tv Washington Journal CSPAN December 23, 2016 7:00am-10:01am EST
presidential pardons. then a conversation with professor kathryn cramer about the 2016 campaign and the role of rural voters. her new book is "the politics of ♪ host: good morning. president-elect am calling on the u.s. to restore nuclear capabilities. and the new york times right -- writes, putin and donald trump . he wrote, the u.s. must greatly strengthen and expand nuclear capabilities and the time the world comes to send this -- its senses regarding nukes.
what does that mean for the nato, forrussia, for our allies? your comments and reactions this week -- to the tweet yesterday. for republicans, (202) 748-8001. .or democrats, (202) 748-8000 and for independents, (202) 748-8002. many of you already weighing in. good morning. this is the headline was the front page, trouncing the -- signaling a security system. more on this in a moment. first my breaking news overnight, reporting on the berlin suspect that has been shot and killed near a milan, italy train nation. "the tunisian man sought in primary suspect in the attack on
the berlin market this week, killed by a talent police -- italian police near milan." he became the subject of a massive manhunt yesterday morning after authorities discovered his personal documents in the cap of the truck used by the berlin attack. his fingerprints on the door. the interior italian minister says many incident took place near the outskirts of the lawn, two police officers stopped the magma presumed to be amri. amen removed -- he then removed a handgun and shot an officer in the shoulder, before being shot and killed by another officer. we want to begin this morning with your reaction to the tweet yesterday. donald trump saying it is time for the u.s. to expand nuclear capabilities.
this from the washington post. before lunchtime on thursday the president-elect said he would expand the u.s. arsenal, of ending a course set by residents of both parties, and called for the united states to veto a pending u.s. resolution that criticized israel's policies. first, reaction yesterday on msnbc much alien on way -- msn kellyanne conway was asked about this. pakistan, the number of nuclear weapons may have -- do you talk about that? >> i don't. we talk about that with the national security team. >> busyness states announces a plan on nuclear policy. india pakistan hands - - has noe
-- >> we're getting ahead of ourselves. >> but that is what has happened in the past when presidents have made even joking remarks about nuclear weapons. a lot of people like hiding under the bed right now. it does not seem like he knows what he is talking about on this issue. >> that is not there. >> how can you make policy on twitter. he is extending the nuclear arsenal and announcing it on twitter. >> he said his capability. and maybe he is doing that president obama try to do, looking at nuclear systems. i saw the tune of a price tag of $1 trillion. in a, he is talking about, perfect world we would not be talking about nuclear weapons. it is not a perfect world. it is a world in which military might -- >> extending nuclear capability. >> he did not say that. i'm saying the water which we
live, it is very dangerous and uncertain. military might has been one of the ways to deter people from doing bad things. that could take on any number of different aspects, but on this one i think you are getting a little ahead of ourselves and changing policy in making policy in a way that he did not intend. rachel: the president making policy happens when he's on a national security matter. kellyanne conway. that tooks tweet place from his resorts in florida, saying that the united states must greatly strengthen and expand their capabilities until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes. on our facebook page on many of you already weighing in. here are some comments. recall that ronald
reagan was called stupid for investing in star wars and new technology, including nuclear. i'm very happy with this news. karen says, he is right again. ronald reagan taught us peace through strength. obama was forcing the military to complete itself and we are done being a weak nation. twitter much of his a madman wanting to build more new -- nukes. he is going to blow us all up. tell us what you think about the tweet and the reaction. robert joining us on henderson, kentucky. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i think the president-elect is unstable. insane he is somewhat and he needs to have a psychological analysis.
inone who is not even sworn yet should be in the position he -- to tweet such an irresponsible tweet. mike ising people with never going to be successful. donald trump has this type of authoritative attitude, he thinks privity is scared. isis likes to blow themselves up. it is an irresponsible and unacceptable tweet anything like this. thank you. host: brian said, somebody asked donald trump, to what end? to drive fear. ricky is joining us from michigan, the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you doing? host: we are fine, how are you?
caller: as an engineer, we do not need any more nuclear bombs. donald trump is crazy. we do not need anymore. you have some marines with nuclear weapons and any moment, we studied in school where all the target are in the united states. and all the power grids were actively in china, russia, we do not need anymore bonds. we need to reduce them. that you start bullying people around the world -- you start doing that in your career is over. iran will be wrapping it up. we do not need that kind of man in office. thank you. host: thank you for the call. "isher viewer with this, donald trump the most dangerous leader in history? we are about to find out. code (202) 748-8001 is online for
republicans. (202) 748-8000 is online for democrats. and our line for independents, (202) 748-8002. donald trump saying we must expand nuclear capabilities. quote, currently the executive director of the center for arms control saying, "it is dangerous for the president-elect to use 100 40 characters and announce a major change in u.s. nuclear weapons policy, which is nuanced and affects everything a person on the planet." under the new start treaty, the treaty negotiated by the president with russia and ratified by the senate might the u.s. and russia by february 2018 must have no more than 1550 strategic weapons deployed. while there is widespread agreement that it must be
modernized, little enthusiasm has been expressed for increasing the number of nuclear warheads. that is this morning from the washington post. your reaction to this. on the democrat line from the good morning. caller: good morning. the statement i want to make is, just to be clear, it is frightening what is going on here. this has never happened as far as i can tell. it has never happened or a president has actually come up and more or less advocated putting more weapons that could really destroy the planet, i am frightened myself. host: thank you for the call. david is joining us from lynchburg, virginia on the independent line. we will show you the headline. vladimir putin next to the casket of the russian ambassador to turkey that was killed
earlier this week. putin and trump call for a nuclear boost." caller: this goes to show how dangerous it can be for the misuse of words. and people cannot scrutinize the president of the free world saying things that i do not think we need to expand on nuclear weapons, but we probably do need to modernize them. host: thank you, david. how many times over in the nuclear arsenal destroy the world? donald trump wants to add to the number. and the front page of the usa today collide donald trump alling -- calling for more nukes. what are your thoughts? caller: thank you for taking my call. unfortunately, i think that the world is turning nuclear.
things all of these going on to my think -- going on, i think it is an origin and it is the direction we've been heading for a long time. host: thank you for the call. david is next, good morning. caller: i think you have me on the wrong line. it is republican. got: you are on the air, ahead with your comment. obama: the fact barack gave the keys to the kingdom to iran, that is where it a lot of the nuclear arms race is coming from. he gave $50 billion or at least made it accessible. and we have north korea caught up in the arms race, they are rattling sabers and shooting missiles, so i think the response of donald trump saying, we need to be reevaluating and
upgrading and updating,to our strength. that is another ronald reagan doctrine pretty -- dr. and -- doctrine. that is the way the game does. host: david on the republican line, thank you for the call. modernizedet, "a nuclear arsenal makes sense. i do not understand the democrats are complaining about. they are back to loving russia again?" the story, the front page of the new york times, a photograph of the deadly fire that took place in oakland, california, but the headline relating to donald trump, saying the u.s. should expand nuclear capability. and writing on this in the new york times, also available online, he says, the last time the next eight declared -- uni ted states declared a nuclear
policy, it requested a 64 page report. donald j. trump appears to have done so in 100 characters, forcing analysts and foreign look ato do -- to foreign policy from a freebie towards -- brief words. policy has a language all with implementing signal clearly to allies and adversaries. his words fall outside that language, creating several interpretations with a wide range of meanings and ramifications for the world, as well as uncertainty that is in itself destabilizing, according to analysts that one about that." max fisher, the new york times, available online. we will go to josh on the republican line from baltimore. good morning. caller: hi, how are you? host: good, how are you? voted: can somebody that
for donald trump it is having second thoughts already, i wonder how much of this is -- you know, there is not much news coverage directly from them. it is news pertaining to his tweets. who knows what he is doing behind closed doors. he says anything. and the other curiosity i'm wondering, if he is taking a ronald reagan playbook and following it would for. even though it is 30 years old, he sounds like the reagan era kind of mentality. host: thank you. we will go to brenda on the democrats line. good morning. your thoughts? caller: merry christmas, stephen. please everyone, enjoy this christmas, it may be our last. two points i want to make. host: i certainly hope not. merry christmas.
caller: i have been in a state of shock since the election. you have no idea. comment, il get your want to let the audience know, at the end of the program we thosesk that question, if that did not support donald trump are able to move on with them at the president elect. caller: it is hard. it is like watching a child, you know that the child is not going to act right or do what is right and ok, i need to watch you march into this horror. the two points i want to make my try to appeal -- i want to to appeal to the christian republicans, they always make a comparison that donald trump is so strong. when he died for
us on the cross? he took the punishment knowing he did not have to. he could have called for angels to rescue him. was that week -- weak? stephen, i know you cannot do this because you guys are gentleman and i love every last one of you. with the exception of maybe one. anyway, my last point is, when the republicans call in, let's give them a chance, nobody wants to give donald trump a chance -- thent you to ask individual, you are a republican, did you want to give president obama a chance? were you willing to give him a chance? are you rallying for his support? thank you, you have a blessed happy new year. host: brenda, thank you. another viewer with this tweet, throughd war was won
negotiation and compromise, rather than armed confrontation." we will go back to max fisher, this piece available online, he breaks down in detail what the tweet means. "a straight reading of this language suggesting that mr. trump is promising an increase in the number of deployed warheads and the capability of weapons systems, but his unconventional language and a lack of policy experience leaks costthe increase would billions of dollars." henry on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. two aspects to my answer. it will be brief and strong. first, for at least 10 years we have been modernizing our weapons. i lived in santa fe for many years and i was a reporter on
this, these weapons have gone through a rejuvenation program. and number two, i do not think donald trump has ever read kissinger. he never read the stuff we have read in college or school. and he does not know what he is talking about. the fourth thing, you have to have -- in order for it to work, you must have two sane parties, but mr. trump every day is unstable and he is projecting this on the american people and i have been to think he is a nut. i think he is wrong. host: henry, go ahead. caller: i think he is wrong. again, these weapons, they are going up the hill to lost almost and they took them. ask any new mexican. ask if they can refer to any of your articles? there is a safekeeping program.
he is wrong in that respect. these are not obsolete weapons. they are not new, but on the know, nobody- you wants to stand under them, on the off chance that they would work. host: thank you. nukes are a"more waste." world iser, "the plummeting and he is making america second rate again." we are one month away from the inauguration of our 45th president, live covers beginning on january 20, the traditional ceremony that will take place at noon. the arrival of the president-elect to the white house happening around 11:00 eastern, followed by a luncheon, the inaugural ball, and a trophy as history unfold on friday, january 20.
you can read more on our website and for those of you listening on c-span radio. and many commenting, this is renee who says, we have depleted ours, thanks to obama, we are the least respected country. i believe with peace through strength. " i remembers, getting under my desk for drills. we have grown week and with the likes of iran, russia and china, we need to be strong and able to retaliate, talking in good faith is ridiculous." spoke with "trump vladimir putin and they agree they both need to work on nuclear weapons to destroy the world. both of these men are dangerous. wake up america." good morning, caller. caller: merry christmas. i want to say, and that of increasing -- instead of
increasing nuclear weapons, they should work smarter and harder. we had a70's, we had, big meeting between president -- bresnev, and i don't know if it was carter, and they -- host: 1979 it took place. caller: they were upset because we had developed cruise missiles with the systems that could deliver quite a lot of destruction to russia. is, ronald reagan came on and told them, we're going to work for the strategic directive initiative or something like that. now we have computers to go into that strategic directive initiative and as a matter of fact, i think china is working on that too. that could actually turn the
tide in nuclear war. for prevention. host: thank you. and from time magazine, the view from ian brenner, this is called the era of global leadership is over. this is what comes next. at least theor next four years america interaction will be guided not by the conviction that u.s. leadership is good for america, but by donald trump's transactional approach. this will force friends and foes to question every assumption they've made about washington, adding more assertive china and russia to the greater willingness of traditional allies to hedge bets on an american plans and it is clear we have reached a turning point. donald trump is not an isolationist, he is a unilateralist and probably a selfish one." the full story is available online at time.com. patrick is joining us from oklahoma city.
welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. statesve the united should expand its naval nuclear capabilities. i used to work for an animal -- admiral, and i designed ballistic submarines, attack submarines, and we have allowed those naval ships to decline and we need to expand that capability and i am a trump supporter and i believe we should expand it. that is all i have to say. and i will listen to the,s -- the comments. host: thank you. the headline, putin and trump supporting a new pair on space boost.ear arms good morning.
caller: this year, the christians and the jews, we celebrate the holidays, and i think we have a king now. it is the first time in many years. we have one president at a time. this psychopath has many traits that are dangerous. he brings with him his special needs child, that is probably retarded, his foreign wife, and it is a shame that america is going to be deprecated by this type of conduct. host: you are referring to a special needs child, what you talking about? his son that goes to a special school and lives in a room by himself, who is probably not autistic but is retarded. and his wife you can find all over the internet in porn. host: ok.
i do not see the point of using the phrase retarded. this is from robert, "the apology tours are over, it is time to be a leader again." donald trump calling on the u.s. to restore nuclear capabilities. how is all of this plane overseas? -- playing overseas? we look at this -- the inquisition for donald trump to fashion is unclear. it may further- along those already worried by the president-elect's seemingly nonchalant attitude for the deadliest weapons of all. tweet came hours after vladimir putin said that russia, the cold war adversary of the u.s., needed to boost the potential of their own nuclear
forces, to penetrate systems." that is this morning from the independent in great britain. donald trump has a nonchalant attitude to the deadliest weapon the world has ever known. welcome listeners on c-span radio, we're talking about his tweet yesterday, that the u.s. must expand their nuclear capability. james is joining us from west virginia. good morning. caller: good morning, sir. i would like to come in. i disagree with the last caller bring much. i do not think donald trump's mental or not. anyway, i cannot understand our americans. i am 71 years old. i voted ever since i was 18 years old. and i cannot believe how america is so, so disoriented and
confused, and so much hatred, hatred. and god bless donald trump with all of the criticism he has had and everything going on with his coming in as the president. we need to get behind this man. i cannot vote for, think of his name, he got assassinated. host: president kennedy? caller: yes. i did not vote for him, but as i watched his presidency, it made him feel proud to be an american with a democratic president. i vote for whoever i think will fill the job, whether democrat or republican, and i voted republican this year because i did not like -- agree with hillary clinton and her things. that is in the past.
what i would like to call on the americans, let's pray for this president and let's get behind become,let's help him make america great again, because we do need the nuclear arms agreements and things like this. we need our power back. we need our dignity back and we need america to be great again. god bless you for letting me get on the air. i hope and pray the americans will listen to my voice and pull together, and let's work together this, in the next four years. we have had a mess in the last eight years, this is a new birth. this is a bringing forth of america again and a new birth with donald trump being our leader. let's get behind him. god bless you. host: quick question. thank you. quick question. do you worry this will create another nuclear arms race similar to the 1960's or 1970's?
caller: i don't think it will. i think it will let the russians know that we are just as important in this world as they are. that obamaof hate stood by and let the russians do what they did over there in the middle east with all the killings that they did over there. for in a do not look nuclear arms race or anything that is going to be -- i think donald trump has a head on his shoulders and i think he has the right people that are going to be his diplomats to bring forth peace in the world and also to deal with russia and anybody else. god bless you and i thank you for letting me be on. host: james, thank you. inside the wall street journal, senior staff beginning to take shape. reported yesterday his campaign manager will move to 1600
pennsylvania avenue to serve as counselor to the president. and sean spicer, a press secretary, will take the helm as white house press secretary, replacing josh earnest. harry from pittsburgh, good morning. caller: good morning. i tell you, you mentioned something about the nuclear buildup. every country is doing this. if you look at since obama has been in, how many attacks we have had in our country. the one under bush was because nobody was doing anything for eight years when clinton was in. we need to build up nuclear energy, that is the only way to make countries afraid of you. china, russia, iraq, everybody has nuclear. and this is getting crazy. i do have one thing to say, the guy that called from chicago mentioned donald trump's son
being retarded and his wife being a poor and start, this is star, this is the mentality people have. and that guy from chicago, what kind of scum made you to make remarks like that about somebody? i can call you that because he called donald trump's children names. we can all awnings. -- call names. that is all i have to say about it. host: merry christmas. we were showing you the chart from the washington post that includes a breakdown of the nuclear reduction as a result of the new strategic arms reduction treaty of 2010. according to the washington post, donald trump and latin putina can's -- vald vladimir suggesting an increase. the washington post says it is not entirely clear what donald trump meant when he said, " until such time people come to
their senses." you can look at this chart and also get more information online at washington post.com. had nos tweet, "we leadership under obama." licannother tweet, "repub congresses will not go after as being honest teams -- espionage teams." join in on the conversation. send as a tweet. and many of you sharing comments on our facebook page. rosie, cleveland, good morning. caller: good morning. listen, i am a first-time caller. i got in on the first call. and i thank you for taking my call. host: sure. caller: i would like to refer to the guy that said donald trump
had a head on his body. he does, and in my opinion, it is an air head. he has no knowledge of weapons, the nuclear weapons, and if he gets his way, he is going to blow up this country. said thate that president obama caused all of these problems, i do not know what rock he has been living under. but these problems are going on -- were going on before president obama took office. and the caller that said, that we have had all of these problems with since the president has been in office, you can tell the amount of education that he had by his vocabulary. and that is all i have to say. and thank you for taking my call. host: thank you very much.
thank you for your calls and comments. democrats for liberty said, " this response from trump shows he is easily manipulated and the love affair between donald trump and vladimir putin is already starting to unravel. he has led followers to believe that they are friends and it was not within that wrist nuclear war with russia, but donald trump." and weakness invites aggression. jimmy carter and obama are prepared they are also reporting -- are true. they are also reporting, raising questions and fears. jason miller, a spokesperson going to the white house as well, saying "donald trump was referring to the threat of nuclear proliferation and the need to prevent it, particularly among terrorist organizations and unstable regimes." donald trump will take office on january 2010 and emphasizing the
need -- as a way to pursue peace through strength. and that was from jason miller of the drum transition team. randy is joining us from chicago heights. good morning. caller: good morning. i am calling to say i do not believe the nukes are a problem. i do not think donald trump or russia or any other country that is nuclear, that has nuclear weapons, is a problem because i do not believe we are ever going to use them. i believe the threat is the terrorists. and accidents could happen. i believe in the safety of having them. wars went back to the old were men fought men and used our normal weapons, it would be a safer world, because this is cheating by using nuclear weapons, it could destroy a
whole country and everything like that. terrorists do not care how many nukes we have come a are not really safe by having one million nukes. how many do you need? that is my concern about having them in the first place. it is the safety. what if an accident happens? or a terrorist gets into a silo? that is what we need to think about. host: and my bloomberg is insuring your sentiment. "if you are in a room of gasoline and you have 3500 matches, so what if your enemy has 5000?" and another comment -- russia today is also reporting on all this from auntie, the tweet seems to divert from donald trump's public position that he expressed during the campaign, the billionaire
writes, the campaign on a platform of rebuilding the u.s. military while cutting taxes and bringing in federal spending. he was critical during the campaign, talking about president obama's plan to modernize the triad, you may have cost $1 trillion over the neck 30 years. the president is going to week break in hawaii and this might want from page has this headline, obama's final holiday on taxpayers, costing an estimated $35 million over the last eight years. and you can read that online. there is a photograph of the president playing golf. he will return for the final two weeks of his presidency after the first of the year. and sterling from charleston, south carolina. the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? i appreciate you taking my call. i will keep it short and sweet.
first and foremost, the majority of calls have been on the democrat and independent line, but talk about the education line -- level of these people calling in, it is unbelievable, i am laughing at these statements of these people are making because they think they know so much and literally they know so little. second of all, the -- city that somebody would have to say something about somebody's kid. host: i stopped him on that. caller: you did. you did. this is the first time i have ever watched your show and let me tell you, you do a wonderful job in it will continue to watch your show. all i am saying is the audacity to say something about somebody's child and wife, especially the president elect of the night if it, -- united states, it is unbelievable to me. merry christmas. host: merry christmas and thank you for turning to c-span.
we will be here tomorrow and sunday morning as well on christmas eve and day, we hope you will tune in after you are finished opening the presents and the china could gives -- a full weekend of programming of american history to become all available on our website. if you are just tuning in, we are getting your reaction to the tweet donald trump sent out yesterday just before noon, "the united states must greatly strengthen and expand their capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes." the front page story of the washington post, "before lunch on thursday, the president-elect saying he would expand the u.s. nuclear arsenal of ending a reduction course set by the presence over the last four decades. the also called the u.s. to veto
a pending resolution that criticize israel's policy." the full story is available on washington post.com. tara joining us from arkansas. the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: we are fine, how are you? caller: pretty good. all these people that are criticizing donald trump, if they don't think all of these other countries, isis, and all of these other countries are expanding their weapons and they, they're -- they -- are not thinking about what other countries are doing. and if we are not prepared, like when they hit pearl harbor, we are not prepared for that kind
of a war, and i don't think anybody wants a world war iii. or another more. -- war. and i don't believe donald trump want another war, i believe he wants to be prepared in case we have to go to war. if we need to go to war. host: thank you. joining us from arkansas. and the dnc chair candidates faulting obama, pointing out from keith ellison, one of the candidate vying to become the next chair, saying under president obama, 1000 democratic officeholders lost their jobs. the dnc chair must be operated separately and not from the white house. you can read the story online. and this from robert with reference to the president golfing in hawaii, "too bad obama did not stay on the worst for the past -- stay on the golf course for the past eight
years." another saying, "trump is incapable of deep thought." roger is next on the independent line. good morning. welcome to the conversation. roger, you are on the air. one more time. evans. go on to good morning. caller: good morning. this nuclear thing, and a lot of people forget what presidents putin said before he came president, that he would drop 1000 nuclear bombs on america. that was a quote he said. and, which i don't trust a lot of people, because other countries are pointed at us. one thing i don't understand is we keep selling 20% of our
uranium to russia. and that is about all i have to say on that. people need to know about him. one thing for america, a house divided cannot stand, and we all need to get together and become americans again. host: thank you for the call. one story we want to share related to this is from time magazine, quoting the outgoing president in a press conference in april, according to time, "after the nuclear security summit, the president warning that the balance must be stopped to return to a nuclear arms race. the president saying we must guard against ramping up new and deadly systems that end up leading to a whole new escalation of the arms race." the headline, donald trump wants to build up the nuclear arms arsenal great you can continue the conversation on our facebook
page. when we come back we will turn our vision to another issue getting a lot of attention. the president issuing another series of pardons, in a single day, more than 200 federal inmates, the most ever by a president in a single day. samuel morrison will be here to discuss how the president makes these decisions. and we are continuing our christmas series with authors, joining us will be katherine cramer, the author of "the politics of resentment." looking at wisconsin and rural america. you are listening to the washington journal. on this friday morning, the 23rd of december. we will be back in a moment. we hope you stay with us. ♪
>> this holiday weekend, here are some of our featured programs. on saturday, we take a look at farewell speeches and tribute to outgoing members of the white house. starting with the senator from maryland. and speeches from joe biden. then at 8:00, christmas at the white house. join michelle obama as she receives the official white house christmas tree. tour the white house and see the decorations. make products with children of military families visiting the white house, and finally the tree lighting ceremony on the national mall. hear from the former house speaker on the trump presidency in his time in congress. and at 9:40 p.m., it's in the portrait unveiling of the outgoing minority leader, harry reid, democrat of nevada. speakers include hillary
clinton, vice president joe biden and carl schumer. and then we hear from the retiring member of congress, representative charles rangel of new york. and then from the shakespeare theater on capitol hill, we take you to the romeo and juliet wrongful death mock trial, where saying alito will serve as presiding judge. and at 6:30 p.m., a look at the career of mike pence and his new role as vice president. watch on c-span and c-span.org, and listen on the free radio app. >> follow the transition of government as president-elect donald trump selects his cabinet and the repair for the next congress, we will take you to key events as they happen. watch on c-span, watch on-demand on c-span.org, or listen on our free c-span radio app.
unfoldswhere history daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. it is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. "washington journal." host: we want to welcome samuel morison, from the office of the pardons until 2010, a long background in the issue of presidential pardons. let's go to the u.s. constitution, article two, section two, clause one, "the president shall have power to grant pardons for offenses against the united states, except in cases of impeachment." what does that mean? guest: the president of the united states can relieve
somebody of the consequences of the commission of an offense. it does not apply only to conviction, it applies to the commission of the offense. any time after it occurs, the president can grant a full pardon, which would end the criminal process, or he can grant a more limited form of relief, which is a reduction of sense. -- sentence. that assumes the person has been convicted and sentenced. other than that, the other constraints have to be found in the constitution, so you cannot prevent his administration from being impeached. that is what the impeachment clause refers to. he also can't refund money already in the treasury, because another part of the constitution says congress can only
appropriate money by law. short of, he also can't for example part a state offense, because that is against the united states. so there are a few constraints on what the president can do, but apart from those thing is discretionary power. host: you were at the department of justice and this is the website and the office of the pardon attorney. i want to go back to what happened this week, because this is the most ever in a single day, 78 pardons. guest: that is not quite right. not the most in a single day. that is the white house exaggerating that a little bit. it is a large number. host: harry truman had the most? 1500 in agranted over single day. muted 264ent lincoln
cases in a single day. i'm not denying it is a large number, it is up there, but it is not the most in a single day. host: in order to get a pardon, what is the process? guest: ordinarily, under the rules that apply to the pardon office, you must wait five years after you are released from prison, or after you are convicted, if you do not go to prison. whichever is later? formew file a complicated with the office, they do whatever investigation they think is appropriate, then they write a recommendation to the president, a letter of advice. that is the recommendation about physician not the should be granted. and that is what the president relies on. the real audience in a practical sense is doj.if they give you a recommendation , you have a good chance of a
pardon. host: let me follow up on that and highlight some points. in order to receive a presidential pardon, the ,ollowing criteria is looked at the legal forgiveness granted in the acceptance of responsibility of the crime and giving good conduct. it does not signify innocence by the individual, it removes civil disabilities and the person not eligible until a minimum of five years, having a lapse since release of confinement. host: that is correct. guest: that is correct. those are rules that the office follows. as i said, the constitutional constraints on the president must be found in the constitution. none of those are actually lost. -- laws. the president can make exceptions. but those are the rules that the
pardons office follows and the basic inquiry they are trying to decide is, is the person rehabilitated and therefore not likely to reoffend. host: correct me if i am wrong, i believe this was the first president to travel inside it present to meet -- inside a prison. and one organization who will be working with is my brothers keepers. strikes and you're out has her african-american men, keeping them in jail longer and not allowing them to return to a sense of normalcy in their lives, even for crimes like possessing drugs. guest: this president has made that a central focus of his part in policy, that is to relieve primarily african-americans and other minorities who he believes have been punished more harshly under the drug laws then they
would be if they were sentenced today. since there is a widespread consensus that those sentences are excessive, but congress did not make them retroactive, the president's power is in the only way to address the issue. host: there is a story this week about whether or not pardons could be used for deportation of those in the country illegally, is that within the president's authority? guest: i do not believe it is directly, that is a complicated question. the answer is -- the president's power is limited to relieving the consequences of a criminal conviction. if someone is in removal proceedings, because they were convicted of a federal crime, then the pardon of the federal crime will prevent them from being deported. but most people in deportation proceedings are there for other reasons, other than conviction of a federal crime, so the
answer is, he can prevent the deportation through the pardon power of a subset of people who are subject to removal, but not the majority. he cannot directly pardon somebody's immigration status, that is a civil matter, not a criminal matter. host: we are talking with samuel morison who specializes in presidential pardons. he was in the office of the pardoning attorney in the department of justice. we will get your questions. he is earning a law degree from north carolina school of law. (202) 748-8001, the line for republicans. (202) 748-8000, if you are a democrat. we also have a line for independents, you can also reach us on facebook. i want to ask you about a political story in illinois, the former governor who tried to get early release from his prison sentence, a story from the
chicago sun-times. he had speculated whether he could grant a pardon to the former governor who was charged with trying to sell barack obama's senate seat in 2008. guest: keycode. the governor was convicted in federal court for that conduct, so it is a federal offense. the president, notwithstanding any rules, has the unfettered authority to either pardon or commute the sentence if he chooses to do it. frankly, i do not have inside information, but i am assuming his lawyers are trying to press the white house to do that thing. ist: if that assumption true, what do they tell you and what is the case to the president? guest: for mr. blue going to him, it is a plea for mercy. they could argue, and i have not
looked at the case, but his sentence was disproportionate perhaps to other political figures convicted of similar crimes. something like that. that would be the approach. host: for other individuals that come to your office looking for a pardon, the family members say my husband or wife has suffered enough, what is that process and what are the keywords? it dependss not, first of all on whether they are seeking a commutation or a pardon. if somebody is in prison, a family member in prison, and they want to get there sentence reduced, you are looking at the nature of the crime, did it involve violence, was it a drug offense or not, that seems to be a focus of the president's initiative, are there any issues
like unrewarded corporation or disproportionate sense, things like that. overall, what is the petitioner's attitude toward the offense? if he wants to seek vindication or argue about whether he is really guilty, he is not a candidate for clemency. you are making a judgment about partly what the nature of the offense is, but what they have done with their life since they got out. have they been steadily employed and what are their reasons for seeking a pardon. of look at the whole package criteria and try to make a judgment about whether you think the justice department is going to think this person is a good candidate for pardon. host: we will go to oakland, california. the democrat line. speaking with samuel morison. good morning. caller: i would say that it is
ok that he allowed these couple hundred people to be pardoned, but i am upset that obama did not create policy to allow some of these people, who have been forn 15-20 year sentences cocaine. he should have created public policy to allow these hundreds of thousands of black men sitting in prison unlawfully in my opinion, and my question is, this is about private prisons and filling them up. he did nothing to address that. i am upset about that. that, you are freeing a couple of people, that is doing nothing. my question is, where all of these in federal prison? what about the people in state prison? host: thank you. guest: the president does not have the authority to pardon or commute is the offender, so we
are only talking about federal prisoners. that is because the president grimes. host: william, from virginia. caller: good morning. i like to ask a question of your guest. excuse my voice, i have bronchitis. are there any databases over years of whether or not any of these people who are commuted or pardoned or whatever, whether or not they end up in trouble again? is there any data for that to tell us whether or not they come out and become productive citizens? guest: the short answer is, i am not aware of any statistics that have been maintained on whether a pardon recipient recidivate's.
i know it happens but i think it is very rare. in general, i think the process is very rigorous so i think it is unlikely that that is going to happen, and certainly not on a large scale. host: let me share this story from national public radio conducted a lengthy interview with newt gingrich, and the subject of presidential pardons came up. he said, the constitution gives -- donaldent a wide trump could potentially use the power of the pardon if anyone in his administration seemed to be filing in conflict of interest laws or protocols. guest: my answer is, it would depend. again, the conduct in question would have to be a crime. he cannot pardon somebody from a ,ivil ethics regulation or law and essentially exempt them from the ethics rules.
if they had committed a criminal offense that was rooted in the ethics laws, he could pardon them for that. host: mark stone has this tweet, what types of crimes are these people serving in jail? are they some drug dealers? guest: a large percentage of people in federal prison are serving time for drug-related offenses, something like 40% of the total federal prison population. host: let's go to gordon, ithaca, new york, democrats line. caller: good morning. pardonquiring about a for edward snowden. does a petition that people signed help influence the procedure? when someone reveals the government is retain the breaking the law, shouldn't that person faced a pardon instead of life imprisonment or something like that? host: thank you, gordon.
guest: i think the answer with snowden is complicated as he himself wrote the law. he is a civil disobedient, and takelly civil disobedients the consequences of their punishment, so whether he should be pardoned or not is a matter i think people disagree about. he is also a fugitive, so he has not returned and faced the consequences of his act. in general, while the president has the authority to do it, he usually does not intervene in a case like that. host: another tweet asking ken pardons and commutations be made without eachbsets individual by name? guest: absolutely, that is called an amnesty and it is granted to a class of people. that has happened dozens of times in american history. host: this surprised me when we
were getting ready, the number of pardons this president has issued. it is available at usa today.com. president obama issuing more than 1100 part and now it is up to about 2000. bush, 189. bill clinton, 396. jimmy carter, 534. gerald ford, 382. richard nixon, 800 xt three. lyndon johnson, 960. almost 2000. guest: to put that in a little bit of context, most of president obama's grants are commutations. about 150 are part. -- pardons. host: presidential forgiveness.
, tot: a couple of points put that in some sort of historical context. there is no doubt he has done a fair amount of grant, particularly in light of recent presidents, but as the percentage of the prison population actually has not. as a point of comparison, presidents kennedy and johnson granted 324 commutations to drug offenders in the early 1960's. that is sort of the model for what people is doing today. the size -- for what president obama is doing today. the size of the prison population was less than 10% of what it is today so president obama would have to grant over 3000 commutations to equal what kennedy and johnson did. i think if we look at it in a proper historical context, what he is doing is important. it means everything to the individuals that get the grant. but it is not as historically
significant as some people want to make it out to be. host: one of the most famous presidential pardon came, gerald ford, when he pardoned richard nixon. under what criteria? guest: that was a purely political decision, and that is a good illustration of the scope of the pardon power. president nixon had not been charged, much less convicted of anything, but president ford came to the conclusion that it was in the best interest of the country to move on from watergate. and that was how we did it. he wanted to put that issue to rest. quin from boulder, colorado, on the independent line. caller: i would like to bring up a question about clemency for leonard pelletier. obviously he did not do it, and the courtroom administration
when they were talking about pardoning him, the fbi actually picketed the white house to prevent him from doing that. i was wondering what you guys obama barriers to pardoning leonard pelletier. guest: the barriers are political. it is that he would be criticized if he did it by a lot of people who would be unhappy about it. fbi wasointed out, the quite upset the last time this was mentioned in the clinton administration. mr. pelletier has submitted an application, i do know that. we will see what president obama does. host: you touched on this earlier, but maybe the viewer or listener did not hear your answer. the question is, could president obama grant amnesty to all noncriminal and nonviolent illegal aliens living in the
usa? guest: the short answer is no, he cannot do that. the vast majority of people who would be called illegal aliens have not committed a crime, they have just overstayed their visa or do not have a status under the immigration my. that is not a criminal defense. the president can only pardon crimes. if somebody is being removed from the country, being deported, and the basis for the deportation is that i have committed a federal crime then yes, a pardon of that crime would prevent their removal. but that is only a subset of a very large class of people who are in immigration proceedings. host: can you summarize on average how many request your office receives in any given year, and the staff involved in researching these cases? guest: those numbers have grown substantially under president obama. when i was there from 1997 to 2010, on an average year me --
year you might have 2000 commutation applications and maybe 3000 or so pardon applications. and there skyrocketed are something like 15,000 pending commutation petitions. i do not know the exact amount of pardons, but it is several. and the staff has grown as well when i was there it was a total of six attorneys and now i think it is about twice that still a small office, but the staff has grown. host: how often does how long does it take to go through -- on average, to go through a pardon process, how long does it take? guest: you can expect a couple of years after you file the justice department scrutinizes them very carefully, and before you were going to get a favorable recommendation they will do a full background investigation by the fbi,
including interviewing the applicant, his character references, his neighbors, that sort of thing to try to determine what his character and reputation is in the community. and then they solicit the opinions of the sentencing judge and u.s. attorney's office that prosecuted the case, and all of that can take upwards of two years. host: if they are denied a pardon, can they come back and have it reconsidered? guest: they can but under the rules they have to wait two years. host: kelly in ashford, arizona, republican line. caller: good morning, merry christmas. they cannot get over trump winning. is, how many of the 2000 that obama has pardoned are muslims? that is the question. guest: i have no idea, and i can
tell you the pardon office does not track religious affiliation. host: we will go to bob in popoff, michigan. caller: i am not sure how much confiscation the federal agencies do of assets on someone that has been arrested on a smaller amount of drug possession. even though there is no presumption of innocence or guilt, would it be possible for a pardoned person to go into civil court and at least get back a proportionate amount of the assets seized vis-a-vis the seriousness of that crime they have been pardon for? i realize there is no guilt or innocence involved here. can they get their assets back or does the government actually seize assets like at the state and local level? guest: interestingly enough, that very question has been
seriously litigated in the federal courts all the way to the supreme court. the answer is that if there is a criminal forfeiture, a pardon would restore that property to the defendant provided it has not been sold to a third party or paid into the treasury of the united states. if either of those things have happened, it is too late. host: do you know, if you are pardoned, how that helps your chances of getting a job in the workforce? guest: i think it makes a big difference, because it is generally accepted that a pardon by the president is an official statement that you are forgiven for the offense, that you are fully rehabilitated, that you are restored to first class citizenship. and many employers, even if they are not legally obligated, treat it that way it also removes any legal restrictions that might be placed on you as a result of the conviction.
if you need a license, for example, or security clearance, a pardon helps facilitate that. host: you are a lawyer, not a historian, but why do you think the founders put this in the constitution? guest: that is fairly clear in the historical record. the pardon power is fundamentally a part of the separation of powers, and it is about dividing the powers of the government to protect individual liberty. congress has the authority to decide thats and the punishment is going to be. the courts adjudicate cases that come before them the president has the authority to enforce the law but also has the authority, in the interest of justice or in the interest of humanity and mercy, to make exceptions to the enforcement of the criminal law. be, the founders
conceived it as a check on the power of the legislature and the court. host: brian is next from to, park in washington, d.c.. caller: good morning. i have a question. with what we know about the activities of the fbi, illegal criminal racist activities, what is the possibility that the president went pardon those members of the black panther party who are still locked up peoplely, as well as the in cuba who were freedom fighters and political prisoners? we know the fbi was after them and went about it illegally. i will take my answer off-line. thanks. host: thank you for the call. guest: i guess the answer is, i do not know if any of those
people have applied. they have to ask generally speaking before the president is going to act. that is a hard question, because i would have to know exactly what they argue in their petition and someone. ultimately, it is going to be a political calculation by the white house. host: our guest is a lawyer specializing in executive clemency. how did you come to specialize in this area? guest: i took the job at the pardon office by chance because it seemed interesting, and ended up staying longer than i had intended. my experience there was that there was a lot of partner applications are people who put -- pardon applications from people who probably could have and should have been pardon, but did not do a good job putting their application together. they did not understand how it would be received by the justice department, so i felt when i left i had something to offer because i could help people walk
through the traps when they file their applications. host: the most common question you get asked, besides how long will it take? guest: the most common question, probably what are my chances of getting a pardon? you wrote the following in 2011 on the pardon office. . have put it on the screen you say the pardon office exploits the symmetry of information that protects the departments institutional prerogatives have a turning out a steady stream of almost uniformly negative advice regardless of the merits of any particular case. in effect, this amounts to little more than an effort to restrain rather than exercise the president's power of discretion. clear:licit message is you either do as we suggest, mr.
president, or you are on your own. been a critic of the way the pardon advisory process is structured. this is one thing where i do think president obama has made a mistake. thepresident could move pardon office out of the justice department if you wanted to, but he chose not to. the reason it is a problem is that the justice department has an inherent conflict of interest in every one of these cases. they prosecuted everyone. ,ou should not make any mistake they have and feel that they have an institutional interest in preserving those convictions. they're very strong -- very strong inclination is to just say no. moreover, all the president knows about the case except in the very few cases of high-profile people who have the resources to approach the white house directly, is whatever the justice department tells them about a case.
they minutes ago you said get these recommendations from the justice department. in most cases, that is all the white house knows, what the justice department tells them. that is their only basis for deciding. that gives the justice department and overwhelming advantage in terms of shaping the outcome. they basically control the ifcess, because they know the president wants to reject their recommendation he is flying blind. host: our topic, presidential pardons and clemency's. rison.est is samuel o is, i: my question is ending that obama the terror related registry before trump takes office.
i wonder, should we be concerned as citizens, because even those of themrdoned, if any were in because of terrorism and you have no registry to go by, this could be disastrous. host: thank you. guest: no one has been pardoned by president obama that was convicted of a terror related offense. host: bill in illinois, on the independent line. 1985, i had to move back to illinois to take care of two terminally ill parents, and i was business partners in a small aerospace company. i business partner was brought up on 25 different charges, including selling drugs to children in grade school, and he also had a charge of using a weapon.
down, -- negotiated it ea, received a 20 year sentence and he is one that is going to be pardoned. when people say it is victimless , they wereemployees in that factory that lost their job. i lost over $6,000 investment in the company, and i'm just appalled at what is going on. where is the voice of the victims of these people that committed these crimes? i just think it is ridiculous when i hear people say that drug dealing is a victimless crime. i am sorry, but that is my comment. host: thank you, from illinois. we will get a response. guest: i guess i have to partly disagree with that. i think in many cases drug crimes are in fact victimless.
society is the only victim. has a, the pardon office regulation to notify victims of an offense. if there are identifiable individuals who are harmed by criminal conduct, the u.s. attorney's office is notified and it is their responsibility to contact those people if they can find them, and get their input on a petition. the victims' views are considered. , or: on january 20, 2001 the day before president clinton pardoning march -- marc rich, where was the breakdown and why was that a mistake? is that hebreakdown retained a very well-connected attorney, which was his right. he did not do anything illegal -- i want to emphasize that. there is nothing wrong with trying to approach the white house directly if you can get access. the mistake that was made is that they cut out the justice department altogether.
there was no input from both sides. in that case, it is sort of the very rare exception for what i was complaining about earlier, where the justice department is the only voice. in that case, the justice department did not know it was being considered, and the white house trusted what they were being told and it blew up in their face. host: lucy in alabama, democrats line. caller: good morning. my question is in reference to government, the governor of alabama. what chances would he have of getting a pardon from president obama? well, that is another case where i do not represent governor siegelman so i do not have any information but i know he has a pending petition. he is a lot like governor okoye bench.
-- governor bogor is it. host: there is no limit to how many pardons a president can issue? guest: that is correct. caller: i just want to express something to america. i am a veteran, for it an elite force, air defense force. after spending my military career i got out of the military and into gaming. i have supervised games for 20 plus years. i have also been a manager of walmart. i have had a number of jobs where i had fbi background. hometown, chicago, and tried to get a job in gaming. made a mistake of walking by a vehicle, a 1999 caravan with no engine, no wheels, and a for sale sign. at 12:00 on broad day i was accused of attempting to break into this vehicle.
i have had fbi background, and $85,000 job waiting on me, did not touch the vehicle. spent six months in the cook county jail having to stab people and hurt people feared now i am out -- hurt people. now i am out. process is a joke. thank god i did not have a record. in the cookx months county facility? caller: the reason why is because the court systems are so backed up. this is a class two felony, and my bond was a ridiculous $700. host: did you have a lawyer? caller: i did not but i should not have a lawyer when there is all.idence at
i have a person with me who walked out from a busy store at 12:00 in broad all. i have a person with daylight,'m going to risk my career, my life on a piece of junk. the gentleman had an auto body not getting a up dollar off of it, but the state is affected -- expecting me to pay thousands of dollars in restitution. i said, for what? because all id could focus on is, what are you doing, where is the evidence? they took me out of the court during a 20times minute trial. i came very close to two being radicalized. a lot of others are not as patriotic as me. you do not have to go overseas to get a radicalized arson. -- person. you have your carriage right here. host: radicalized to what?
caller: radicalized to anti-americanism. and i love this country, but i came very close because here i am, i have two kids in college and i cannot support them because some european gentleman -- i have nothing against europeans -- this country is backwards. if i think this gentleman is messing with my car from 50 feet away through chain fences, and you destroy my life and all it word?is his word, his does the court pay no attention to that? that is why i am became radicalized. host: what are you doing in mississippi today? caller: trying to get my life back together, trying to get this expunged off my record. i love this country, but it is
not fair. no evidence, period. i said, if you all do not let me we are not going to give you anything but we will violate your probation. why? the evidence should come before the conviction. for sharing your story and answering some of our questions. -- i'm nots hard going to give legal advice over case, youo that is a just have to look at the specifics. one thing i would note, it is a state case so you would seek pardon from the governor of illinois, another president. it does underscore i think, the purpose of the pardon power in general. i think that is to mitigate the
undue harshness of the criminal law. it is certainly true, as this illustrates, if you are convicted of a felony there is a sense in which you do have a life sentence. it follows you forever and restricts what you can do. we have a large and growing class of people in this country who are saddled with those kinds of restrictions. in that sense, i think the pardon power is as important now as ever. host: let's go to dd in raleigh, north carolina. caller: i have three things to touch on. -- can you hear me? host: we sure can. cases, drugost dealers are people who have done pers get a lesser sentence than drug dealers does.
, i have seen so many black families destroyed as of the simple fact that they have been a pound ofn maybe weed or something like that, and they tried to get jobs and better themselves, and their applications are thrown out. thathe other one is, is she waser before said worried about a policy for trying to help a lot of the black men. president obama had to fight tooth and nail for what he did get because of the republican party. host: thank you for the call. guest: there is no question that president obama has focused on trying to provide some relief to minorities who have been over sentenced for drug offenses. and to that extent, i think he
is right host:. host: do you think we will see more pardons before january 20? guest: i do, i think there is at least one more round. host: samuel morison, thank you very much for being with us. guest: thank you for having me. we have beens week introducing you to many of the authors we have been featuring on book tv. a chance to drill down on some of their works, and a chance for you to weigh in with your comments and questions. we continue that serious today. coming up from wisconsin is the author of the book on resentment focusing on world voters, katherine cramer will be joining us -- rural voters. katherine cramer will be joining us. ♪ >> next week, washington journal well devote the entire
programming to the key issues facing the trump administration and congress. we will take a look at national security, including challenges facing president-elect trump's national security team, and a closer look at james malik's. on december 22, trade and job issues, examining how the trunk administration could change current trade laws in an effort to save jobs. policy, howal energy and climate issues -- thursday, december 29, we will talk about immigration and how president-elect trump might change immigration policy. taking a look at the future of the affordable care act, and how the trump administration will repeal the case in a. -- the aca. be sure to watch washington
journal starting on monday, december 26. as one of therce things i think the american public very often gets impatient about because they really believe they have this trump card, this military that can defeat anyone, but it is not true. ,t is an extraordinary military but it can only win in certain situations and can only really destroy things. it cannot build a new order in its place. talks about his career and the challenges facing the u.s. war on terrorism in his latest book. >> will begin not want to do is respond in such a way that will produce more of these militants, more of these militant organizations. they want us to overreact. they want us to occupy muslim countries so they can build their recruitment. they want us to torture people.
they want us to do things that is going to allow them to make their case against us. >> sunday night on eight at -- at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q and a. host: the book is titled "the politics of resentment." joining us is the author, katherine cramer. and you for being with us. guest: thank you for having me. host: what was the genesis of the book? why did you write it? guest: i study public opinion. and i wasfessor interested in the way people make sense of politics, the way they interpret politics. i live in wisconsin, i love wisconsin, and i was interested to hear what people in the state are thinking, and also how they were thinking about our university.
wisconsin was sort of out of chance,nce and just by but it ended up being a fascinating place to study public opinion. host: especially in light of what happened with that result of wisconsin and michigan and pennsylvania flipping. you read about the recall scott walker faced. let me share with our audience part of what you wrote in your book. to the way window the politics of resentment works in wisconsin, this is a state in which the debate of the appropriate role of government has played out prominently since 2000. it has been a partisan battleground. -- can see the poll of push pull and push a partisan fight here in multiple ways. guest: wisconsin has been a swing state for a while and has an independent streak.
the battle of, what is the appropriate role of government has been playing out here as people have, at times we have voted for democrats, at times for republicans. what i heard in my travels around the state was a lot of discontent with government, and from a wide range of people. in that kind of context, it makes a pretty possible -- it makes it pretty possible for politicians to come in and make it appeal for change. we are not unique in that respect, and that is happening in a lot of places in the country. our election of governor walker in 2010 was a flash point, if you will, in some ways to a lot of national attention. to thingsen a window going on in other parts of the country for some time now. host: you break down many of the
socioeconomic issues and income issues that affect wealthier americans, and also the divide between rural and urban. you write "when you consider how much the very top income earners make compared to the bulk of the population, income inequality in the united states looks even income for average the top 1%, $1.1 million. for the bottom 90% it was just $29,143 a year. quite a disparity. guest: yeah, it is quite a disparity. i would say most people in the u.s. are aware that there is a disparity, but the extent of it is often pretty shocking to people. host: why is the middle class shrinking? guest: that is a great question. partly, whent is
you have income inequality of thereagnitude, that means is a smaller and smaller group of people who have a larger and larger portion of the wealth. that means less wealth for the middle class but also clearly it has something to do with the shifts in our economy and the nature of manufacturing. so what we have considered middle-class jobs for so long extentanged, and to some cease to exist. it is partly the nature of the jobs available and the shifts in who is holding wealth in the population. host: our guest is katherine cramer, a professor at the university of wisconsin. america,ve in rural (202) 748-8000. for those of you living in cities, urban residents, (202) 748-8001.
let's talk about the election of donald trump and the impact in wisconsin. , anddid you see firsthand did you sense that trump could win wisconsin? guest: to be honest, i was surprised that trump one wisconsin, partly because i was following the polls at the end of the campaign like everyone else, and put a lot of stock in them. ,n the lead up to the election i definitely heard a great deal of support for donald trump. wouldt that probably surprise a lot of people who were not supporting donald trump , and supporting hillary clinton or bernie sanders. oftentimes that support was people acknowledging some of the distasteful things that donald trump said on the campaign trail, and nevertheless strongly supporting him. i think that mix of attitudes is somewhat surprising to people who oppose him so strongly.
the one phrase that you allude to earlier and write about in your book is the term "rural consciousness." in the book you say that is a term i'm using to describe a strong sense of identity as a rural person combined with a strong sense that rural areas are what you call the victims of injustice: the sense that rural areas do not get their fair share of power, respect, or resources they feel are necessary. the particular puzzle i focused on is why people refer less government when they might seemingly benefit from more of it. guest: i know your fear is who live in rural areas or have experience in rural areas will laugh that that is a revelation at all. hearing iswhat i was something that people have been talking with each other about in the small communities and rural
places around the country for some time. it is this feeling of people in places like this were just on the short end of the stick. no one pays attention to us. we do not get our fair share of resources. it is this view that we are not respected actually by folks who live in the cities, and decision-makers who live in the cities. to meiew was a surprise but in my interactions with folks as i have been talking about that point of view, and sharing my books with the folks i have spent time with, their reaction to me sometimes is, no kidding, lady. i am sure some of your viewers are familiar with what i am talking about. host: as you write and a book that voters are looking for someone they can connect with and my question, donald trump who lives in trump tower on the 60 84, is a billionaire and yet to connectvailable
with wisconsin voters in a way hillary clinton was not able. how was he able to appeal to those voters? wast: i think what happened donald trump came along and said, you are right to be upset, you are right to be thinking you are not getting what you deserve . he gave the people an explanation of what was going on in the world that would leave them feeling like they are not getting their fair share. when he talked about trade, the economy, and made claims about where the jobs that seem to have disappeared, where they have gone, and he gave people targets to blame. immigrants, for example, talking about immigrants coming in and taking jobs. basically he said, you're right to be upset, you are deserving and hard-working americans, and what you deserve it going to people who are less deserving. he lives in trump tower in the middle of new york city, but his message appealed to people who live very far from that center of wealth and power.
host: let's bring in our collars and c-span radio listeners with katherine cramer, running us on this friday from madison, wisconsin. that is where our first caller is from, keith, good morning. caller: i was one of those who marched up to the capital with the other people who were protesting the attacks on public sector workers. we were making the argument that the public sector workers would boost the pay of all workers because it was kind of like a race to the top. --t i think this author does and i saw her on c-span giving a talk at the library in medicine, i watched it on c-span -- in madison, i watched it on c-span. she kind of dismisses the whole issue of race as central to the solidarity of the working class. it makes it much more difficult for us to organize along class
lines when the owners and politicians who are basically bought and paid for, they are taking workers against one another. a prime example was when scott walker was caught on video talking to diane hendrix claiming he was going to "pit workers against each other." he said it explicitly. it was not some kind of conspiracy, he admitted he was going to pit black workers against white workers, women against men, public-sector workers against private sector workers. in picking workers against each other. now we have seen 30 years of this, workers being pitted against each other, and that is why we have suffered a decline in our living standards, the working class. host: thank you for the call from wisconsin. we will get a response. guest: thank you for the call,
and thank you for bringing up the issue of race. it is hugely important. i disagree that i dismissed the role of race, and i actually think it is pretty important here. here is what i have to say on that. i think that racism is sort of the baseline where we need to start with our discussions of controversies over who should get what. from the moment that our federal government has been talking about redistribution, race has been a part of the story. shortly after the civil war when our federal government have the power and resources to actually distribute, or redistribute, race was used as a way to divide people amongst each other. basically, white farmers from freed african-americans. country we have never really come to terms with
that. it remains a part of our discussions about redistribution and who should get what. what i do in my book is try to ease into -- i should not say "ease" but, around to the question of race as carefully as possible, because when i do not want to happen is for people to hear what i have to say and come away and say, those people in rural america are just a bunch of racist, and leave it at that. it is so much more complex than that, and we are not going to ever repaired the divisions in this country if we keep dividing along very simple lines. so the complexity as i see it is this -- when people are talking about who is deserving and feeling like they are deserving and not getting what their fair share is, and it is going to people who are undeserving, racism is in those conversations because unfortunately we have
stereotypes about who is hard-working and who is not in this country, that are often very racialized, meaning people of color are often attributed with laziness more than white folks. when people are talking about those people in the city, those lazy people in the city, they are oftentimes talking about me .oo, white professionals understanding the ways in which class and race and region are intertwined is really important for figuring out how we actually come together as a country, and for the purposes of organizing workers, it is helpful to understand those dividing lines. i really appreciate bringing up the topic of race because i in no way maine or want to skirt it. it is essential. host: the subtitle to katherine cramer's book reads as follows the politics of resentment --
rural consciousness and wisconsin and the rise of scott walker. tv.org.go to book , c-span3 this weekend is american history tv so a full offering. also in to don, wisconsin. in wisconsin. caller: thank you for taking my call. i hope you do not cut me off. i have a question about the resentment, and wonder if that could have anything to do with possibly the 13th amendment of forced servitude, and people forcing people to do illegal activities like the 23 corporations that and dazzled workers' -- and as old --
workers' assets? guest: i think part of the resentment that i have heard in many communities around the state does have to do with perceptions of government corruption, or perceptions of attentive not being to people like me. so to the extent that people perceive that government is allowing corruption, or workers were officials are doing it themselves, that definitely feeds into the perception that why am i working so hard to make ends meet when people are breaking the rules in order to get more? i think this perceptions of comesment being broken
and many forms and what you mentioned is one form. host: one tweet from tj who said donald trump would fill up stadiums while hillary could not fill a high school gym. that was the most accurate poll, not the biased polls given on tv. used propaganda to brainwash the simpleminded. on those two comments, your reaction? guest: in terms of who got the bigger crowds, the trump campaign was -- had an element of entertainment that drew crowds in person and also inattention to news stories related to the trump -- also in attention to new stories related to the trunk campaign. campaign. was that a lack of enthusiasm for hillary clinton or just
really heightened interest in donald trump? i'm saying that a little bit wrong, but i think part of the draw of big crowds for donald trump was a recognition that at almost every campaign event, something newsworthy happened. we have to keep that in mind. also, appealing to the simpleminded, i have a lot to say on that. common notion that people who voted for donald trump were fooled or ignorant or not knowledgeable or less educated. but when i go and spend time -- in myle if i feel field who i know voted for trump, these days they ask me, how is it that all of those smart students voted for hillary clinton? what is wrong with them?
what are they not getting? my point in bringing that up is on both sides we are wondering what is wrong with people who voted for the other candidate. and to attribute other people's choices to ignorance kind of overlooks the fact that we all subjectively define ourselves interest. i do not want to ignore the extent to which many of the things donald trump said on the campaign trail have been proven by fact checkers to be inaccurate, in other words, lies. that is important and deserves attention, and you might say folks who voted for a candidate who gave out right lies, isn't there an element of ignorance? there is definitely an element of misinformation. my point and i guess in general when i want to say, we have to pay attention to where there are inaccuracies but i think we should be cautious about
explaining other people's votes as lack of ignorance, or the presence of ignorance. host: this is a tweet from max. where you innow, contact with the hillary rodham clinton campaign to lend perspective? if so, with a receptive to your ideas? guest: i was not. my job is not to consult with campaigns. my job is to help everybody better understand the american public. so i guess the answer is no. host: from dayton, ohio, lynn is next. good morning. caller: good morning. it just things to me that people here in ohio, near the end of the time to vote were bombarded that made inreport
justice seem as though it was something that -- in justice -- something that hillary clinton was engrossed in. he did not have enough authority figures on donald trump's misinform and dennis, which ess,ty fun -- misinformedn which means that she would be more of a chance of being involved in more injustice as far as the government, and the corporate figures have done to the middle class for over 30 years now. host: we will get a response. thank you for the call. guest: it is a good perspective to hear. i am not really sure i have much
more to say on top of what the caller said. thank you for the call. host: we will go to jimbo from alabama. what part of the state do you live in? caller: about 30 miles south of huntsville. you for the opportunity to express my views. i would like to ask ms. kramer went to she think as far as the material in justice being done to the big population of the united states, millions of people, because of that consistent and persistent attacks on labor unions? i am a vietnam era veteran, and i see the labor unions have almost dwindled right down to nothing. money, which is
becoming more and more fleeting, and now they are doubling down. i see they want to double down on tax breaks for the wealthy. what is the working poor going to do in the future? guest: it is a great concern to raise. labor unions are a really important set of organizations that represent workers' interests. without labor unions, there is not a structure that is in place to represent workers. and i definitely hear a lot of concern in my fieldwork about labor unions. sometimes it was people that were a part of a union or currently are, and perceive corruption within their union so sometimes it is people complaining about their union. oftentimes, especially among
retirees that were part of the union, i hear them talk about how grateful they were to be represented by a union, and how grateful they are to now be able to be in retirement and have a decent quality of life. unionserned about labor is something that is very widespread, and labor unions are not popular in public opinion polls. but for people who have been represented by labor unions, i generally find a whole lot of gratitude that they were able to have someone fighting on their behalf. host: a tweet from sandy beach. now we know this individual lives in wisconsin -- it was not only trump. wisconsin rural voters like me also voted to the feet radical -- defeat radical liberals in madison. check out the state outcomes. guest: our state government now she may bean, and
referring also to the fact that governor walker, scott walker has been our government since 2010. -- our governor since 2010. rural wisconsin has been voting for republicans pretty consistently for some years. cai bell says, i have lived in big cities and now a very rural town. now i'm feel sorry for city dwellers. they are missing life. you write, in an atmosphere of resentment it is hard to take the high road. usis a time that those of with the power to vote demanded -- demand it of them. who are you referring to? think, it is easy to
understand why a politician might cap into that divides -- into the divides among us. if that is politically advantageous. mind, that use of resentment, the only way to cut through it is for people, somebody to rise above it. ideally it would be a political leader who refuses to use that kind of rhetoric that pits us against one another, but it may also have to come from ordinary citizens and voters who refuse candidates, or take stances on policies based on us versus them ideas, but instead on the merits of the policy or the merits of the policy the
candidate is representing. that is a tall order. , and in myy hope classes at the university of wisconsin madison i regularly talk to students about these types of issues. i see in our young people a desire for a higher type of politics in which we are not pitting ourselves against one another, but trying to figure ways to make everybody better off and to refuse to vote based on resentment of one another. host: the book "politics of resentment." the author, katherine cramer joining us. my question is this -- over the years i have been working on my own business and have seen foreigners come to this country where americans train them and they lose their jobs. the african-americans, whenever
it is time to vote they come to her community but they spend millions on illegal immigration. that could becoming to our communities. we have to take care of our children once they get here. my question is -- why don't they just shut the border down so that nobody can bring drugs back, bring money back, just cut it off, let their borders be overwhelmed to come to our country to get to theirs. instead of fighting illegal immigration, that money could be used to train americans and could cost us a lot less pure thank you. host: thank you, ray. guest: i have a lot to say in response to that. one is there is a lot of
motivation for people to come here, and the fact is that a lot of businesses -- i mean, i am speaking here with wisconsin in mind. there are businesses in my state that are grateful for immigration. i'm thinking in particular the dairy industry. distinguish here between people who do not have their papers or are undocumented immigrants, or immigrants who arrived here illegally. it is kind of a case in point, right, that people are meet,ling to make ends we are turning to undocumented immigrants and assuming that it is because of them that we are struggling. i just find that very sad.
it is the kind of political arguments that is not about, ok, how do we ensure that everybody has a decent quality of life. instead, it is shifting our anxieties toward blaming a particular group of people that we do not have a better response . host: let's go to anthony. good morning. caller: i am so glad that i got a chance to talk about this subject. my take on it is three-fold. americans voted against their own best interest when they elected donald trump. he wants to lower the minimum wage, ok. a lot of people scream about food stamps.
you are not getting a lot of food from food stamps. some people are getting $50 a month. try to live off of $50 a month for one person. another thing, i continue talkingabout people about minorities getting food stamps and subsidies. there are more white people in america on these programs and then there are blacks. i mean the entire black race here. the thing i really want to say is this country needs to start trying to address racism because this has been going on too long, and racism is not something that people are born with. we teach our children these things, and we have to understand that if you want to succeed in life, you work hard. you don't just climb up, make yourself feel better to put somebody else down. that does not help your situation at all. lessed to start spending money -- we spent almost $1 billion every year on defense. the next 10 countries don't.
we need to start spending that money on education here in our country. the thing about donald trump talking about immigrants, the plan he has come of those jobs, 25 million jobs -- from what i understand, they will have to import people because we do not educate our kids well enough. when you look at the systems around the country, the water systems are bad, the school systems are bad, and now we are getting people having to start digging up holes, digging up coal and everything. if a person wants to go in get black lung, thinking about a short time deal for their lives, what about their children? host: anthony, thank you. we will get a response. professor kramer? guest: thank you for the call. just be notion that we have not dealt with racism and we need to deal with racism, i agree with 100%, so thanks.
education,respect to a really key, central issue, and what has really interested me in my fieldwork in wisconsin is just the -- it is a pervasive sense that people want a high in the of education community, and what i find really interesting, really important for our debate about whether we are going to put funding into education or not, ofre is a perception that course we value education, and it is really important to us, but if we pay in, if we are asking higher taxes for education, that money is not going to come back to our community. thatere is the sense people value education, yet they do not believe that higher taxes is actually going to improve education for people like them. i think that is a really important sentiment to pay attention to. but i agree with the caller that
education is central to progress i am, youiety, and know, obviously i believe in education. i am a university professor. i devote my life to it, and i am very proud of public school teachers. you know, just speaking personally, i am with you. i think education is central, and we need to value it. host: our conversation with katherine cramer is part of a weeklong series here on "washington journal" as we bring you some of the leading authors we have brought you this past year on c-span2's booktv, and on program.y "q&a" you teach at the university of wisconsin. what are your classes? guest: i teach mainly political science, public opinion,
political psychology, and this semester, i'm winding up a class on citizenship, it is called citizenship, democracy, and difference, and it is called a service learning class, is a class in which students are engaged in the community. so they are learning through working with the local city government and with the local community center about how to put their ideas as good citizens into practice. so, hello to the students. it has been an awesome course. host: this is a tweet from jan, playing on the title of your book. she said "the resentment vote is out of the box. it will never be put back in." guest: hmm. that is the big question right now, right? i certainly hope it well, because based on democracy, resentment does not bode well
for the future. from crystal lake, illinois, good morning. caller: good morning. host: tell us where that is location -- is located in relation to chicago. caller: 75 miles away. number one, thank you for taking my call. the public school system is in shambles. , talked to college graduates and it is like talking to people that just are in the middle of their freshman year in high school. in my had many people generation -- i am 75 years old -- tell me that they are sick ,nd tired of talking to adults and they are going to talk to them like they are babies. they cannot have their way -- and another thing, and you are a
professor, and you could not see the momentum that donald trump was getting across the nation? good grief. i mean, you have got to go back to school yourself. anybody with any common sense whatsoever with the -- all you would have to do is drive through the industrial parks in rural america, and there is nothing but they can season empty buildings. aremore thing -- a can see anti-buildings. one more thing, i heard obama talking to a crowd prior to the election, and he said, "i know you'll be disappointed when ptt passes and i sent jobs to vietnam," and the crowd did not say anything. , they weret apply like, it is hard to explain. someone should have gotten up and started shouting. host: joe, thank you.
we will get a response. professor kramer? guest: i do not know some much about the statement about president obama's statement at the event. i guess i will just refer the caller, not to assign your homework, but to refer you to my my bookd actually what is about is sort of the momentum that you talked about us professors missing, and about just recognizing the sense of discontent across many parts of .he nation in particular, my focus was on wisconsin. thank you for encouraging me to go back to school here i love school to i am all for it. thanks for your call. host: why do you think governor scott walker's presidential bid and it so early? guest: hmm. for, i don't know s
sure, but part of it may have been that he has done extremely well here in wisconsin in terms of gaining support. i think from being in a spotlight in a statewide way to being in a spotlight international way -- it is a very different set of concerns that you have to address and a different level of intensity. perhaps thatknow, was maybe too early of a jump for him. i am not sure. but i also think the nature of this republican primary was very different. expansiveth the field, the number of candidates, and also the presence of donald trump. clearly he is a different kind of politician who shook up his campaign in many ways. i think the way in which he drew
a lot of the attention to himself just from the start meant that what the other republican candidates were dealing with was, you know, trying to make a name for a very smallth amount of airtime, basically. so it could be the mix of those things and probably other things that i am not aware of. quick question from mary potter. please ask how twitter and social media affected the outcome. did you delve into that area at all? by asking people where they are getting their information, but currently, i am with some with it colleagues here at the university of wisconsin, chris ares, others and i hear
interested in that. i do not have a great answer for you now, but hopefully i will in a short amount of time. next with our guest, a, "the politics of resentment," good morning. caller: good morning. well, vietnam veteran as a white woman. i have lived in the city, overseas, i have lived in many different places. the number one by is probably all over the world is not race, is gender, and i am wondering why we are not talking more about that. there is a different mentality in the country versus the city, and i have seen it -- people do not trust women. women do not trust women. and i think it is something that we need to think about. the reason why i believe trump was voted in was because it was a woman running against him.
people don't use their intelligence when it comes to voting. a lot of people voted with their emotions, and i believe that that is why trump won. in there is a difference mentality between the people who live in the country and the people who live in the city. host: thank you, teresa. we will get a response. guest: thanks for bringing of gender, sister. [laughter] guest: i agree, it is a huge issue. little itresting how was talked about in this campaign, and at the same time what a massive role it played. i do not think it is a coincidence that donald trump know, kind his, you not, uh, gender equal things that he said on the
campaign trail -- it is not a surprise, and it is not a coincidence, that he was running against, you know, the first viable, national party female candidate. the contrast, i mean, the dynamic that you mentioned that people are on comfortable with a woman as president i think is something that we really have to come to terms with. public opinion polls say that an overwhelming amount of people say they would vote for a female candidate for president if it is a very good i do thinkand yet there are many ways in which the country was not willing to elect a female president. i should back up to say i am thinking mainly here not of
public opinion polls, because like i say, public opinion polls say the majority of voters are ready to vote for a woman for president, and yet i am aching mainly of my field -- thinking mainly of my fieldwork, and it is not a cross-section of wisconsinites, not a cross-section of people in the united states, but i have often been in conversation with people talking about their perceptions of hillary clinton, very negative perceptions of her, and their thoughts on having a woman country,ent of the almost the exact phrasing is they are not ready for it yet. it is very interesting the way in which we don't talk about it issue, andt is a big it is present even though we are not talking about it. host: derek, our last caller from columbus, ohio. good morning. you are on with katherine cramer. caller: good morning, and good morning, mrs. kramer. i have a couple of comments in a
question for you. thatl start by suggesting donald trump has used for years and years the same sort of methods used by dictators all over the world. most especially adolf hitler comes to mind, where he creates peoplerings, such as the who worship islam or the mexicans, they get all of the people who were already prone to the anti-christian government, to make them the big demon bad guys. they are hoodwinked, and they see that. all they want is a bad guy, and misogyny and race and that sort of thing, i have never understood how people, both
democratic and republican, are always voting against her best interest -- their best interests, or they become apathetic and they don't vote. one comment, off-track, the character in your face tells me you're a fighter, and you have been fighting for a long time, but you are working against inalienable -- i just want to make the comment that you should keep fighting the good fight. there are those of us around really support your philosophy. and my question to you, and you may have to write another book to answer it entirely, why are so many people so beguiled and so full of ignorance, i guess, that they cannot see the demon when it is coming? i.e. that they are working against the interest of all people. is it race, is it hatred, they don't like the government? everybody knew that hillary is angel, but she was a much better choice than a donald trump.
and not only the people who voted for trump but the people who failed to vote for hillary, what do you think caused that kind of thing? merry christmas to everybody. host: thank you for the comments and the questions. we will get a response. guest: thanks for the call. way to start an answer -- i guess i am pausing because i personally have found it helpful to encourage myself to not make judge -- not assume people are voting against their interests, because what i know about interests is in the realm of politics, it is very seldom something that we can objectively define as someone's true interest. we are defining our interests in pretty subjective ways.
that is kind of an abstract way of saying don't be quick to say that people are voting against their interests. if we are going to repair our country, we have to understand why people are voting the way that they are. just eluded your question -- why are people voting the way that they are? i think much of the motivation in peoplee heard voting for trump and supporting trump is the perception that the system is so broken, that it coarsely needs someone saying he is going to come in and shake things up and change things drastically, drain the swamp, if you will, right? and part of that, the contrast between trump and hillary clinton -- and i have to
mention, often times these folks are perceiving that hillary clinton is part of the problem, and she has been a part of the federal government in a way for many years, the 30 years that donald trump often mentioned. i know you will say in response, "well, donald trump is not exactly draining the swamp so far, so are they voting against their interests?" again, it is partly, i mean, understanding the nature of the depth of discontent that would lead people to vote for someone even though they are a part of what he is saying and supporting that they do not agree with, it is a mix of many things, but for , the issue is just the level of discontent, the feeling like so many different, kind of powerful structures and people are against you, i think that
feeling is what often times motivates people to vote for someone who other people see as and they see a someone who will take away the rights and liberties of other people. you are right, though, that there is a whole other book, if not volumes of books, to be written on this discussion. it seems to me to be kind of the central question that we are facing right now. that nextou write book, we would love to have you back. a, the book is called "the politics of resentment -- cramer, theramer book is called "the politics of resentment." thank you for joining us. guest: thank you for having me. host: the suspect links to the
horrific incident in berlin has been shot and killed. this from cbs news. the tunisian man in connection with the truck attack on the berlin christmas market was found in italy. request for asylum was rejected, he became the subject of a massive manhunt yesterday and overnight after authorities as ever his personal documents in the cab of the truck used in the berlin attack and his fingerprints on the door of that truck. the italian minister saying in a news covers earlier today that the incident began earlier this morning near the train station in milan. two police officers stopping a man presumed to be amri who was on foot, asked to see as identification, he then removed a handgun from his backpack, shot and injured one of the officers. the other officer fatally shot the individual, saying there is no doubt beyond a shadow of a doubt that we have got the man who was linked to the deadly attack in berlin, germany.
again, that this morning from cbs news. this headline from the "washington post" as donald trump is signaling a shift in u.s. security policy, the question we begin this morning on "washington journal" at 7:00, , as column at nytimes.com street reading of the language that mr. trump is promising an increase in the number of deployed warheads and the capability of weapon systems that deliver them, but his unconventional language and lack of policy experience leave doubt about his intention. stemming from a tweet that donald trump issued yesterday morning at about 11:50 eastern time. reaction less on msnbc. this -- reaction last night on msnbc, this from kellyanne conway. [video clip] pakistan, one thing
to know is the number of nuclear weapons that they have on watch status. do you guys talk about that? i don't.: and pakistan to not have any nuclear weapons online status. they could move them to that status because a nuclear arms race is ready to start. that is what happened in the past, when present is even jokingly remarked about nuclear of what i am think trying to get at is a lot of people are hiding under the bed right now because it is not seem like he knows what he is talking about on this issue. kellyanne: that is not fair -- rachel: expanding on nuclear arsenal and speaking of that on twitter is not -- is talking about getting upgrades to our systems. i felt like in one or two
reports, it was the price tag of $1 trillion. again, he is talking about keeping our materials safe and a perfect world. it is not a perfect world. it is a world in which military -- t rachel: expanding our nuclear capability -- kellyanne: i want to say this. in the world that we live, military might has been one of , and is to deter people think we are getting a little too far ahead of ourselves. it is changing policy and making policy in a way that he did not intend. rachel: ok. the president making policy happens when the president speaks on a national security matter. host: that was kellyanne conway speaking on the "rachel maddow" show.
states must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes." if you are interested in more comments and reactions, the first part of this program is on c-span.org. this is the headline from the "washington times." for those who did not support donald trump, whether or not you are ready to move on as we prepare to swear in our 45th president of the united states. we will get your calls and comments in the remaining half hour of c-span's "washington journal." " this way, "newsmakers, week, our guess is lee saunders asking whether he can work with , his nominee-elect to serve as the u.s. labor secretary. it is a portion of that
conversation. [video clip] mr. saunders: we will see. his past record, as far as we're concerned, is not a good record for working families, and the department of labor should be standing up for not only union members but working families across the country. he does not support the increase of minimum wage, he did not support the overtime rule. his companies have had numerous labor law violations. he has actually made the statement that he would prefer having robots as employees because then they would never take sick leave and vacation time. that is not how you grow the american dream among working families. workers are suffering in this country. clearly, the economy has improved under president obama, but there is still a very large section of this country, especially in certain pockets across this country where people and communities are suffering. trump is theat,
president-elect because people were so angry and so frustrated at what they consider to be "business as usual," and they wanted to make a statement, and they wanted to try something new. and they wanted to try something different because of that anger and that frustration. so to talk about not supporting the minimum wage or the overtime provision for having a as far asle record labor law violations, that concerns all of us. we are just going to have to hold him kabul. we will have to hold the president-elect accountable. about working families, he is talked about bringing jobs back to this country and helping folks who are struggling every single day. the rust,pecially in especially in local communities where plants have closed. he said he is going to help
those working families, and i believe what we have to do is hold him accountable for that. we hope you tune in this week on our "newsmakers" program christmas day. "newsmakers" airs every sunday a and is on our website at c-span.org. for those of you did not vote for and did not vote for donald trump, have you accepted the results? giving donald trump the more than 270 electoral votes to officially become our president, the next step will take place in the u.s. senate, vice president joe biden, and then a genuine 20th at high noon, donald trump will take the oath of office. he will become our 46 president. if you supported hillary clinton, i want you to call (202) 748-8000. if you supported a third-party candidate, call (202) 748-8001.
and if you are a republican who did not support donald trump, (202) 748-8002. our question -- have you now accepted the results? a are asking it in part of column available at washingtontimes.com. "now what? sore losers have been telling anyone who would listen for more than a year that donald trump could never, ever be elected president of the united states." editorial from the "washington examiner" reads as follows -- it is time for trump and for grinding axes critics to change their tune. some seem unable to let go, but it is all over now. some will continue to preen themselves with the #notmy president on their twitter bios , but theyk pictures
need to move on and accept reality." our next caller supported hillary. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to weigh in because the news lately has been incredibly disconcerting. i've spent my entire career in national security in the washington, d.c. area. inave a masters degree topics related to nuclear weapons to terrorism, conflict, etc. i had years working on treaties in the pentagon, and i am just isolutely horrified at what coming out of -- let's call it preemptive policy -- from donald trump's twitter feed. it is outrageously irresponsible.
is potentially destabilizing in the worst possible way with respect to nuclear stability. it is just outrageous. what i have learned from this there is a huge proportion of america that has no idea what it takes to be president of the united states. the experience, the knowledge, the character, the honesty -- none of which donald trump has. shockow, i am still in that the election went this way. falsehoode lots of coming out on a daily basis, and i am very frightened for my children's future on many levels. host: patricia, banks. you sound like you're in the car, maybe listening on c-span radio. is that the case?
caller: yes. host: patricia, thank you for your call. in the baltimore, washington area. also check out our c-span app and c-span.org. --l king has this tweet "accept the outcome of the election, of course, we'll have a choice. happy with them? no. not by a long shot." our next caller, have you accepted the results that donald will become our 45th president? caller: yes, i have. hillary was running for election, and she could have really push it for donald trump to accept whatever happens at the election. and then she did a turnaround she even thanked her supporters. and didn't nobody here nothing from her for a day
or two. the way the elect our presidents is wrong. with the delegates and superdelegates -- what is the purpose of having delegates and super delegates? --that too cheap people cheato cheat people? they need to change the way they elect people. it is wrong. host: mark krugman tweeting about the election results. "why is it useful to emphasize the questionable legitimacy of the election not to ensure a smooth transition?" well, he says, there are several reasons. "threat of public outrage is really all there is." paul krugman also says, "plus, anything that enhances future chances of a turnaround is
essential, which means not forgetting and normalizing the subversion of 2016," and he finally says, "you cannot put this back in the box, and trying to do this makes it worse." also in the "new york times," details available online. let's go to mike from wisconsin. good morning. caller: good morning. host: mike, who did you vote for? able to vote not because of a disability that i have an inability to get to the voting booth at this time. my registration is in a different state from where i now reside. host: if you did vote, who would you have voted for? caller: i can tell you right off i felt very uncomfortable voting for either candidate. mr. trump -- i mean, most of us who are in my age -- i am in my
60's -- who have followed his career may times over prior to his tv personality, so there was some apprehension. now, as far as mrs. clinton is concerned and knowing the clintons in the process they have been through, i could not accept the lies and innuendo that kept coming out. not understand how the media that we normally listen to, everybody in this country, could only listen to one -- it just seemed to lean one way all the time. nks onou reached in the li emails you would have sent to you, regardless of what you thought, you would follow the links, and the more you read on --, the more it became like how could this be going on in our government? i mean, there is still dialogue going on about the server.
there will probably be dialogue going on about the server until the day we die, but you have to understand why somebody in government who was put at the top of our government allowed to conduct business out of the eyes of the public? many of us were shocked at that. host: mike from blue river, wisconsin, thanks for your call. a tweet from maverick -- "let's see what that nitwit donald trump is up to, launching a trade war with china, starting a nuclear arms race with the world." another viewer saying, "i watched his first thank you tour speech. my intention was to give him a fair shake, but he spent most of his time gloating, he lost me." "finally after eight years, i am starting to feel the hope and change." are you readyr, to accept the results that donald trump will become the next president? couple oftried to a
days after the election, and everything since he -- i mean, he said he was going to become "presidential," and everything he has done or said, how could anybody say this is the president of the united states of america that are for the people? in,an, everybody he has put not one person has ever done, that we can see or have heard -- other than their company or themselves. and the people that voted for venice, have lived in california, which is considered the salad bowl of america, i have lived in south dakota, and i am living in las vegas. i have seen all kinds of people. the thing that worries me most is something i heard in high school, a long time ago. in rural america, because of the of people have a lot living 50 miles apart and never have communication with somebody other than somebody who looks like them or sounds like them. so when they hear hillary with
jay-z on stage, everything about minorities, i understand why they voted for trump, even though it is against their best interest, and he is probably the most dangerous man that america has ever voted -- with nuclear weapons -- i mean, i thought after bush was elected and the fiasco that happened after that and obama was elected, i thought america was becoming a lot more intelligent. and then you get this man who sits up here, and everybody with any type of knowledge about the world has said "this man is crazy." my heart is racing right now just thinking about what is going to happen. in one sense, because i have lived in california, and i have seen the devastation that the caused, ings have thought, yeah, let's see what trump does. but that is the prejudice side of me. i just hope for america that
this blowhard is all bark. then, we have to deal with these republicans, everything we have been fighting against them, they are going to get in spades, and of course our democratic leaders are going to do with the republicans did not do and say, "let's give him a chance." host: mark, thanks for the call from las vegas. tsre of your twee @cspanwj. "people try to accept him, and then he makes that cabinet, speaks with dangerous experience, and/or tweets something reckless." "right-wingers constantly whined about real president obama's time in office for eight years. trump's opposition starts january 20." good morning. you are next. caller: i actually voted for
hillary, but i am a registered republican. and what has been coming out kind of proves my point and makes me more certain that i voted correctly. the election results. the one thing that kind of stuns women who did not see that it would be so transformative justice have a woman, a woman who can complete a sentence, as opposed to what we will have the next four years. it almost reminds me, not to get to micro personal here, but when -- i haved growing up never been in a fist fight in my life, but i have been in about three occasions where drunken men were kind of roughing up their women, see you go in and try to be chivalrous and rake that fight up, and all the
sudden, the woman turned on you. i think there is something that needs to be addressed like on a micro cultural level. what is it about women that election go to their beater before they will stand up for their families' best interest? host: how do they turn on you? physically, verbally? caller: wednesday separate the woman who is getting beat up and you get physical with the guy who is beating up the woman -- all of a sudden a woman -- in every guy in america has probably been in something like this who comes from a rough-and-tumble situation like i did, the woman is invariably man!:"don't you hit my and you are like, "are you kidding, he was beating you," and you step in like your civic toy, and the woman tries come in and get in your face.
it is a very weird cultural phenomenon. i have always been stunned by it. it is never talked about. c-span is the place you can have these discussions anymore, right? host: thanks for your analogy. california, of jerry brown, speaking out on a couple of issues, including climate change. saying he is not ready to accept the results of the election. when it comes to climate change, he wants democrats and those opposed to donald trump to fight him on this issue. here is part of what the california governor had to say. [video clip] gov. brown: some people say they will turn off the satellite, ,hey are monitoring the climate all the various measuring satellites we have. well, i remember back in 1978, i proposed a satellite for california. they called me "governor moonbeam" because of that. [laughter] gov. brown: i think that line is
good for nothing, and if trump turns off the satellite, california will launch its own damn satellite! we are going to collect that data! [applause] brown: and we are launching satellites right here in california, so we have the laboratories. and by the way, if they start messing with lawrence berkeley have or berkeley livermore, i want to say "keep your hands off . that laboratory is going to pursue good science!" [applause] gov. brown: as long as the university of california manages those labs, we are not going to have a lyrical interference. to havehave -- political interference cured we will have honest, good science. host: california governor jerry
brown and how he in tends to go after donald trump on that key issue. this tweet -- let's give donald trump the same cooperation senator mcconnell and the gop gave president obama. the next call in pine bluff, north carolina, did not support donald trump. good morning. are you ready to accept the results? caller: yes, of course. i am a foreigner, and i am here 40 years, and i would say hillary was the best qualified, but she came with the most baggage. , everything he has -- iso far and what he going to be true. i believe that that will come true. host: thank you for the call. let's go to joan joining us from ou urbana, california.
caller: hello. what i want to suggest is the united states congress get rid of the electoral college because, no, i don't. thep was not elected by total population. hillary clinton won the election by more than 2 million votes, which makes me think that, although in the early days of our country, there might have been some value to the electoral college as it was established, but it is now not only obsolete, but it is contrary to the will he the people and voids te notion that each individual person has one single vote that counts. we no longer have a system in which everyone's vote counts
equally. thanks for the call. a live look at the u.s. capitol. the next step in the process is the certification that will take place jeffrey sachs. the new congress is -- take place on january 6. the new congress is sworn in january 3 we have all of that our website at c-span.org. the news today," conference that took place today with vladimir putin was a link the end of the year news conference, which has become tradition for the russian president. praising donald trump's political savvy, swiping at the democrats through a translator. here is part of what he told reporters earlier in moscow. [video clip] putin: you mentioned tampering in my conversation with president obama. you may have noticed that i never reviewed the contents of our conversations one-on-one. you mentioned tampering.
so irony mentioned to your colleague from the united states -- so i already mentioned to your colleague from the united states, losers always look at ways to accuse someone else. they should look at themselves first. and they always forget the most important thing. the most important thing, i think, is, let's say some hackers hacked the democratic party's emails, some hackers did it. ok. like the president-elect said, "who knows who those hackers not inmaybe they were russia, maybe it was some guy lying on a sofa, on a couch, and now it is easy for them to blame it on some other country. that is not the most important thing, though. the most important thing was what was revealed.
it is not like they invented something, they came up with some information. no, true information was revealed. truth came out as evidenced by the fact that after they revealed how the democratic has been manipulating public opinion in favor of one candidate against the other ,andidate, against mr. sanders the head of the democratic party leadership resigned. this indicates that this was true. this was actually true. instead of apologizing and promising never to do that , they what they did started looking for people who hacked into their evils. that is not -- there emails. that is not really important, right? host: the russian president,
vladimir putin, in a news conference that lasted three hours and 15 minutes. we are translating it, and we will have on the c-span network. this headline from the "vladimirn post," putin to the democratic party, you lost, get over it." we are asking whether you are ready to accept the results of the u.s. election. thursday's rt saying tweet seems to emerge from donald trump's public position on nuclear weapons that he expressed during the campaign, and the billionaire businessman campaigning on a platform of rebuilding the u.s. military while cutting taxes and reining in federal spending. he was critical of the outgoing president, barack obama's, plans modernize the u.s. nuclear triad, estimated to cost $1 trillion of the next 30 years.
the united states must greatly strengthen and expand their nuclear capabilities, i donald trump tweet. obama canceling the muslim registry, rushing to cancel a program set up in the wake of september 11 two track and report illegal muslim torican and arab men, hoping onmote supreme vetting muslim visitors. host: that is as morning's
front-page story from the "washington times." are you ready to accept the election results? mark says, "the election is over. in my mind, i know why. i am looking forward to the future and how u.s. citizens reacts to actions and decisions of trump." our next caller from akron, ohio. caller: seasons greetings, steve. host: i have been there, i know where it is at. caller: right next to the firestone country club. host: well, i have not been there. [laughter] caller: me, either. that is a little too uppercrust for me. i have voted democrat since jimmy carter, and when he did not doing the job, i decided to go independent. here is the deal -- being a democrat and listening to the people from my party whine and moan and complain about trump, they failed to realize that they have said for
years about playing on an even feel, not tipping the balance, yet i have yet to hear one democratic senator or house member condemn debbie wasserman schultz or others who did not get caught tipping the playing field against bernie sanders cured out was going to write in bernie sanders. he was unavailable in ohio to do so. then they realized democrats me just as shady as republicans can , and in less they admit to the fact that they do play during, we will never have compliancy in the house or the senate. host: tommy, thanks for the call. this tweet "the main reason hillary lost the election -- obama policy, private illegally mills, and pay to play scheme by her husband." from theine
"washington times," donald trump calling for the u.s. to restore capability.uclear let's go to another call. caller: good morning. i am a hillary clinton supporter, i am an african american male. major in scaffolding and i work in oil refineries, and i work with a lot of the deplorables that hillary spoke of. those are the white males she to.not cater they are more centered on the inner-city and what they can do african-americans, and leaving out the white party and the people in the rust belt. this is what the democratic party has failed to do. i can still not figure out for the life of me, just from supporters of trump, failed to nominate people such as mitt romney and lindsey graham. lindsey graham, i think, would have made a great presidents for the republican party, and i just think of trump as a person who
sits here and says anything out of his mouth that he can actually say to another man, oh, he would get down on his knees to me, and he would bow down to me now. it sounds like penitentiary talk. i just know that the republican party, the white males were more angry and upset with the status quo candidates, but trump is not the one, and i just cannot accept him as being the president of the united states. even though we have to go along doh it, i think we need to away with the electoral vote. it is antiquated and outdated. there are people all over the told now, and we just need go with the one-vote system. host: ruben, thank you for the call. another viewer saying most republicans have still not accepted the result of the 44th president, referring to barack obama.
"still see derogatory photos and lies about him. -- him." misplace families losing loved ones as a result of the violence inside syria. rupert cornwell is writing about to donald trump tweet yesterday. here is what he wrote this morning available on their website. "donald trump has a deadly attitude -- a nonchalant attitude to the deadliest weapon the world has ever known." it is unclear that even if he is his campaigning criticism of the current inadequacy of america's nuclear strike force, it may further alarm those already worried by the nonchalant attitude to the deadliest of all weapons. his remarks contained, as usual, in a tweet, and it came hours after president putin of the biggest nation in the cold war
-- a couple more minutes with your call. a voter for hillary clinton. good morning. caller: yes, i am a supporter of hillary clinton. host: have you accepted the results? it -- whatl, difference does it make whether i accept or do not accept? there saw putin on contradicting our intelligence agency and being broadcast on there as if he is part of trump's cabinet or something. it is so nice that putin is rump isng trump, or t seconding putin, i should put it that way. oh, they had nothing to do with
breaking into the communications in the democratic party. and breaking into the elections. things.many other saw the people that he was taking for his cabinet, when i thought romney going to trump tower, i thought oh, good, he is going to choose a smart person. he knows his limitations. he is going to choose someone good. and then look what he has got up there. his whole family, who are foreigners from eastern europe. this is ridiculous. host: i'm going to stop you there because we are just about out of time. a reminder that we are back tomorrow morning, christmas eve, at 7:00 a.m. eastern time, and back on christmas day at 7:00
eastern, 4:00 for you on the west coast. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] host: a complete complement of coverage including booktv and american history tv. we want to wish you a happy hanukkah, a merry christmas, and we want to take you to the floor of the house of representatives for what will be a very brief pro forma session in today for just a couple of minutes, and then we will continue with our other ongoing coverage. you can check out all of our programming online anytime at c-span.org. thanks for joining us on this friday. have a wonderful weekend. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. december 23, 2016. i hereby appoint