Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal 06292018  CSPAN  June 29, 2018 6:59am-9:00am EDT

6:59 am
you don't belong. we all belong. i think my book is the ordinariness of a very extraordinary story. >> watches saturday night at 7:45 eastern on c-span two's "book tv." >> coming up friday, on c-span at 12:30 p.m., journalists review the recent supreme court term. at 3:30, chief justice john roberts will speak. 9:00 a.m., a discussion about recently imposed steel and aluminum tariffs. at coming up on washington journal in one hour, mark janus, the plaintiff in the afsme vs. janus supreme court case, and jacob discussing the high
7:00 am
court ruling this week. at 9:00, author malcolm nance discusses his new book, which discusses the methods and the rationale behind the russian meddling in the 2016 elections. ♪ host: good morning, it is friday, june 29. it has been a big week in washington with the end of the supreme court term and decisions , uniontravel ban dues, and abortion. justice anthony kennedy wants to -- re, and mitch mcconnell has insisted twice this week that the chamber will vote on kennedy's successor this fall. democratic leaders are citing 2016 as president for not voting
7:01 am
on a nominee so close to the election. onwant to get your thoughts how washington did. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. go ,o twitter as well, at @cspanwj or poster comments on facebook of stories from that part of our government with kennedy resigning in the supreme court ruling on travel bans and union dues, and then you have fromsentative joe crowley new york losing his primary bid, and yesterday on capitol hill, lord rosenstein testifying on the clinton email investigation. testifying onein the clinton email investigation. we will begin with chuck schumer on the floor yesterday, talking
7:02 am
about how republicans should proceed on justice kennedy's retirement. [video clip] >> time and time again, leader blockade justified his of merrick garland by claiming that the american people should have a voice in deciding the next supreme court justice. that was in february of an election year. it is now almost july. if the senate's constitutional duty to advise and consent is just as important as the president of the right to president's right to nominate, which the constitution says it is, why should a midterm election be any less important than a presidential election? leader mcconnell is simply engaging in hypocrisy. leader mcconnell followed mr. schumer on the floor, and this is what he had to say. [video clip] tothe senate will vote confirm justice kennedy's successor this fall. this is not 2016, this is not the final months of a second term constitutionally lame-duck
7:03 am
presidency with a presidential election fast approaching. we are right in the middle of this president's very first term . to my knowledge, nobody on either side has ever suggested before yesterday that the senate should only process supreme court nominations in odd numbered years. after joe crowley lost his primary bid on tuesday to a a latinald newcomer, woman in new york, representative pelosi was asked about it twice. here is what she had to say wednesday. [video clip] >> does anyone have any questions about the serious matters of the day? a supreme court decision that does violence to the first amendment? a supreme court decision that undermines the rights of working people. a bill on the floor that the democrats -- we would never do it -- that is about undermining our national security as well as
7:04 am
our judicial system. does anyone have a substantive question? host: that was the leader. she did go on to answer those political questions. she and the other democratic leaders also gathered with union toders on capitol hill discuss the supreme court's decision on union dues. richardl president trumka. [video clip] >> what this does flies in the face of what workers in america want, where workers in america want to go and where they need to go. and it shows how out of touch they are with the real america that is out there. was yesterday on capitol hill. also, deputy attorney general rod rosen thine went before the house dish eerie -- rod rosenstein went before the house judiciary committee.
7:05 am
about how thened department has handled the mueller investigation and their request for documents about the extent of it. here is part of an exchange between jim jordan of ohio and mr. rosenstein. [video clip] >> why did you try to hide that from his? >> i have are to make those allegations publicly on tv. >> i have it right here. >> mr. chairman -- >> now, mr. jordan, i am deputy attorney general of the united states. i am not the person doing the redacting. i am responsible for responding to your concerns. i have a team with me that is only a fraction of the team doing its work, and when you have brought in issues to my attention, i have personally tried to remedy them. >> you are the boss, mr. rosenstein. >> you are correct. we are trying to respond to your concerns. host: we covered many of the top
7:06 am
stories out of washington this week, as well as the house rejecting a gop compromise immigration bill. the v.a. secretary nominee is on capitol hill for his confirmation hearing this week, as well as the irs commissioner. and the white house announced that president trump will be meeting with vladimir putin when he travels to nato. , republican.ork you are up first. good morning. good morning, everyone. it will be a hot one here for the next few days, but it seems like washington is always hot, isn't it? on the supreme court thing, first of all, i heard mitch -- not mitch mcconnell, but chuck schumer say the other day that mitch mcconnell is the height of hypocrisy. what i have to say about that is it takes a hypocrite to know a
7:07 am
hypocrite, because chucky schumer has been quite a hypocrite over the years. another thing about this, i can remember in mr. obama's first mccaintanding with john -- and john mccain gave him a suggestion. obama currently pointed out to him that elections have consequences, and that implication, he was not going to take john mccain's advice or consent with anything. and on the public employee union thing. when you talk about the public employee unions, one of the greatest heroes, franklin's alana roosevelt, who, d llanoay, -- franklin
7:08 am
roosevelt, who, by the way, tried to pack the supreme court so he could get his way and a lot of things, he came out and said he did not think public employee unions were a good thing because of the fact that they do work for governmental institutions, and anybody can find that. it is amazing where we are going and when kennedy retired, it made me feel almost as good as when trump won. now i do not like a lot of trump's rhetoric and personal things he says, but i vote strictly on supreme court justices. i have been a on this earth long enough -- i have been on this earth long enough to know that supreme court justices are a very important thing. i'm not an evangelical, i am a
7:09 am
person who believes in the constitution, so i guess i would be called a strict constitutionalist. host: i have to get some other voices in, but i hope you keep watching. at the top of the hour, mark plaintiff in that case you were talking about along with his lawyer will be joining us to talk about the case and take your questions. tony in florida, a democrat. caller: hi, good morning greta. i just want to say that mitch mcconnell has no soul. politicians have no right, but a woman do or does to her body. mr. robert mueller needs to take his time to find out the trump , where he hasump connections with russia. countries western
7:10 am
want to lend trump money because he does not pay. the only country that lends china,o him is russia, and those are the only two countries that can afford trump. know if youi do not watched that hearing yesterday with mr. rosenstein and christopher wray, but the message from some of those republicans on the committee were hurry up. conclude the mueller investigation. and if you did not see it, go to he specifically told that to the deputy attorney general. hi, jim. caller: hi greta, how are you. host: i'm doing well. atler: i'm just calling about 6:10 in the morning, just waking up and it has been very difficult to get through to c-span, i have been trying to get through about a month and a half. i just wanted to say something
7:11 am
in observation to all of the regular callers who must know this and be yelling at their tv screens, as i have. caller whoregular calls himself herby. he calls like 20 times a month. i do not know how he does it. we will keep an eye on it. what about this week in washington. caller: i am calling about the ban. first, the word ban is not a good way to put it. it is a moratorium on this particular region of the world, and it is a very short one. it should be quite a few years, but it is only 90 days. the thing the american people, i have noticed when it comes to immigration or what it is going on -- we seem to beginning away from it now -- but the righteous indignation about the detention ohnson and which jeh j
7:12 am
chris wallace admitted they expanded them. he is the one with the 90,000 beds down there, he and obama deported one million people over their time there, which is more than george bush did, which is a good thing obama did. but throughout our history, we always had moratoriums. i have always brought this up and people forget this. wherever there is conflict or a hornets nest in the other parts of the world, our government had ysfferent congress has alwa acted to slow down migration immigration from those areas. there are over 6 million german halted germant we migration in 1914 because of what was going on with europe, the rising militarism. we halted german migration, and it has not really ramped up for
7:13 am
100 years. we also halted norwegian immigration into wisconsin, believe it or not. it has nothing to do with race, of course, these blonde haired, blue-eyed norse people, but because the norwegians were not .ssimilating they were branching out, they were speaking their language, and it was becoming a problem to ensure simulation. -- assimilation. . only 5 million italians were able to come here. we slowed migration from 1924-1965. to 90,000 people a year in order to absorb us all into one family. and when i look at the emotional reaction of the protesters -- that comes from 30 years of indoctrination. they are almost like 12 girls. they react emotionally -- host: what protesters are you talking about? caller: the people who just seem to appear on the border. all of a sudden, 1000 people appear with signs.
7:14 am
how do you just leave your job and go down there? the visceral reaction in the airports, with people screaming and losing their minds, it was like 12-year-olds. they seem to be rolled -- ruled by emotion and not how we became one people, one culture. it, heas tried to do talks about slowing down legal migration and people go insane because they are addicted to a myth. host: jim, i will leave it there. there were about 600 protesters that arrived on the senate side of the capital yesterday and some were arrested during the occupation of a u.s. senate august the link -- office building in washington, where they decried president trump's ono-tolerance stance illegal immigration. the protesters, mostly women dressed in white, wrapped themselves in metallic silver blankets the mueller to those given to migrant children
7:15 am
separated from their families by u.s. immigration officials. -- say it loud, say it clear, immigrants are welcome here. capitol police warn the protesters that if they did not move the building they would be arrested, and then the protesters were lined against a wall and police confiscated their blanket. it took police about 90 minutes to arrest them. a democratic congresswoman sat with the protesters and was also arrested. about 500 75 people were charged with unlawfully demonstrating people were -- 575 charged with unlawfully demonstrating and would be removed from the -- charged at the scene. i also want to give you some sad news about that shooting at an annapolis news yesterday. gunmen hits annapolis newspaper
7:16 am
and chase cook, who is a reporter for the capital does gazette tweeted out yesterday "i can tell you this, we are putting out a damn paper tomorrow." up you can see a picture put of him and a photographer working out of the back of a truck on their story for today. here is the capital gazette this morning. five shot dead at the capital. you can see the five that were shot dead, the victims. madi winters, rob cnamara, and the others who were shot at the capital yesterday. in a beef against his local
7:17 am
newspaper, a man with a shotgun walked into the offices on thursday and opened fire on the newsroom. police called it a targeted attack, saying the gunman had sent threats on social media and entered the building looking for specific people. the person was identified as a white man in his late 30's, and he was identified as jarrod 38-year-old laurel resident to unsuccessfully filed a defamation lawsuit in 2012 against the paper over coverage of a criminal harassment case against him. victims include an editorial page editor, writer, and a sales assistant with the newspaper. let's year from sherman, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call.
7:18 am
there are so many things going on today it is hard to pick just one issue to talk about, but the most probably important one at the moment is the retirement of the supreme court justice kennedy. host: ok. garland is not on the supreme court because of a maneuvering of a senate republican majority that was put there mostly because of the turnout of democrats. president trump is in the white house. russiahe was helped by and james comey and other things, but he is there because in the key districts, the democrats sat on their butts. just thinking about all of these things that have been set about hillary clinton and her emails,
7:19 am
blah, and they allowed donald trump to become president. and their supreme court nominee did not get on the supreme court. the supreme court that is in the distance now and what is coming next, roe v. wade is going to be overturned. this summer, there is going to a huge debate about abortion. i would just like to make a slight comment on roe v. wade. the ruling of what roe v. wade -- of roe v. wade says a person, individual has the right over their body. not the state. so if roe v. wade is overturned, the state could pass a law saying you have to have your tonsils removed or your appendix imaginaryy other
7:20 am
things. it is bigger than just the abortion issue. host: in your analysis, it is a in the papers today. in the wall street times, all sides brace for court clash. the white house again has enlisted leonard leo, the executive vice president of the federalist society, a conservative lawyers network, to assisted a selection process that is already focusing on fewer than a half-dozen candidates. on wednesday, mr. leo took a leave of absence from the federalist society to serve as mr. trump trump's outside advisor on the nomination. people close to the white house election process anticipated that a nominee will be announced before mr. trump departs for the coming nato summit, which begins on july 11. the wall street journal this morning. and then you have the front page of the new york times story with
7:21 am
an interesting take behind-the-scenes. urging a justice to move aside, -- assurances to kennedy about his legacy came from the white house. in a subtle and not-so-subtle way, the white house waged a that campaign to ensure mr. trump had a second opportunity for the administration to fulfill one of its most important campaign promises to his conservative changers, that he would the direction and complexion of the supreme court. so he used the first opening to help create the second one. he picks just as neil gorsuch, who served as a law clerk to justice kennedy, to fill justice scalia's seat. when justice gorsuch took the kennedyustice administered it. let's go to jack in pennsylvania, independent. caller: good morning, ma'am, and thank you to you and c-span for
7:22 am
letting me voice my opinion. from a christian perspective, i am thinking -- the gentleman mentioned before that we are a nation of language. i think the majority language in this country is based on christian. how we express ourselves is based on a christian attitude. christian children, i am assuming most of the children are christian across the border, from six months old yesterday to whatever age are being detained .nd imprisoned that doesn't seem to be christian to me. the fact that a man murdered five people and injured others yesterday certainly is not christian, and it seems like most of the people we hear on the news, at least from my perspective, seem to have law degrees, which suggests we are basing things more on law, that does appear to have political sides to it, rather than -- and
7:23 am
the only way we can resolve that, it would seem to me, would christian a perspective instead of a judicial perspective, because it does appear to the average laymen -- first of all, i assume people in other countries are going to say well, if they are going to treat christian children like that across the border, how are they going to treat us in our countries? host: ok, jack. by the way, the first lady returned to the border. of usa today has a picture her discussing border security. she met with agents and aid workers along the border, and next to that is a story about democrats pushing to put ice on ice somewhat. some want the agency abolished. there is not much chance of that -- expertserts say. host: steve, good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to talk about what happened yesterday in the house.
7:24 am
i was just watching on c-span and the news, some of the house grilling our and wanting them to rush this case. 20 fbi already got convictions and manafort is going to jail. what do they feel that they have, that they have to hide to the president of the united states? now it is all out there. we all know what is going on. actually bring these men that give their lives every day. they do this to criminals. it seems like the reverse. it is so crazy. here is a good shepherd, ex cia
7:25 am
director plan and -- the ex cia director. he gets interviewed. he is a good shepherd, he knows what is going on in the country and politics, he knows what is going on with the politicians and so on. the house politicians -- you should let the justice department do their jobs. for themonstitutional to be doing what they are doing, getting in the way of finding ,ut if the russian government which is run by the kgb, has infiltrated our infrastructure. sost: the house republican would say they have a role to play in this, and that is oversight. they have asked the justice department and fbi for documents so they can conduct their oversight role, and they claim that the justice department is
7:26 am
slow walking those requests. at the same time, i get what you're saying, the justice department has to do their job. they cannot release anything because if they do, they might take that information and give it to somebody that shouldn't have it, ok? we really do not know how some of these house republicans are acting right now. they aren't acting like patriots, ok? they are protecting someone who acting like is not a patriot. host: all right, steve. let's show our viewers, in case folks missed the five-hour hearing yesterday with deputy attorney general rod rosen nine and fbi -- rod and fbi director
7:27 am
christopher wray. here is jim jordan, former leader of the freedom caucus -- still part of that room -- his questioning of the deputy attorney general. [video clip] mr. rosenstein, did you threaten staffers on house intelligence committees? our reports say you did. >> your reports are mistaken. numberng the nation's one officer threatened to subpoena you were called and emails is downright chilling. >> did you threaten to subpoena their calls and emails. threaten to did you subpoena their calls and emails? >> no sir, and you cannot subpoena a phone call. [laughter] >> i asked if you would do it after you said it. >> did what? >> what i just read. >> no i did not. >> who are we supposed to believe? the house members we have worked with you have never hidden anything from us, or you? >> thank you for making clear it
7:28 am
is not personal, mr. jordan. maybe because i am telling the truth and i am under oath. >> i know these staff members. here is my last question. that youo important know that you don't want us to know that you will not give us the documents you are asked -- we are asking for that the house of representatives is about to go on record saying you should give us. what is so darn important that you would threaten staff members -- >> your inquiry, mr. chairman. if you missed that hearing and want to see parts of those exchanges between the house republicans and the deputy attorney general and vista for wray, you canpher go into our library and find it there. on access intensifies inquiry. on the house floor, republicans voted in lockstep to give the totice department seven days
7:29 am
produce sensitive documents related to the russia inquiry and hillary clinton's private email use. nonbinding, the measure was intended to put rosenstein on weree that house members planning on taking a punitive action, including impeachment, if their demands were not met. both rod rosenstein and just in rosenstein case, some republicans charged outright misconduct into the investigation and russia interference. judiciary -- and certain aspects of the russia investigation in recent weeks. on wednesday, lawmakers from the judiciary committee interviewed trzok about his messages with ms. page.
7:30 am
he said the messages had been taken out of context and not affect his work. democrats on wednesday called for the interview transcripts to be released to the public. theill be talking about russian interference into the 2016 campaign in our last hour. ance will be our guest. spent two years on -- destine and corporate kansas city, aaron, independent. our conversation, this week in washington. caller: good morning to you. host: the morning. regardsi am calling in to the irs commissioner. --ically, as a final former irs employee for over a decade and dealing with new is,es in the agency, which
7:31 am
in fact, a union agency, which arenumber of agencies unionized as well. dealing with the intrapersonal agency,ships within the how well is mr. reddick going to handle harassment within the agency? that is never really discussed. -- did you wash yesterday's hearing? did you wash yesterday's hearing? caller: host: very little. -- very little. caller: while in that case, you can go to our website. -- caller: more of an employee. irs employee level. the harassment was in the agency
7:32 am
. that is being allowed and tolerated within the agency, , directors,ment supervisors, commissioners, deputy commissioners are involved with severe harassment on multiple federal employees, who already have their lives threatened daily just for being an irs employee. alex in maryland, a republican. caller: hello? host: good morning, you are on the air. caller: hello, i am talking about the immigration topic. mali,rom west africa, [inaudible] host: yes, we are listening. so i came into this country for asylum, but i came
7:33 am
in a legal way. those people coming to the border with their children, i have been in this country for 27 years. do -- my daughter is like 10 years old. she goes to school, she will not be allowed to play with their families. when she comes back, she says daddy, they will not let us play with them. i said why? their mamas do not want us to play with them. [inaudible] say, a lotgoing to of black people are getting killed with the police. they do not have no guns. i have never seen any lawmaker and the democratic party crying
7:34 am
for that. they never shut the government down over these issues. [inaudible] cry go to those borders, for the children, the spanish, but never for the black people. times, they attempted to address the separation of families at the border, border security as well as the children that came here with their dacats, the so-called kids, the deferred action on childhood arrivals program. they tried to put that permanently in place. both attempts failed. a so-called moderate republican compromise bill was put on the down wednesday and it went 121-301. carlos cabello, republican of florida, one of the leaders behind pushing a compromise bill with republicans, had this to say after it failed. [video clip]
7:35 am
today was aitnessed minority of republicans joining tory democrat in the house double down on a failed, broken, inefficient, unfair, and at times cruel immigration system. jeff adams said, this bill would have secured the border. this bill would have provided certainty, secured a future for approximately 2 million young immigrants brought to our country as children, the victims of a broken immigration system. this bill would have closed a number of loopholes that are exploited by human traffickers and drug traffickers. but, a minority of republicans joined every democrat to vote for the status quo. a lot of members of this house who, for years, have been talking about dreamers and about helping dreamers decided today that they prefer the politics,
7:36 am
the petty politics of immigration instead of these solutions for immigration. politico has the back this compromise bill. the two factions, the conservative republicans and moderate republicans. she writes that moderate house republicans suspected they were being played. for weeks, they had been negotiating with freedom caucus chairman mark meadows in a deal that could pass the house, but whenever the two sides got close, immigration hardliners would ask for more. on the morning of a scheduled june 21 boat, moderate got their -- votes, moderates out their hands an email morning group members that voters would punish them for backing any bill with a width of amnesty. this is bull, representative tom macarthur scolded meadows at a meeting in speaker ryan's office that day. the new jersey republican, who had worked closely with meadows
7:37 am
in the past and wanted a deal demanded to know why meadows appeared to be backing away from a bill he helped craft. a litter of the pro-immigration reform centrists read the email allowed as meadows insisted he had no knowledge of it. -- said he had been warned not to trust the freedom caucus, saying he would never make that mistake again. politico has this story this morning about representative what ao, touting his country political action committee as a way to support like-minded republicans on immigration, dishing out 152,000 dollars to house republicans. but when he most needed their support, most of those republicans deserted him. let's go to doris in michigan, a democrat. go ahead. caller: good morning, yes. i have a comment on those children that have been stolen
7:38 am
by the trump administration. first, i want to mention, i would like to know what orders trump is going to get from putin what he is what he is supposedo for the 2018 elections. now, the children. i was reading a couple of days found thecclatchy trump administration has likely lost track of about 6000 children. it is not 2000, as they have said before, they have lost track of about four times more than that. they do not know where they are. kids,ey are just stealing because how they are going to they going to get these kids back to parents they have already deported? to oure will go on caller from pennsylvania, republican. good morning to you. caller: hello. host: you're on the air, sir.
7:39 am
caller: i would like to comment on immigration and the extreme left socialists. a socialist.stand if they want to be socialists, why don't they go to a socialist country? this is a democratic republic. if you don't like america, leave. it is so simple. want to change those of us that want a constitutional republic? another thing on immigration, why don't they by about 50 buses , have them at the border. when those people come, load them onto buses and take them back? ed inlet's go to virginia, independent. good morning. morning, thank you for taking my call. i would like to comment on a couple things this morning, if i have time.
7:40 am
first, i would like to talk about the shooting in annapolis yesterday. show the friday after the florida high school shooting? i came down pretty hard on marco rubio and his comments on the senate floor about it would not have mattered what type of weapon it was, we could not have stopped this shooting. my comment that marco was wrong, that a shotgun would not inflict this damage, and in the last two shootings in this country were done with shotguns, and the previous one to this with a revolver. ar have noton the changed. i am opposed to any military style weapon, but it makes me realize that we need ar stricter gun control on all types of weapons. i'm a gun owner, i own guns and hunt with guns, i use shotguns, and never in my life have i ever
7:41 am
thought about pointing one of my hunting weapons at an individual and taking their life. it is hatred in this country that needs to be dealt with. i find it veryd curious that the last two shootings, we did not kill 17 people, but we have killed 5, 10, multiple numbers of people. control,ates for gun for the ar's, they have not been calling in about these last shootings and other gun control issues we need to deal with. so i want to comment on that. and the rosenstein yesterday, the senate hearings. i have to agree -- what do we got on trump? is there anything there? let's get this over with. if we have all of these people in jail that are supposed to flip and do something, let's get it over with. gotwhat have we got on this
7:42 am
president? not a trump fan. i do not like him, did not vote for him, would never vote for him, but let's get it over with. host: we will ask that question to malcolm nance. kennedy,ing justice the new york times reports that the democrat parliamentary options are limited, because the republicans rescinded a rule that allows confirmations to be filibustered. democratic senators undergoing tough reelection battles and states that voted for trump in 2016 will face pressure to vote for his nominee, including the three that voted for justice gorsuch. joe donnelly of indiana, heidi heitkamp of north dakota, and joe manchin of west virginia. mr. manton said thursday that he was keeping an open mind about the nomination. a current senior democratic senate aide says the party sees a public pressure campaign around abortion rights its best
7:43 am
about voting for mr. trump's nominee as unpalatable as possible. people with insight into the white house's decision-making process having knowledge concerns about ms. collins and -- presti -- mr. perkowski mr. murkowski, as well as potential defections by senators such as jeff flake of arizona and rand paul of kentucky. and the president yesterday met at the white house yesterday senators for filling this vacancy to discuss it. they were senator chuck grassley, who chairs the judiciary committee, susan collins of maine, lisa murkowski of alaska, who will be the pivotal vote for the republicans, senators joe manchin, donnelly, and high camp, all of -- heidi heitkamp, all up for reelection.
7:44 am
delma in ohio, democrat. caller: hi, how are you? host: hi, how are you? caller: good morning, i am fine. my first disappointment with this whole thing was when mr. to the white house and sneaked back to wherever he wanted to go and with all of that i said ok, that is it. and now i hear the ohio representative being so nasty, i thought is this what we have come to? allowot believe that we our representatives to be there and speak in such a nasty way. i am not a trump fan, will never to have an ohio
7:45 am
representative speak in such a mean way, i am sorry. that is not a christian way, as far as i'm concerned. host: margaret in tampa, independent. yes ma'am, thank you for taking my call. yes. i just wanted to make a comment on witnessing the attorney general rosenstein and the representative jordan from ohio demanding the files and also, i would like to make a comment on the fbi director chris wray. my comment is sickly this. -- simply this. it is very unfortunate, and i felt that representative jordan , kind of displayed a
7:46 am
lack of character, a lack of what i thinkack of any american would want to hear from a representative. i felt that rosenstein and chris wray handled themselves with dignity, grace, character, humility, and that right now, unfortunately and sadly enough, is what our america is having to endure. as far as the gentleman that called earlier, as far as people leaving america, i am going to very kindly say that this is not my america, and i am not the only one that feels this way. i am not going to get on a bus and leave america, what i am going to do is go out and vote and use my character, my and my owny grace
7:47 am
is what is far as it will do. but i'm not going to get on a bus and leave america. .ost: ok, margaret let your from ike in texas, a republican. caller: hi. ok, it is very interesting what is going on now. what i would like to share is that trump is really doing a good job. he is doing a good job because this country is a different country from what it used to be 10, 15 years ago. it is a different kind of migrant coming into the country. something has to be done about it.
7:48 am
there is no problem with what trump is doing. there are a lot of american families that are being supported by their kids when they break -- that are separated from their kids when they break the law. they should be released because they have kids. if you broke the law, there is a consequence. america is law in that you need to follow the criteria to come into the country. useru choose to children as leverage to come into the country, you need to face the consequences. host: the state department put out its 2018 human trafficking report yesterday. the new york times takeaway, the state department report warns against family separation. the state department warned that separating children from their parents can cause lasting psychological damage to leave them vulnerable to trafficking, a cautionary tale that comes amid an uproar over trump
7:49 am
administration immigration policy that has broken up migrant families as they enter the united states. since may, the trump administration has separated more than 2300 migrant children from their families crossing the southwestern border. we cover the report with secretary of state mike pompeo and the president's daughter, e trump,trump, -- ivanka who held a news conference to raise awareness about human trafficking. you can read that story on and the transatlantic trade caused an unfortunate side effect, -- i'm sorry, this is the wrong story. merkel says migrant issues could make or break the eu. divisions over migration threatened the european union's future, warned the german chancellor, as this could
7:50 am
sway newly empowered populace. leaders of the eu's 28 countries are focusing on a battle over migrants coming to the bloc across the mediterranean sea from north africa. there is more in the papers on that this morning. stevie in dallas, texas, democrat. go ahead. good morning, ma'am, thank you for taking my call. i think everyone is missing the point about what president trump is trying to do. government, the mexican government is not trying to stabilize the immigration that they have coming through their country, and they are acting like a non-sovereign country. with america -- what america and president trump have told them, -- bad a lot of bafd bres and you need to stop
7:51 am
them. but if a country cannot stabilize and keep forcing people out of where they live, a sovereign nation has to come in and table eyes the country. i think they are missing the point, they are going to do what he did to puerto rico. he will make mexico a territory and stabilize that country, because he is a developer. people are missing the point. that is exactly what he is trying to do. this a story from axios morning on the wto, that the president has repeatedly told top white house officials he wants to withdraw the united states from the wto, a move that would throw global trade into wild disarray. and this story from politico, the senate passes the farm bill, setting up foodstamp battles with the house. the farm bill passed in the senate 86-11, but did not include those worker requirements in the house bill. they will have to reconcile that as well as other differences between the two bills before it
7:52 am
will get a final vote and head to the president's desk. and this story in the front page of the wall street journal, the president raising a chief of staff switch. john kelly is expected to depart the white house as early as this summer. the two frontrunners are the chief of staff to vice president mike pence and mick mulvaney, is also serving as the acting director of the consumer financial protection bureau. mr. mulvaney dined with the evening, andnesday the president discussed the chief of staff position with him. charles from louisiana, republican. caller: good morning. i have several things. wrayld like to start with and rosenstein. i felt like the republicans -- and i am republican -- i felt like some of them were very unchained, those two.
7:53 am
i think they are striving to do their jobs and i think if you just let them finish it, trump and all of them will probably be vindicated. should not have anything to fear if they are not guilty. and then on the border, the democrats want to confuse illegal immigration in our country. i tell you, what they need to do is leave their own doors unlocked tonight and let anybody andhat is legal or illegal see how they feel about it. if they don't want to do that, they need to fix our borders. host: ok. caller: i wanted one more thing. host: all right, go ahead. caller: that man that called in and compared a little baby to tonsils or something like that, i would like to answer him that
7:54 am
the fact is, they are a separate body. they have their own dna and that starts at conception. and then you have these little babies, they are known for thousands of years that they were a baby, now through hard heartedness and no compassion, we literally kill it. it says in our bible that satan and to kill and destroy, that is what they have to do to that little baby. it is alive and they kill it. host: ohio, independent. hello. regard,i'm calling them you have so many ignorant people calling in. unbelievable. , ifone guy about socialism he wants social security, that is socialism. medicare, medicaid, all of that is socialism.
7:55 am
there are people that do not really know what is going on in this world or who are really ignorant to what is going on, and they are opening the doors up for a dictatorship, that is what they are doing. and in regards to the man they are so in love with as far as trump, he is nothing but the devil. people need to wake up in regard to that. socialism, this is a story in the daily beast. after that surprise win by casio-cortez against joe connelly, the democratic socialists have seen an uptick in their membership, 30 times more sign-ups than on an average day. caller from atlanta, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning, greta.
7:56 am
i am glad that i got in. these are really good topics. i am glad you have open phones. democrat, i voted for reagan -- i am sorry that i did nevertheless, as much as i want to -- the much as i want to say to democrats is this. we have to vote. even if you don't agree, if you are a democrat, independent, or republican, if you do not agree totally with the person who is running for your party, regardless of what that party the lesser of evils if you want to put it that way. i do not think any of these people are evil, except for the person in the white house, but you have to get out and vote. if you do not vote, this is what we end up with. the next thing i want to talk about is the hearing. i thought that jim jordan from ohio was so disrespectful to mr. mr. wray and mr.
7:57 am
rosenstein. demand at even give chance to answer the question he was asking of him. he interrupted him repeatedly, and mr. rosenstein and mr. wray and mr. mueller, they have already found -- these people have found, people have been convicted, people are in jail, who investigated hillary clinton -- there were eight or 10 hearings for her. nothing came out of it. it went on for more than two and a half years, they are saying. , how cann they ask they ask these people, who are [inaudible] to get it over with? this is important for our democracy, it truly is, greta. i will hang up now so someone else can get in. host: we will start with this story, the washington post has a headline on their website that
7:58 am
representative maxine canceled events after death threats. waters says individuals threatened to shoot and lynch her ahead of a texas event. jimmy, republican, florida. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am calling from south florida and i want to give a shout out to the president trump. the african american, by way, and i have been a democrat my whole life. but i want to give a shout out to give a shout out to mr. trump, because i'm a firm believer that this country was word ofout the god. what mr. trump doing, he trying to bring this country together to follow the constitution and follow the word of god. hillary clinton got the majority vote, he got the god vote. lefte moving so far to the in this country that they are going to take god away.
7:59 am
that is why we are going through the chaos that we are going through. an mr. trump, as african-american, you are doing a great job. keep your head up. you will be successful. host: ok, and we will hear from the president today, holding a tax event at the white house to mark the six-month anniversary of republicans and the president signing into law that tax reform bill. go to for our coverage of that. and john roberts will be at the federal conference of the fourth circuit, talking about this past term and hopefully give his perspective on the retirement of justice anthony kennedy. that coverage begins at 3:30 p.m. eastern time on c-span,, and you can also listen in on the free c-span radio app. we will be taking a break, but when we come back. -- but when we come back, mark janus will be at our table, along with his attorney jacob huebert to talk about this
8:00 am
week's ruling. and later, malcolm nance will be here to talk about his new book on rush interference in the 2016 campaign. we will be right back -- russian >> these c-span buses traveling across the country. the bus stopped in fairbanks, asking folks what is the most important issue in alaska. move -- i believe the most important issue is the walls our society seems to be building up. for a nation built on immigrants and diversity we are finding it it as a goodce thing.
8:01 am
that is creating a big divide and greater conflicts than we really need at the moment. we should be focusing our skills , notmething more important how we are different. our differences make us great. >> we have a misconception that we are following behind. that is not the case. , for theortant for me government to understand and work hard on making arctic policy a bigger issue. >> i have been here since 1976.
8:02 am
i have been here since i went to school in michigan. health is an important issue. in this state we have volunteered. we finished a mission of mercy where we treated thousands free of charge for two days. the private sector of course, the biggest burden, a lot of the treatment is donated. the government facilities, public health offers a great treatment. encourage everybody to remember dental hygiene. most important issue to me
8:03 am
currently is the political divide. i was raised a moderate republican. i worry about the future of our country. it seems like there is no room for moderation anymore. what we have is conflict, and nothing really gets done. i would like to see some changes in that respect. our worldwidebout standing. historically we have been looked at as problem solvers. i think that is changing and not for the better. those are my issues.
8:04 am
>> be sure to join us when we will feature our visit to alaska. watch alaska weekend or listen on the c-span radio app. >> washington journal continues. to folks at our table with lead plaintiff in the union case the supreme court decided on, thank you for being here. and, your lawyer you're, at the liberty justice center and litigation director there. let me begin with you. tell us your story of how this came about. years agostarted 11 when i went to work for the state. processhe usual hr nothing was said about a union. there weren't any cards about it. , and ay first paycheck
8:05 am
line item says union dues. it surprised me. i never signed up for a union. my peers said everybody has to pay a fee to work here. i thought that was very odd. on, and i continue to see more money coming out of my check and i saw some of the policies that the union was their in illinois with , icarious budget situation just became more and more upset. i had a mutual friend that knew i was upset. they put the two of us together and we brainstormed and decided we were going to try to do something about it.
8:06 am
we got our final decision wednesday. host: states cannot have mandatory union fees for public sector unions. guest: public sector only. >> can you tell us how much the unions were charging? guest: $50 a month. it wasn't the dollar amount that bothered me. it, thate principle of i did not have a choice as to whether or not i wanted to pay or not pay. it is just mandatory. , wehe state of illinois have 5 million public-sector workers in a similar position. to have our jobs. i did not think that was right. i basically work on looking at court orders and do accounting
8:07 am
work to make sure our records match what it should be. host: what kind of children? guest: children of all aspects in illinois. i can't really be specific because it is a wide variety. anytime there is a child support order we have to take a look at it and make sure everything is right. win the liberty justice center took this on, on what legal grounds were you going to argue his case? >> forcing people to pay union pay forforcing them to 's politicaloup advocacy in the context of government employment. when a government union bargains , it tells the government things like how much it should pay workers, how it should run its
8:08 am
programs, and those are political topics. we would recognize that as political and would call it lobbying. none of us can be forced to just pay a third party to lobby the government on public policy issues, and it is not right people who want a government job should be forced to do that. host: the union argues on behalf of all of the government workers. getting pay increases, let's say. other benefits mr. janus would get as well. why should he have to pay the fee? thet: not all workers want representation and consider it a benefit. some would rather represent themselves but can't. they are being injured having the union be the representative, and forced to pay for it.
8:09 am
host: donnie callan wrote a piece, here is how he benefits from a strong union. his job would probably have been outsourced by now. he said mr. janice has received 17,000 in raises. access to resources like childcare. guest: i would like to know where that 17,000 is. i don't know where he got that figure. the problem is this. the collective bargaining in illinois, the union asked for collective bargaining. they received it. theyer i wanted it or not asked for it, they got it. cost all of this extra money they collect from me to bargain when you have a
8:10 am
bargaining committee of 10 people. does it cost any more to bargain for 5000 people versus 10,000 people? all you have to do is look at a standard business model. where is this extra money going? we asked for accounting and never got it. they would give us nebulous line items. you could say the money was going anywhere. that was another problem. what is the money being used for? host: are you antiunion? absolutely not. if they voluntarily want to sign up and pay the dues and get those benefits so be it. god bless. for those who choose not to why can't we have that choice on their own? i look at it the same way as someone who runs for exercise.
8:11 am
goingave a choice of straight ahead or left at the intersection. untilt have that choice wednesday. i was mandated to pay a fee. you believe all unions are bad in the fees that they charge? guest: the problem is the co-worship, forcing people to pay for advocacy on public policy issues they may disagree with. the first amendment never allow that. this was a unique situation where one private entity was getting co-worst funds for its advocacy. all we want is a situation were the government isn't favoring one side or the other with this. speak to steve. this is one of the most bogus stories that has come before the supreme court.
8:12 am
i think mr. janice is no more than a mold put in place. and represented companies that have been breaking into -- breaking up unions for years. mr. janice is receiving the of safety, and good raises. that is why companies don't want unions to bargain for these things. is bogus for him to bring up this. he doesn't even do that job anymore. to helpust put in their bust up unions. ost: you plan to return to work. guest: i will be back in the office monday. i'm not sure where he thinks he knows more than i do.
8:13 am
you approached by outside corporate interest groups to take this? guest: absolutely not. that is another fallacy. that i am some sort of shell. i did this on my own for the 5 million public-sector workers like myself that have to pay this. i would like to have someone tell me it is not right for me to have a choice on my own. have someoneto tell me i have to do something that i may not agree with. >> i worked for a company, required to do background checks. they required us to find documents the state could collect any information they wanted to about us without notifying us.
8:14 am
it was the equivalent to surrendering my fourth amendment to search and seizure. that my said how can the state ask you to do that to keep your job, their argument was you are not compelled to work here. if you don't like the requirements of this job. can you tell me how this differs? guest: i can't speak to the background check situation. in constitutional law we have the idea the government can't make you give up your constitutional rights to get a benefit including the benefit of a government job. you shouldn't have to give up your first amendment right to choose what associations you will and won't support with your money just because you want to
8:15 am
work as a child support specialist, a firefighter or something like that. host: maryland, democrat. caller: yes. i don't understand how this case came about. it is ludicrous. it is an insult to people who belong to unions. this man knew what he signed up for. he shouldn't deny it and he is causing havoc because everybody wants unions in this country. we need people who stand up behind them and not tear them down. to say that union dues don't matter, they matter quite a bit. they controlled the benefits and keep benefit levels stable, they keep raises stable. you can't say that funding doesn't do that. you knew what you signed up for. don't lie lie about it. host: let's have mr. janice
8:16 am
respond. guest: when i went through the process nothing was said about a union. so that argument is false. -- a unions are surviving in this country. they will continue to survive. they will still be able to negotiate for benefits. the federal government does not .equire these fair share fees the unions on the federal government side are thriving. they have membership. if the union has a product that is beneficial people will voluntarily sign-up. they are offering something to the workers. because they are offering a good people will flock to it and join it. that is all i am saying. let people make their own decision. union in your state
8:17 am
conducted themselves differently when you asked the question, can i see how the money is spent do you think you would not have fought this? >> good question. i never saw the numbers. hard to say. >> do you think if they did provide that more people would sign up? >> i believe so. i believe there would be more transparency. the president of the teachers union, on the steps of the supreme court, she said if we lose maybe we ought to do a better job at communicating with our members. struck me as interesting. shouldn't they have been doing that all along? why does it take this case to say we really need to communicate with our members .etter
8:18 am
>> let me be clear. the supreme court is on the wrong side of history. what they did flies in the face of where america is headed, where workers want to go, where workers need to go. it shows how out of touch they are with the real america that is out there. workers are demanding a voice. we are speaking out for a better life. demanding a fair share of the wealth we helped create. we are marching and bargaining. them toy will not allow stop us from doing our job. can stillons
8:19 am
represent workers and advocate for the things they believe in. the only thing changing is unions can no longer force people to give them money. now workers have a choice. unions will have to earn their support. that is the only difference. that should be in their interest and should make the unions more responsive to them. good morning. my father was a member of the unions when i was a teenager. he was in the steel industry. he used to complain about the unions. he said they want all our money. he was making a lot of money. was a veteran of world war ii. he always complained about how much they were taking from his
8:20 am
paycheck. he had nothing to say about it. workers gotther together and went to the union and said we don't want to pay this much. , it wasy were getting not compensating for what they were taking out for these union fees every week. the people running the unions, he is making millions. >> i would have to agree. let's face it. these national union leaders are making big money. they are criticizing me for being backed by big money? i find that interesting. host: are you backed by big money? guest: i have no idea. i am not privy to the list of
8:21 am
donors. i have had support from all across the country. california to the east coast. all we are trying to do is give workers the right to choose for themselves. are they trying to offer a choice to workers to have a better life, to get wages and benefits? why is it ok to advocate for that but if i want to advocate her choice in my own decision that is bad? i don't get the contrast. >> jacob hubert. who has donated? guest: we have a variety of donors who believe in our mission. we don't say who is or isn't because we respect privacy. we can't do that but we appreciate the donors. we rely on voluntary donations to do this.
8:22 am
the unions have had to coerce money from people. >> what has this been like for you? it has been a whirlwind. we have been trying to keep our privacy as best we can. i understand this is a national issue. .'m on the hot seat my parents taught me if you believe in something you should go for it. unionss not unlike the are doing. they go for it. we not that far apart. >> from gary, democrat. >> hello. i want to start off saying this. don't misunderstand me. i am all for unions.
8:23 am
what you're going through is an old-fashioned pushing around. i want to refer to something you said when you mention someone duesif it were not for the the job would be outsourced by now. that does not make it right. he does have freedom of choice. i find all of this exasperating. when i watch her program i get mad. this really burns my toast. it is unfair what is happening to you. i'm in your corner. good luck to you in your case. i hope all the fairness and justice you are due comes your way. host: -- [inaudible] guest: the decision was better
8:24 am
than what we thought it was going to be. host: in what way? guest: there was one clause in the decision where an individual must opt in incentive opt out. thatnk jacob can explain better than i can but that was a big win. guests: if the government is going to take money from anyone that person needs to give their affirmative consent, which means in writing. the government can't just put you in it and then put the burden on you topped out. we have that in some states and people don't understand they are in it. the court decided that is too to put onburden people. >> that was my situation. i was never given that opportunity.
8:25 am
i was just automatically in. the money started coming out and started to flow. host: kimberly, your question? caller: good morning. unionseen in a couple over my lifetime. texas. cna in dallas, we had $15 dues once a month. later i joined another union to give me to send benefits. -- give me decent benefits. six months after i started i still did not have health benefits. from september of 17 until acember of 17 when i left taken $880 they had out of my pay.
8:26 am
, in i called the union rep left the job because of the union. i said what is this 4%? my pay stub is union dues. they are telling me that was to keep the lights on. unions can help but they can also hurt. my sister works for the post office. they have a union. they have a choice. she refuses to join. they need to fix it. it is only as good as the people running it. host: let's talk about that breakdown. what was your reaction to that? speak to an't specific union situation. as far as the breakdown, a lot of times workers that have good information about that.
8:27 am
if you were not a member you were supposed to have to pay for your share of representation but not paid for the politics. what is political and what is not political, a lot of people are frustrated they don't get good information. a lot of people think that maybe it is going towards things that are not helpful to them. maybe now unions will attract more members by providing better information. host: illinois, independent. caller: now that this law is a collective bargaining members, between union what is going to happen now is this management now allowed to have two different pay scales? during collective darkening
8:28 am
everyone got the same cash and benefits even if they want paying dues. now that they have a law where you don't have to be art of that is that going to allow management to have two different pay scales? other in illinois and states with government unions there are laws on the books that say the union has to represent everybody whether they are a member or not. that means everybody gets the same deal. that is not going to change. those laws are on the books. that, unions don't like if they think it is not there, they could lobby to change those law. they lobbied to have those laws in the first place. they could do to change that so nonmembers could potentially get a different deal. i don't think they are going to lobby to change those laws.
8:29 am
they will probably remain in that situation. theoretically it could change. host: if you were to get a raise, what will you do? uest: i have not thought that far and it rants. a lot of this has to be determined. governor didu the sign an executive order issued wednesday in the state of illinois that said if you are a fair share member those dues and fees will not have to come out anymore. that was pretty immediate. there is a lot of this we have to look at. we still have to decide how that is going to shake out host: read host: will you feel torn -- shakeout. host: will you feel torn? guest: i probably will. i negotiated my own benefits. i understood what management
8:30 am
went through, and what the state is going through. the state of illinois is in bad shape. the fact that as a taxpayer we just got a 32% income tax increase a year ago, what i found interesting, during contract negotiations they were lobbying, in the streets protesting for better wages. they were saying we need to protect the middle class. how does a 32% income tax increase healthy middle class when that is going to have to go to increase wages and benefits? i have been happy to stay with the status well and not have to get the increase. at some point this is going to catch up to us all as far as budget and what we have to pay. host: mike, independent.
8:31 am
caller: the previous caller stole my thunder. i was wondering if this man doesn't want to pay his union dues, petitions the court to strip him of all his benefits and wages, when he says he did not know he had to join a union when he hired onto the government, that is ridiculous. his gray hair and is starting to bald. a new. can the answer -- did he petitioned the court to strip him and get rid of his wages and benefits that he got associated with the union. guest: that free right argument has been bandied about ever since we started the case. the point that i make is that i believe the union has been free
8:32 am
on us. -- riding they have been collecting these fees for years and years using it for a variety of reasons. some good, some bad. i don't find that that is an argument. i would like to know how many people out there if they were forced to make a purchase in a store but in order to make that purchase you had to join a group and pay a fee to make that purchase which is similar, i would like to have the wood feel about that -- how they would feel about that. call,nk you for taking my and it comes to unions, one woman spoke about the postal union. i was a member. ofs comes about the cousin poor union leadership.
8:33 am
they don't make convenient hours to come to general meetings. every time we get a raise, they raise our dues. if you are not supporting the leadership, there is a chance that you will not get represented or not it represented will -- well. this came about because of poor leadership. why should he have to pay dues for nothing and get nothing? they get ahip, pension from the union. they do not get a pension from the union. they get it from the post office. were winning elections by acclamation. i put up three tickets and was given a death threat and told i was going to be killed. the government was informed and they did nothing. they buried the case.
8:34 am
from what a far cry they used to be in our country. they used to stick up for the workers. they had apprenticeship programs for you have people who performed the job well. you,i'm going to tell there is a tremendous not of people that do not earn their day and that starts at the top. host: what is your thoughts? have: unions are going to to become more transparent and answer to membership. they are going to have to produce a product, if you want to call it that that is going to entice people to join the union and offer something just like somebody that manufactures a dishwasher or automobile, as to why you should live that product. i think that is going to be the major been it.
8:35 am
it is going to strengthen the unions. there will be that transparency. there will be that rethinking of what they do and how they do it and i think that is going to strength in the unions. host: could you see yourself joining a union? i possibly could. prove it to me, if you will. i can't quickly say one way or the other. host: for you wondering if there were other legal challenges? guest: it is possible. there trying to make it harder for people to get out of the union. the union wants to keep as much of this money going as possible. they are giving work or's a narrow window of time every year in which they can quit and stop having dues coming out, where they are giving unions exclusive access to push union membership on the muallem not letting them
8:36 am
here in the voices, people who would want to give them an alternate view. these things could lead to other legal challenges to ensure workers are actually able to make a free informed choice about whether they were want to be a union member. hopefully it will not take much. hopefully they will respect this decision over others -- and workers will be able to make the decision. host: thank you for your being here as well. we appreciate your time. we are glad to take a break. we would return to our earlier discussion. we will be right back. >> he is closing up to kim jong-un, vladmir putin, to
8:37 am
president xi in china. that is the most concerning thing to me, are we moving away from the notion that the united states believes in economic and political freedom towards a strong man approach to governance? we need our allies. we need to promote democracy and economic freedom. this president seems to be moving away from that. the trend of where he is taking foreign policy is troubling to me. >> the nato summit is coming up. could you give us perspective on how you see relations with nato allies? what your expectations are?
8:38 am
>> administration has been pressuring them for some time with next results. that is always going to be part of it. the concern is that this president has basically said at different times he wants to move away from nato, move away from our alliances. arounda lot of people temp who want to reinforce those. there is always that tug-of-war. articleed to reassert five, where it says every nato country will defend the other. a week later he mumbled it. so, i do not think that the way the president is going about this is going to strengthen the alliance. i am really worried that he doesn't want the alliance to continue. our interview with adam
8:39 am
smith, the top to the credit on the house armed services committee. one of the topics was president trump's foreign-policy, and where he is taking it. you can hear newsmakers sunday. you can also go to this week in washington, that is our conversation. a lot happening. the spring court ruled on union dues. the travel ban, and justice kennedy retiring july 31. joe crowley lost his primary bid. the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein on capitol hill confronted by house republicans over the clinton emails and robert mueller's investigation. gophouse rejecting a compromise immigration bill.
8:40 am
v.a. secretary nominee had a hearing to head the irs. the white house announced president trump would be meeting with the russian president ahead of the nato summit in mid-july. how do you think washington did this week? we will go to tom. good morning. caller: i was listening to the last segment about union dues. i'm a county board member. i have negotiated these union dues with the sheriff's department and highway department. we get people from chicago that are head of the union and represent them. we meet with them and they tell us what they want, and we have to give it to them otherwise we are strong-armed. my point is the unions in
8:41 am
, the pensions the unions have negotiated across billione are 131 unfunded, which they will not ever get paid. unless we take all of the property taxes and wealth, because these have not been negotiated in good faith. does anybody know how government employees got the right to unionize? i watched this on c-span. , a presidential order allowed union government unions to unionize. not -- this guy did a good job going to the supreme court. one thing about government is, when you go to the negotiated no -- theyhere is
8:42 am
don't go broke. they just raise taxes. if it is a business there has to be consideration on whether the company is going to go broke. the union thing is a moneymaking thing from the government. the unions benefit from it. employees benefit for now. host: ok. i'm going to go to frank. this week in washington. caller: good morning. i would like to ask a question about the new supreme court appointthat trump will sooner or later. when he was running for president he vowed to overturn roe v. wade. my question is this. how can you appoint somebody to -- iourt that already
8:43 am
guess he is going to interview, already has a prejudice towards a case? isn't that supposed be determined by fax? it is like having a juror going in with a predetermined one way or another. host: those are the questions some democrats are going to ask this nominee. that folks are watching here to see how they nominee.on a potential that is one issue that susan collins has brought up, asking how they may vote on a case that deals with roe v. wade. on who the president might nominate, he has a list of 25 people. kavanaghincludes judge
8:44 am
appointed to the court of appeals in washington, who helped write the report recommending bill clinton's impeachment and kenneth starr's investigation. the opinion that criticize the massive powers of the director of the consumer protection bureau. also, thomas hardiman, both interviewed last year for the supreme court position. other potential nominees include a meet tony barrett, a former clerk for justice antonin scalia. there is also william pryor, a court of appeals judge close to
8:45 am
jeff session, worst -- who called roe v. wade the worst abomination of constitutional law and our history. john larson from another former clerk to justice scalia has also been floated. her appointment last year was opposed civil rights groups who criticized her record on gay rights. let's go to adam. you for c-span. i wanted to comment about the hearings. i never voted for a republican. cia was trying to set up donald trump to stop him from being president. runs theon is, who country? the people who vote for the f ei the cia deciding who we get to elect as president.
8:46 am
evidence one but was changed. i have never been a republican, but it seems to me the left has shown its true nature. host: that is a question we can ask our next guest. he will be joining us after the house gavels and. we can ask him about that. what evidence is there that the russians swayed the outcome? let's go to jerry in new jersey. caller: i'm a registered democrat. predicted youly i were going to see the corruptions of the democrat party. i think the last caller for bringing that up.
8:47 am
i want the democrats to do what they have been doing. continue to protest, because all you are doing is going to turn people like myself to vote for a republican. this is so ludicrous. , and what they are doing is not going to bode well for the democrat party. . listen to msnbc the border -- reporters trying to blame the shooting on donald trump. it must have spent the whole afternoon blaming it on the president. it turned out to be a not all -- nut ball. athink he deserves apology. the news media is a mess. you talk about bias. you guys ate much better. every article you read is biased.
8:48 am
i want you to continue what you are doing. i think it is going to push people away from the democrats. keep doing it. pots in new jersey, referring to the fatal shooting at the annapolis newspaper. they did put out a paper this morning. five shot dead at the capital. they are all featured at the top of their paper this morning. one of the reporters tweeting out after it happened, they would put out a paper. pictures surfaced of him and a photographer, the reporter from you can see them on your screen on the backhe paper of a truck. let's go to john in new mexico.
8:49 am
you are on the air. caller: good morning. i wanted to go back to the supreme court decisions. affects long reaching on the country. we are a center right republic. before withng on the endearing language into the cost to jeanette was not there, they were trying to force language into the constitution and define words with new definitions that were not there. i think it was a victory for those of us on the conservative side of things. two victories for conservatism. then we had the horrible shooting.
8:50 am
any shooting is horrible. it doesn't matter the politics. it was predictable when the rhetoric came up, peter fonda making threats to the president, tom arnold making threats toward the president's son for both threaten the president's son. waters goes off on a senile rant. predictable ate crazy person would lose control of themselves and something like this would happen. i predicted it. host: the newspaper shooting? the washington times says the man, the police said the gunmen newspaperts to the because of a story they covered about him. caller: he was a crazy person.
8:51 am
onis hard to put your finger what pushed his buttons but it does not help when public people like these actors make attacks .n the president and the media we don't expect our politicians to do that sort of thing. that is something you hear from protesterr, a college -- professor. you hear that from lose people. .ou don't hear from politicians i don't know what pushed that crazy guys waters. they go into a hole in you never hear the person again. i would be interested in his expressions of why he chose this week. that was two years ago, three years ago. host: ok. i'm going to leave it there. you brought up the decisions
8:52 am
that came out of the quiet this week as they ended their term. this is from the washington post. john roberts will be on post-kennedy court, speculation john roberts will play the role that kennedy has played, siding with liberals and sometimes with conservatives. the court gave the public a taste of what a post-kennedy court might look like. kennedy did not join liberals to form a 5-4 majority. it led to decision is determined by the court conservatives including upholding president trump's band on travelers, overturning a precedent to prohibit public sector employees from collecting fees from nonmembers. finding the law does not provide a bond hearing for those
8:53 am
detained and facing deportation even after ms years, ruling pregnancy centers cannot be required to tell patients about state offered services. we will hear from john roberts when he attends today. he will be making public remarks at 3:30. we will have coverage of that. leroy.o to good morning to you. caller: first time i have ever called. all of these subjects that you covered this morning are related. they do lead that to the vietnam war. bill beenring to the brought up in the senate today, the blue water navy will that is
8:54 am
going to be voted at on. it took 50 years for that bill to reach the floor for a vote which it appears it will pass. issues, veryf the go back and related to the protest from the vietnam war, the transparency issues we have had, all the way from that arrow to now. i am a 38 year air force veteran . for 10ed agent orange years during the vietnam war. we use our b-52s from guam to bomb the at nam. we were a part of the vietnam war and in the theater of
8:55 am
operations. our exposure at anderson was severe. mine was. i have five cancers. i only have days left to live. i served in the capacity of active duty for 20 years. then the issue of your labor union, i could not join the union because i was a perpetual series employee of the government union. but i still paid my dues even though i did not have to or wasn't eligible because of the series i was. the unions have gone dunhill. by theve been taken over radical left. their agenda has been taken over. the direct reddick -- the democratic party isn't the
8:56 am
democratic party it used to be. americans can no longer trusted. they want to. issues kepthe theen over the years, clinton presidency, all of that butdestroyed not--country our political system in our country. are you with us? caller: c-span, thank you for being the only source of real news and not infotainment. i would like to address a couple of things that perversions of the facts in two cases. that ther said liberals somehow in the
8:57 am
conspiracy of the f ei tried to keep the election from trump. that flies in the face that the fact the fbi director made a pronouncement reopening the clinton case two weeks before the election and handed the election to trump. one of two point that out to the person who called. unions, alabor tremendous discussion. union states be performed. particular woman they known the fact that she paid $800 in dues without getting anything in return. the health and retirement fit of every public union member that i know is worth at least $1000 a
8:58 am
month. the benefit in a large portion, they are worth more money and time able to a is a nonunion employee despite a much higher than average wage. host: the hill has this story this morning. u.s. nominee loses the race to the eu when migrant agency. illinois. republican area caller: -- republican. caller: good morning. the different issues that are not discussed in other networks. a common about the
8:59 am
russians. i don't think we need help from the russians. we had a civil war. we had women's suffrage. we had civil rights movement. putink that we need to things in perspective. we have internal problems. i don't think the russians are responsible for our internal divisions. host: ok. we will leave it there. the house representative is gaveling in for a quick pro forma session. they are not taking up any legislative business. lawmakers have left for the fourth of july recess. we will go to the house as they are about to gavel and. we will come back and continue here on the washington journal. we would hear more


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on