bypassing all the campaign-finance rules. if this gentleman wanted to
6:29 pm
participate in the election, individual campaign concentration limit is $2000. there are certain things you can and cannot do with the money. but the problem is. if you look at the charts ãb they did not raise as much as they spent and then they'd hire them again and spend more money with them. they lost something like $11 million over eight years. why would they do that? i raise that as a question because if you will have the irs do an audit. second part. i address it later in the first two chapters. later on in hr one about vote
6:30 pm
harvesting. you might've heard about this term but basically democrats in legislation have supported the idea they want to make this law everywhere you go that you do not have to be present to actually boate. boat harvesting can go around the los angeles times story about this woman who is an undocumented person here illegally just here illegally. going out and collecting ballots from all of you could go knock on your door i know it's inconvenient but if you just give me your ballot fill it out i will turn it in for
6:31 pm
you. i believe it's eight seats in california that the republicans lost in the last election there were thousands and thousands of vote that showed up after the deadline that came in miraculously in favor of the democrats. in proportions that were totally different. why are we having this special election in north carolina? it's illegal to do vote harvesting in north carolina. ironically joe kennedy, congressman from massachusetts, complained about it. the republicans are cheating. you just voted on legislation to make this legal everywhere in the country. this is but one thing out of a list of 30 that the democrats are trying to do to grab back more power change the way we do things and if we don't open up our eyes and be cognizant of it they will blow through this. i don't know how you win an election in california when democrats play by different rules than republicans and
6:32 pm
engage in this type of vote harvesting.i think there's evidence it happened in arizona against martha mcsally and evidence it happened in other places too even in utah others allegations thousands of vote showed up after the deadline. democrats elected the county clerk, mcgrath elected, would you do? who is going to be the eyeballs to watch this? >> congressional oversight has changed quite a bit since you left congress and unfortunately not for the better. certain things roundabouts when you were there but now it seems the more personal, the more vicious, the more likely the west calls hearings and investigations on the topics. how do the exchange and what damage has done to the institution? >> i guess the thing that makes the biggest mark the biggest philosophical change the oversight committee was founded in 1814. it was there to oversee any and
6:33 pm
all government expenditures. it's had gyrations, different committee names, abraham lincoln when he came on the committee and this was his committee assignment when he was in the united states congress it was interesting he became known as spotty because he was challenging me president where his origins of the mexican-american war. it is a great history of this committee and what's been able to do. what's interesting is what changed when i left because the oversight and government reform committee changed and now nancy pelosi elijah cummings change the name of committee it's just called the committee on oversight and reform. democrats don't believe government is a problem they think it's a solution to everything. they don't need to go look at what governments doing the government is is all good. what you see now are hearings and a press to go after
6:34 pm
individuals and individual corporations. that is not necessarily the purview of united states congress. the committee is the widest birth of any jurisdiction there are two supreme court cases we lay out more oversight wings were clipped back to try to get it on the straight and narrow witches look after government. we had hearings mylan pharmaceutical and the epipen situation, farmer boy. we did call into individual corporations but what we also did his call in the fda and health and human services to say, how did this happen? what elijah cummings is doing is now demanding and sending out subpoenas and directives to go, letters and records amounts to look under the books without
6:35 pm
any evidence of wrongdoing presupposing the outcome on fishing expeditions to go look into the lives of individuals. if you have proximity to donald trump, look out. that is a prime time target. this operating agreement, which nobody has seen the light of day between elijah cummings, jerry nadler, maxine ãand i think there's a 51 about how they were going to do investigations and how they were going to do impeachment, these people lay this all out before the hundred 16th congress even started. but it's all promised on the idea that they were going to be essentially i believe the campaign research arm of the democrats. i think that's what they are doing right here, right now, there is no justification or evidence to justify a lot of it, they are just literally want to find out.
6:36 pm
it all starts with the idea and the premise that we don't need to look at government we need to look at people. it's kind of scary that the congressional branch of government that they would engage in this kind of witchhunt is kind of power grab this sort of diving deep. it is scary the abuse and the power that's going on there. >> one of the most high-profile examples is the confirmation process of justice kavanaugh. you talk about how choreographed it was from the opening scene maybe you can give us a little sneak peak. >> there are whole books you could write on just the kavanaugh situation. the pre-work, which had a focus on is the work that they were doing and the outlines they had no matter who was this is going to be this was going to be a narrative about a frat boy who is out of control and gone
6:37 pm
awry. the clearest example and it's been out there it's not brand-new in my book but we remind people about this the press release that was already written with ex ex ex ex they just had to fill in the name. when you see that in some total in retrospect put together in the way we did it in this chapter, it remind you of how evil and how bad it was and i think it's almost humorous that these democratic senators every single one of them had pledged to vote no and complained about the lack of openness and transparency. you still have senator schumer and the others they always do this they ask for things that they know cannot be given to them. you cannot reveal by law grand jury material. there is executive privilege a president has with his
6:38 pm
seniormost advisors with jerry nadler does time and time again and they did it in part of the kavanaugh situation is they ask for information that the president has executive privilege on, it's the same claim that barack obama claimed, believe me, i wanted to get ben rhodes before the committee to talk about the iran deal. i invited ben rhodes to come testify before the oversight committee. he was in the new yorker, he was doing public speeches, certainly he has time to do all the media and public speeches he can come talk to congress about it. added an issue subpoena, the difference now is cummings and nadler will issue subpoenas saying, they don't comply. but they know if it goes to court they will never win because they don't care because the court date is going to come after the next election. they want to create a
6:39 pm
narrative, i guarantee you will hear nadler and cummings saying we issued 250 subpoenas they never responded. most of them are wholly bogus. " would left them out. the reason jerry nadler became the chairman of the judiciary committee is he wet before his colleagues on the democratic side of the aisle and said i'm better suited to pursue impeachment. come with me i'm going to do impeachment. that's how he beat out loughran and became the chairman of the committee. this is what he's doing he's abusing his power. >> one last question for me then will shift and end on a positive note like you do in your book. what's the path forward? what should conservatives be looking toward terrain the sin? >> would try to do this in the deep state i do this in power grab on purpose. i don't want to just lay out the bad. you come and listen in the meeting and you are bummed out like it's not the feel-good meeting of the year.
6:40 pm
try to end on a positive note that this is the greatest country on the face of the planet. somehow someway the american people figure these things out they sniff out authenticity they understand these issues but we have to be aware of them. the very fact i write that you are reading the book is good news. the fact that people want to dive deeper on these issues but i also think it's incumbent that we engage in federalism that we pushed back on the 10th amendment we push the federal government does too many things to too many people. so much of this either shouldn't be done at all or should be the purview of the states. somehow we got a new growth the power of the federal government and get them out of so much of this business. i think a lot of those answers will be pushing for states rights and doing those types of things. it often takes making sure we are engaged as a people and
6:41 pm
people individually get and decide they will be a part of the solution not part of the problem. with that i can't thank you enough for being here and hearing me out, i hope you enjoyed the book. if we have a few minutes for questions, if you got to go i get it but if you have minutes for questions let's do it. [applause] >> dimension the conspiracy behind the town halls and creating disruption and we know during the rallies all the trump rallies that project ã hesitate showing democrat operatives saying they pay people to go insight and violence. those are felonies, what they did to you, what they did to him. i went to the party and asked them where they can prosecute. it's a great way also to get discovery on the democrats. but nothing ever happened. i think we really have to pursue things like these these people inciting violence in
6:42 pm
their several last count was like close to a thousand attacks on trump supporters and republicans. we've got to do something legally to really lay down the hammer. >> i think there was one person arrested and they basically took her out and just released her they didn't charge her with anything. they didn't detain her. she was going a little crazy. i can't imagine what it's like at trump rallies. there's good and bad at this. first of all, the organic energy behind donald trump, he could go anywhere in this country and probably get 100,000 people. i look at the democrats and joe biden rally ãbthey couldn't pay enough people to show up to fill high school auditorium with those folks. i agree with your premise in general overall because you see this everywhere from what us
6:43 pm
attorney durham is doing. i think there's a huge swatch of americans who does not believe that there is an equal application of justice under it. it's one-sided. it's unfortunate and my grandfather was a career fbi agent. i think if you look at the fbi today you would cringe but i'm trying to say i think it happens across the board you can take these illegal immigration cases you can take simple town hall people yelling screaming disrupting threatening carrying weapons on school grounds. i don't think they arrested anybody. i got pictures body cam pictures from police officers entrusted their judgment in my town hall to make the right decision and keep the column and i think they made all the right calls they learned from some of these others where the
6:44 pm
escalation happened. then i look at portland and i see nt for and others just running a rock shot and nobody's arrested let alone prosecuted. i think that's wrong and i think conservatives are right to point that out because i think we been on the receiving end and it's gone on too long and there doesn't seem to be any consequence to truly threatening aggressive behavior where there is an actual assault. i think you touched on something that's much bigger and broader than my talent. >> ã >> i think they are broadcasting part of this. >> will trump win 2020? >> i think so. i think he will lose some states, like california with the vote harvesting it's going to come down to ãb i want to be optimistic.
6:45 pm
house races are really hard to protect because there's usually a local issue and at the end of the day it's one person versus another person. it's really hard to tell who the personalities are. on both sides. i think in part it's a referendum on donald trump it's going pretty well. you could complain about the tweets. if you're complaining about the tweets then you are looking for an excuse. i think of donald trump gets it trade deal done with china i think it's going to play so well right into the democratic base. [inaudible question] >> your girlfriend? what is she doing hanging out talk about your background if your girlfriend was hanging out with carter. [laughter] i'm just teasing.
6:46 pm
i think donald trump earns credit on both side of the aisle. no member how many people are talking heads on television we finally have a president who is standing up to make it right. let me get this gentleman right here. >> what i think needs to happen is not for profits that are openly engaging the irs spent an awful lot of time making sure these 300+ conservative organizations never got the authorization to exercise their first amendment right. the size and gravity of the irs where they not looking at these
6:47 pm
major players and how they are doing this because it's simple you can look at it in two minutes line after line year after year they lose money why would they do that? what's the answer to that question? maybe a congressional committee should answer that question. but having more importantly, the irs should do that. by the way, we point out how planned parenthood they parked millions overseas and what they do in africa to insist on allowing abortions we point out and i want to make sure i get the statistic right i believe they spend more on abortions and some of these countries than they do in food and water aid it's kind of disgusting but they do. >> thanks for what you are doing and for the book. i don't know if you would agree but don't you think an uneducated electorate is why we have this blatant power grab?
6:48 pm
>> that's a big part of the whole premise of my book the whole idea seek first to understand then be understood. make sure you win the argument before you go out try to win the vote. you don't make the argument and inform people and say, do you think it's right that a not-for-profit charity is engaging in politics? i think most people would say no they shouldn't. but you have to engage in that. >> we have one of the largest as millennial's come of age to vote, excuse me, and the generation behind them, i taught school for 10 years and you probably know where i'm going with this. i would love to see us make a case for return of the school systems to local entities. not national, not the nea, not the same act affirmative education. >> i signed on to the bill that said there shouldn't even be the same act affirmative education. let the money follow the kids. we should do this at the local
6:49 pm
level. as i look back at our kids all went to public school system very grateful we had a good education system, pretty good i think in utah. but history, civics. >> that's what i taught. >> financial education like how to do a checkbook was like almost nonexistent. it was really pretty pathetic. >> but you have situations where teachers like me who are conservative and i never stood in front of my classroom and said i'm a republican and i want you to vote republican i told my civic class i said before you leave the classroom you will be registered to vote and i said that's all i care about is that you register to vote and go vote. the union rep came and talked to me and she said you will not be allowed to be committee covered by the liability insurance if you say things like that. >> hole education system we would need a couple hours to go to that but yes sir. >> just a quick question, many
6:50 pm
think we are losing fox. for those of us to watch a long time it's changing dramatically and that's a big deal for us going forward. what can you say and what can you smile at? >> i'm glad you asked that question because when i showed up at fox and had an offer from another network as well and i went with fox and fox i said, all right, what do you want from me? what do you need from me? they said you'd just be you will want your gut we want authenticity. however you see it you call it. don't think that you have to support the president, if you do, great, if you don't, great. whatever you want. i think fox is finding a niche in a place and what i appreciate about foxes that is the only place that i know that truly opens up the debate to both sides and i will tell you as a conservative we should never ever be worried about
6:51 pm
hearing from the other side as well. because it makes my argument stronger. if i can't win that debate, shame on me. i love the fact that they are giving time and opportunity for democrats and liberals to state their point and look at it and say, are you kidding me?bring me on, let me debate that ridiculous asinine position he just took on and win the argument. i wouldn't worry about that at all. i hear some people say, even the president ãbis not there to be a political arm of just one voice and one political side, i like the fact that they allow and give opportunities to both sides. it's something i think america is striving for and i think given the chance to have the argument conservatives win 99/100 times. >> we have time for one or two
6:52 pm
more. >> going back to the ngo issue, has the irs shown any interest in looking into these? this sounds like a huge negative impact on the country. has there been interest? >> the book is six or seven days old so i'm hoping on y'all and fox i wrote an op-ed for fox news.com they let me on the air to talk about it. i'm doing the book tour. i'm doing all i can to draw attention to it and hopefully there are some members in the house and senate that will also do something along with it as well. i think for most people it's a brand-new information. we will see. >> you noted the nexus between the liberal camp, ngos, media but there is the emerging power the social media giants. google's, twitters what have you, that not only maintain
6:53 pm
enormous amounts of information about us but control the flow of information and influence the actual discussion with the issues are. what's the appropriate response to this. >> your highlight something i think we all have to deal with. when i was the chairman of the oversight committee i did something never been done before. we created a subcommittee on information technology. not only emerging technology and how the government spends $250 billion, i'm sorry, $90 billion 250,000 employees on technology, that's how much we are spending in taxpayers but also to look at some of these dilemmas out there. i think i was more than 40, i think bipartisan group state attorneys general now filing suit against these behemoths
6:54 pm
organization as a conservative i'm a little bit torn because i believe as a private entity they can do what they want to do and if consumers don't want to go that direction they can go another direction. our own son was on facebook and then a couple years ago dropped it. he said it's just a cesspool of negativity. it's a waste of my time and i think he didn't like that his parents also got on and tried to friend him. that didn't help. the court ruling is interesting that the president can't come of the rule was that they can't delete followers and i tweeted back saying, does the same holds true in that as the twitters and google's of the world can they hold back from allowing people to see the president's account and other people's account?
6:55 pm
if i put up a two conservative post barely goes to anybody and i got hundreds and hundreds of thousands of followers and it may be goes to 1500 people. like really? why do you think 250,000 people on facebook signed up as a like and i process it only went to 1500? then i will test it i will put up something else it will go to like 40 or 50,000 people. really? something in those algorithms is not being done in a straightforward manner. long-winded way of saying i think people need to have exposure in terms of content. i think it's fascinating what europe is doing in terms of the right to be forgotten. i think there are child issues that have not been dealt with previously, the law allowed a 13-year-old to sign up, what other instants do we allow 13-year-olds to engage in a contractual obligation and if they

18 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on