CSPAN - Washington This Week

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 20, 2025 10:01-13:07 - CSPAN

03:05:50

Washington This Week

Participants

Main

cal thomas

24:35

donald j trump

admin 05:31

kimberly adams

cspan 30:02

Appearances

brian lamb

cspan 00:39

james comer

rep/r 00:40

karoline leavitt

admin 00:43

marco rubio

admin 01:46

nicole kobie

01:31

rev william barber

01:45

Clips

anthony j hilder

00:12

barack obama

d 00:02

bill clinton

d 00:02

charlotte iserbyt

00:08

george h w bush

r 00:02

george w bush

r 00:04

jimmy carter

d 00:03

john mcardle

cspan 00:16

ronald reagan

r 00:03

wayne paul

00:20

Callers

grant in minnesota [2]

callers 00:04

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Government, politics, and public policy from Washington, D.C. and across the country.
		Coming up Monday morning, former Trump Administration Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shilkin discusses proposed cuts to the VA, and then Axios politics reporter Brittany Gibson previews the week ahead at the White House and some news of the day.
		Also, Scott Kennedy of the Center for Strategic and International Studies discusses escalating trade tensions between the U.S. and China.
		C-SPAN's Washington Journal.
		Join the conversation live at 7 Eastern Monday morning on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, or online at c-SPAN.org.
		On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral argument in Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, a case challenging a part of the Affordable Care Act that requires private insurers to cover certain preventative health care services at no cost to consumers.
		Live coverage begins at 10 a.m. Eastern on C-SPAN.
		Also on C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, or online at cspan.org.
		Weekends bring you Book TV, featuring leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.
		Here's a look at what's coming up this weekend.
		John Green examines the history of tuberculosis and his friendship with a tuberculosis patient in his book, Everything is Tuberculosis, The History and Persistence of Our Deadliest Infection.
		The Nation magazine's legal analyst Ellie Misdahl, author of Bad Law, looks at 10 laws he believes are ruining America and offers his thoughts on how to reform them.
		Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt shares his book, Genesis, a collaboration with the late Henry Kissinger on the promise and challenges posed by artificial intelligence.
		And then on Afterwards, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Viet Van Wen reflects on how society can build allegiances beyond racial identity and have more global solidarity.
		In his book, To Save and to Destroy, Writing as an Other, he's interviewed by author Ijoma Aluwo.
		Watch Book TV every weekend on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule in your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		C-SPAN.
		Democracy Unfiltered.
		We're funded by these television companies and more, including Mediacom.
		Nearly 30 years ago, Mediacom was founded on a powerful idea.
		Bring cutting-edge broadband to underserved communities.
		From coast to coast, we connected 850,000 miles of fiber.
		Our team broke speed barriers, delivered one gig speeds to every customer, has led the way in developing a 10G platform, and now with Mediacom Mobile, is offering the fastest, most reliable network on the go.
		Mediacom, decades of dedication, decades of delivery, decades ahead.
		Mediacom supports C-SPAN as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
		It's Sunday, April 20th, 2025.
		Christians all over the world are celebrating Easter today.
		You're looking at live images, courtesy of Fox News from the Vatican, from Vatican City.
		That is the celebration of Easter happening there in Rome, where Vice President JD Vance is celebrating the religious holiday with his family and also with meeting with leaders there in Vatican City.
		The Trump administration has been active in targeting what the White House calls anti-Christian bias in a variety of areas of public life, while the president's critics say his actions disregard the idea of a division between church and state.
		This morning on the Easter holiday, we want to hear from you.
		Does your religious faith, Christian or otherwise, impact your politics?
		We have regional phone lines this morning.
		If you're in the Eastern or Central time zones, you can call 202-748-8000 in the Mountain or Pacific time zones, 202-748-8001.
		If you'd like to text us, that number is 202-748-8003.
		Please be sure to include your name and where you're writing in from.
		And then we're also on social media at facebook.com/slash C-SPAN and on X at C-SPANWJ.
		Now, the Trump administration earlier this week was amplifying its message, supporting Christians in politics and throughout life.
		Here is a story in Fox News.
		Trump hosts faith leaders for Easter prayer dinner, slams the effort to rid America of Christian principles.
		Reporting here from Fox that President Trump participated in a Wednesday evening prayer service and dinner as part of a series of Holy Week events ahead of Easter Sunday this weekend.
		This was a story from Wednesday.
		Faith leaders of various Christian denominations were present and listened to the president address them about the importance of faith both in governing and in people's personal lives.
		Trump also took a moment to tout his recent accomplishments in line with Christian beliefs and slammed efforts to move the country away from its Christian foundation.
		Here's a portion of the president's remarks.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		And I also, and this was a very easy one for me, I guess some people still fight it because I saw on television today a Democrat congressman fighting so hard.
		I banned men from women's sports.
		And I signed an executive order making it official and the official policy of the United States that God created two genders, male and female.
		Let's not keep it.
		So there's so much to celebrate this Easter.
		This is really, I hope, going to be one of the great Easters ever because we have something going that I don't think this country has seen in 100 years.
		And as we gather with family and friends, we'll not forget the true source of our joy and our strength.
		America has put our trust in God.
		It will always be in God we trust.
		We will never change that.
		You know there's a movement to change it.
		It will not happen.
		We won't let that happen.
		Can you imagine a movement to change that?
		Robert?
		You're not happy about that when you hear that.
		Look at him.
		He's getting angrier and angrier.
unidentified		We can get angry too, can't we?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		No, it's never going to change.
		And with God's help, we can overcome every challenge, triumph over every evil, and restore the spirit of faith in the United States for generations to come.
		We have a very simple slogan, make America great again, and that's exactly what we're doing.
		We're making America great again.
		And I'd like to say, I'd like to add that I really believe greater than ever before.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Now, critics of President Trump And his administration's policies have criticized whether or not his actions thus far in this term in office actually adhere to Christian principles.
		Here from Common Dreams, faith leaders blast GOP's attacks on poor and tax cuts for the rich.
		We are releasing this powerful report to expose for the American people how immoral, dangerous, and insane the administration's proposed economic decisions are, said Bishop William Barber.
		Leaders from various faiths came together in Washington, D.C., and this is from back in March, by the way, on Christian's Ash Wednesday to share an open letter and report calling out efforts by U.S. President Donald Trump's administration and Republicans in Congress to rip resources away from the working class to fund tax cuts, tax giveaways for the ultra-rich.
		At this critical moment in our nation's history, we need a government that promotes unity and love towards all members of the human family, not division or hatred, added Barber, whose group released the report in partnership with the Economic Policy Institute and the Institute for Policy Studies.
		Now, Bishop Barber, William Barber, was on this program recently and talked about why he and his colleagues are speaking out.
		Let's listen.
unidentified		And we're training clergy.
rev william barber ▲ ● ▼		We're taking them through this budget, the budget proposals, how bad it is, because one of the things we're saying to people in all of the movement that's going on, all of the executive orders, all of the things that are happening, that we as the American people need to focus like a laser on this budget because the budget connects us all.
unidentified		Because what's going to happen is going to hurt white and black and brown and Asian and Indigenous, everybody in this country.
		It's going to hurt North and South, East and West.
		It's going to hurt gay folk and trans folk.
		It's going to hurt everybody.
		Anybody who is poor and low wage.
rev william barber ▲ ● ▼		And if you hurt poor and low wage folk, it's going to have an impact on the rest of the country.
		And when you add that to all of the tariff battles and the prices going up, you add that to the attack on voting rights.
		You add that to what's going on in the Justice Department and this attempt to falsely yesterday, I think the president signed something to tell the Justice Department to go after people, which is a fundamental violation.
		We are not just in a crisis of party politics.
		We are in a crisis of democracy and a crisis of civilization in a time when immorality is trying to rule over morality.
unidentified		And so we have to pray.
		We have to stand.
		We have to protest.
		We have to speak out.
rev william barber ▲ ● ▼		Whether they change or not, we have to have a prophetic witness in this moment, and we will.
rev william barber ▲ ● ▼		The one thing you cannot do when people, any country, decide they want to be kings, want to be lords, want to be dictators, is bow down and accept what is being said.
unidentified		Because bowing down is not an option.
unidentified		It is not an option.
rev william barber ▲ ● ▼		When you know that the most vulnerable of the country, people who get up and work every day of their lives for low wages, sometimes sleep in their cars, that's who we're talking about, regardless of what their color is.
unidentified		They are going to be hurt the most.
unidentified		And more people will die because of this budget.
rev william barber ▲ ● ▼		Because as things already are, 800 people die a day from poverty and low wages and the impact and the neglect.
unidentified		This will only increase the deadliness, the destructiveness of those realities in this country.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And our question again this morning, does your religious faith impact your politics?
		We have regional phone lines this morning for folks in the Eastern and Central time zones, 202-748-8000.
		For the Mountain and Pacific time zones, 202-748-8001.
		We'll start with Flute in Washington, D.C. Good morning, Flute.
unidentified		Hi, thank you for taking my call this Easter morning.
		And the thing is, with religion and politics, it seems like the shift is occurring in that religion, you know, well, I'm born a Catholic and I was raised in a Catholic household.
		So I've always been pro-life.
		So, you know, it never really made that much of a difference as far as my political opinion.
		But now that seems to be at the front of the agenda, you know, with Kamala Hearns, that made a decision right there.
		She was emphasized so much about the abortions and the rights and the road versus wage.
		You know, it pushed me towards Republican because I am pro-life.
		So that made a difference in my political opinion was fostered by my religious opinion.
		And then when gender now becomes a choice in school, that was unheard of when I was coming up.
		You was a boy or you was a girl.
		You know, if you wanted to go to a different community, that occurred after you were 21 years old.
		But now that seems to be a thing of religion and what's your religious faith and what school your child attends, you know, as far as the bathrooms and the sporting events, you know, boys and girls, the line is so blurred now that you almost have to use your religion to decide which path you're going to go in as far as the political agenda, social agenda.
		You know, religion now has become such a demonic type of issue too.
		You know, it seems as though that's a new fad to go against the ways of our Christ and our Lord.
		But this demonic situation as far as the rap and the media and it's just the lines are so blurred now, you almost have to choose religion over politics and find your agenda and find your name, and hopefully it'll line up with your politics.
		But right now, I'm an independent because the Democrat's agenda is nowhere close to my religious upbringing.
		And I thank you for taking my call to have a happy Easter.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Pew Research has some data on partisan divides by level of religiousness, showing here the percentage of U.S. adults who identify with or lean towards each political party.
		People with high religiousness tend to skew Republican with 61% versus 32% Democrats.
		And then medium-high religiousness is 50% towards Republican versus 41% for Democrats.
		And medium to low religiousness skews more Democratic, 48% Democrats, 43% Republican.
		Low religiousness is very skewed towards Democrats.
		67% of those Americans skew Democrat compared to just 27% of Republicans.
		Jeffrey is in Greensboro, North Carolina.
		Good morning, Jeffrey.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call and happy Easter.
		I very much want to reiterate some of the comments the first caller made.
		And in religions, if we're referring, you know, our policies or the initiative on how this government is going to be run based on religion, it is sad to say that's the topic because everyone behind me and before today, did they give their Lord and Savior his prayers?
		What did you do yesterday for the homeless?
		What did you do for someone that is weak in despair?
		This situation right now that is unfolding and about choices in life, it's up to God.
		It's up to that belief that you do say you put your whole commitment behind.
		Today in America, what I'm witnessing, there is people not even have somewhat of love.
		There is a breakdown.
		And then his policies, the language, people is not foolish.
		Everyone is not misunderstanding what he's saying or it's an error on what you thought he might have just said.
		It's a lot that's not presidential.
		It's definitely wrong on every aspect to say you can just snatch someone here right now in this country and say ABC about them and give them not a process.
		I thought absolutely that would never happen in this country, but it is, and it has to somewhat now play out.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Looks like we lost Jeffrey's phone line there.
		Let's hear from Mark in Cloverdale, Indiana.
		Good morning, Mark.
unidentified		Happy Easter.
		I'm very happy for life.
		And when Jesus said he came to give us life and life more abundantly, man, eternal life as well as good physical life.
		And this morning I do vote Republican because of the fact that I believe that life is the most important thing that we have given to us from God, both physical and eternal.
		And so every time I check out a candidate, make a decision, I ask that one question.
		Does he believe in the unborn having a right to life?
		And that's basically my thoughts for this morning.
		Thank you very much.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Michael is in Detroit, Michigan.
		Good morning, Michael.
unidentified		Yes.
		I don't know how your religion cannot affect your politics because religion is about morality.
		And the laws that are in this country has to be associated with morality.
		What is fair, what is just, what is helpful.
		And if you're a religious person, you know that the lawmaker is God.
		Now, this country, I don't think they ever really follow God.
		I don't see anything that they've done that.
		Yes, look at the president.
		This guy owns a casino.
		I don't know no religion that promotes casinos.
		This guy put his name on the Bible.
		Hello?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I'm still listening.
unidentified		Yeah, this guy put his name on the Bible.
		That's an abomination.
		The word is to be told, not sold.
		I've never seen this guy, the president, go to church.
		I mean, and then he, Jerry Falwell's son, was involved in some kind of scandal.
		That's how he got the religious vote.
		The people who are religious below the Mason-Dixon line is hypocrites.
		They were hard on African Americans.
		It's nowhere in this country that the South has been more hard on African Americans.
		So when people say, should your religion affect your politics, religion is about morality.
		So how can you, when they tell you not to let your religion affect your politics, then what do you volunteer to be a hypocrite?
		Where do you get your morals from?
		Your morals are supposed, if you're a religious person, your morals are supposed to come from God.
		These people make laws outside of God.
		They never follow God.
		The way they treated the African American, the Chinese, the genocides they committed, the genocides what's happening over in Gaza is nothing compared to what they did to this country.
		The amount of people that was killed in the Americas is just atrocious.
		This is why they want to get rid of DIA.
		I mean, want to get rid of people.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		We're talking about the anti-DEI policies.
		But you did mention, Michael, that you don't normally see the president in church, but he was at the National Prayer Breakfast, certainly in church there earlier this year, where he announced that he would sign an executive order ordering Attorney General Pam Bondi to eradicate anti-Christian bias in the federal government.
		He did indeed sign that executive order that goes to, as he says, eradicate anti-Christian bias.
		Some of the points in that, setting up a task force to be comprised of members of the cabinet and key government agencies to review the activities of all departments and agencies to identify and eliminate anti-Christian policies, practices, or conduct, as well as gathering input from various stakeholders to ensure broad perspectives are considered.
		Also to identify and address gaps in laws and enforcement that have contributed to anti-Christian conduct.
		President Trump made that announcement again earlier this year at the National Prayer Breakfast.
		Let's listen to some of the comments he made at the time.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		To confront such weaponization and religious persecution, today I'm signing an executive order to make our Attorney General, who's a great person, she's going to be a great Attorney General, Pam Bondi.
		The head of a task force brand new to eradicate anti-Christian bias.
		About time, right?
		Anti-Christian bias.
		Yeah, I never heard of that one before, right?
		But there's it's about time, isn't it, though, really?
		So many, so many times you hear, but you don't hear the anti-Christian bias.
		The mission of this task force will be to immediately halt all forms of anti-Christian targeting and discrimination within the federal government, including at the DOJ, which was absolutely terrible, the IRS, the FBI, terrible, and other agencies.
		In addition, the task force will work to fully prosecute anti-Christian violence and vandalism in our society and to move heaven and earth to defend the rights of Christians and religious believers nationwide.
		You've never had that before, but this is a very powerful document I'm signing.
		You get it now.
		First time you've had it.
		If we don't have religious liberty, then we don't have a free country.
		We probably don't even have a country.
		This week I'm also creating the White House Faith Office led by Pastor Paula White, who is so amazing.
		That man's happy.
		Look at stand up.
		Let me see.
		Why are you so happy?
		You love Paula, right?
unidentified		I come from Lebanon.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Oh, Lebanon tough.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, so you know what we're talking about better than anybody.
unidentified		Yeah.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		You're going to have a great new ambassador to Lebanon.
		Yes.
		Thank you very much.
		Thank you.
		It's tough.
		You're going to have a great new ambassador.
		We just put him in.
		Well, I'm in the White House.
		We will protect Christians in our schools, in our military, in our government, in our workplaces, hospitals, and in our public squares.
		And we will bring our country back together as one nation under guard with liberty and justice for all.
		Throughout history, those who have sought control and domination over others have always tried to cut the people off from the connection to their Creator.
		At the same time, every nation with big dreams and great ambition has recognized that there is no recourse more precious than the faith in the hearts of our people.
		It's the thing that makes our nation great.
		It makes other nations great.
		When you don't have it, you don't see great nations.
		Without God, we are isolated and alone.
		But with God, the scripture tells us all things are possible.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Now, in response to the setting up of that task force, Americans United for Separation of Church and State denounced that task force, and the CEO, Rachel Laser, issued a statement saying, among other things, Americans United believes that all people, including Christians, should be able to live as themselves and believe as they choose so long as they don't harm others.
		But rather than protecting religious beliefs, this task force will misuse religious freedom to justify bigotry, discrimination, and the subversion of our civil rights laws.
		This is part of the Christian nationalist crusade to remake our country, not on our watch.
		Americans United and our hundreds of thousands of supporters across the country will not stop fighting for church-state separation until this nation lives up to its promise of freedom without favor and equality without exception.
		And that was back in February of this year.
		Once again, our question this morning: Does your religious faith impact your politics?
		We received a comment from Lori Ann on Facebook who says, no, religious beliefs and political beliefs should always be separated.
		And then Matthew Crawley said, of course, Jesus Christ isn't a part-time Lord.
		Let's go to Gar in Decatur, Georgia, who's just in Decatur, Georgia.
		Good morning, Garr.
unidentified		Good morning, and happy Easter to all my Christian family and friends and members.
		As a Muslim, we believe that religion means alive.
		And the Quran speaks of four types of people and religion.
		The believer, the disbeliever, the misbeliever, and the hypocrite.
		And God is too big to be in one place.
		We can't pigeon God in one place.
		God is bigger than our little mind can conceive.
		And to talk about the president, his sister pulled our coattails on him.
		She said he's cruel with no principles.
		That's what his sister said.
		I didn't say it.
		His sister pulled America's coattail.
		But if you don't believe his sister, what can I say?
		But the thing about it is we must understand this life is very temporary.
		I mean, they say the average American spends two years at a red light.
		And they say we spend a third of our life working, third of our life sleeping, and a third doing miscellaneous things.
		So really, this life isn't that long.
		And we must remember you can't separate religion and politics because God is always in charge.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Gar mentioned that he was Muslim, and that puts him in the 7% of U.S. adults who now identify with a religion other than Christianity.
		This is more data from Pew Research.
		From 2023 to 2024, about 1.7% of U.S. adults identified as Jewish, 1.2% identified as Muslim, 1.1% as Buddhist, 0.9% as Hindu, and then 2.2% as other non-Christian religions.
		And that was from the religious landscape study of U.S. adults that was conducted between 2023 and 2024 by the Pew Research Center.
		Let's get back to your calls.
		Betty is in Blacksburg, South Carolina.
		Good morning, Betty.
unidentified		Yeah, my faith is strong.
		I believe everything Jesus says, and he is coming back.
		And the Ten Commandments, I have to say that Trump is a good president, and he's a faithful man, and he's going to be rewarded for sure.
		And I pray for the Democrats because every time I hear the Democrats, it's all about Trump, and it's all about lies.
		It is not the truth what these people are saying about that man.
		They're going to pay for that because when Jesus come back and they start hollering, forgive me, he's going to turn around and tell you, I never knew you, but he knows me because I love him.
		And he loves me because he died on the cross for me.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And Betty, how do you think your faith influences your politics?
unidentified		Well, I'm telling the truth when I call, I'm not called here to tell no lies about if it was even Biden.
		I mean, they the ones that keeps this going on.
		You know, when Trump was in, when he come in the first time, everything was fine.
		They want no war.
		They want to bring, say that Trump caused all this.
		There wasn't no war.
		There wasn't no, the economy was fine.
		Gas was fine.
		Everything was fine.
		And I'm not lying.
		I seen it.
		I heard it.
		And all I hear now is Trump, Trump, Trump.
		He's the one that done it.
		He's the one that done it.
		You know, I can't see why anybody would stay on a man like that.
		I wouldn't even do that with Biden.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Betty was talking about how the Democrats are portraying their stance on religion.
		Representative Jared Huffman, who's a Democrat from California, along with the secular Democrats of America's Sarah Levin, had an op-ed in the Hill talking about just this issue of Democrats and faith, saying, surrendering the high ground on religious freedom would be a mistake for Democrats.
		Authentic personal expressions of how religious faith shapes one's value are fine, but institutionalizing religion as the lens through which public policies are justified is problematic.
		It risks imbuing the party with religious authority, making it the arbiter and arbiter of religion, and reinforcing the theocratic notion that our laws and policies should be based on religion.
		We need not engage in religious pandering to show that Democrats are moral, values-driven people who care about the well-being and quality of life of every American family.
		And that, again, was an opinion piece in The Hill from January of this year with the title, Democrats are the party of religious freedom, not obligatory faith talk.
		Back to your calls.
		Debbie is in Pennsylvania.
		Good morning, Debbie.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Happy Easter.
		I think that religion is a good part of it.
		That's part of the reason why the Democrats lost, because during the last four years, when people were praying on the sidewalk at abortion clinics, that they were getting arrested and put in jail, and they weren't saying anything verbal.
		They didn't have any signs, and they weren't physical or anything.
		But if they stepped on the sidewalk at the abortion clinics, they got put in jail.
		And also Kamala Harris, I was watching one of her rallies, and there were young adults there, and they said, Christ is King, Jesus is Lord.
		And Kamala laughed at them and told them that they're at the wrong place and they needed to go down the street.
		So I think that was part of the reason why Kamala Harris lost, because people frowned on it.
		They're religious people.
		And, you know, I'm not Democrat.
		I'm not Republican.
		I'm Independent.
		And I go by my religious beliefs.
		I was raised Catholic.
		And then almost 30 years ago, when I moved to Pennsylvania, I became Christian.
		But I believe that religion should be a part of voting.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Debbie mentioned the anti-abortion activists.
		One of the early actions of President Trump when he first came to office, this was back on January 23rd.
		Trump pardoned anti-abortion activists who blockaded clinic entrances.
		A story about this in the Associated Press from back in January, that President Trump announced he would pardon anti-abortion activists convicted of blockading abortion clinic entrances.
		He called it a great honor to sign this, saying that they should not have been prosecuted as he signed pardons for peaceful pro-life protesters.
		The people pardoned were involved in the October 2020 invasion and blockade of a Washington clinic.
		Back to your calls on how your religious faith impacts your politics.
		Jeff is in Ashland, Oregon.
		Good morning, Jeff.
unidentified		Hello.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, we can hear you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		Well, I was brought up Catholic.
		I'm a 74-year-old white man who lives in a small town in Oregon.
		And, you know, I don't disregard being brought up in the religion, but I don't practice it anymore.
		I spent time getting an education post-graduate.
		And obviously, that present the paper you presented about Christian nationalism is true.
		I mean, where is any other religion in our religious freedom supposedly mentioned in that?
		Only Christianity.
		So believing in God or not believing in God should not affect anybody's decision about the quality of a person that they're going to elect for president.
		That's my belief.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		All right, then.
		Let's go and hear from Judy in York, Nebraska.
		Good morning, Judy.
unidentified		Yes, I am very religious.
unidentified		That is a very important part of my life.
charlotte iserbyt ▲ ● ▼		I believe that Christ, God through Christ, has given us two commandments: love God, love each other.
unidentified		He doesn't tell us what to call him, how to worship him.
		And his main message is that of inclusion, not exclusion.
		And that is what I base my political beliefs on.
		Inclusion, not exclusion.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Next up is Devin in Boise, Idaho.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Devin.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, go ahead.
unidentified		I just wanted to say, to get to the point right away, I don't let my religious belief influence my politics.
		I'm very active on both sides of that spectrum.
		I advocate for a lot of our local politicians.
		I'm regularly going to rallies in the Boise area.
		But a lot of the people in my church know I attend the Ivy House in Boise.
		It's in West Boise.
		I always try to convey the message to them to not let their religious beliefs influence their politics.
		And every Sunday when we go, I'm going to go there later today.
		And I believe the is that we're all going to pray to no money.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Scott is in New Bedford, Massachusetts.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Scott.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, go ahead, Scott.
unidentified		I would say no, that I do not allow my religious views to impact my politics because I'm in fact an atheist.
		An earlier caller called in saying that in order to have good morals, you should be a religious person and read the Bible and base on religion.
		That's how we develop laws.
		I would say, no, you don't have, you shouldn't have to depend on a Bible for fairy tales to get good morals.
		President Trump is basically using religion to defend some of his views.
		Well, in administration, for example, abortion, religion should not enter into the equation when it comes to abortion.
		He makes off as if he's a religious man, when really he's not.
		I mean, he's, you know, do unto others that others do unto you.
		I mean, he's a sexual assaulter of women.
		He's a felon.
		He's sexually assaulted women in the past.
		He cheated on his own wife.
		He's not a religious man.
		He just pretends to be to win the faith, to win the support of to win the support so he can get voted, you know.
		So I highly recommend this book.
		It's called Christianity It's Not Great, How Faith Fails by John W. Laughless.
		It goes into a lot of detail on how religion can cause a lot of problems when it's intertwined in policymaking throughout history and social, the social fabric.
		You know, for example, Texas wants to pass a law to allow the Ten Commandments in schools.
		No, no.
		That should not be allowed.
		You know.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Scott sets us up for a point in the U.S. Constitution that the legal cases challenging that Texas law as well as other efforts to put the Ten Commandments in classrooms throughout the country,
		many people are citing the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment, which states in part, Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press or the right of the people to peace peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
		Philip is in Jersey City, New Jersey.
		Good morning, Philip.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		I can't see how religion doesn't influence your politics.
		I mean, I understand why Democrats say that because they're for abortion.
		They're for changing little boys into little girls.
		I mean, it's just ridiculous.
		Another thing, I just want to say, I don't know why C-SPAN, like every show, I haven't seen one show when things went up under Joe Biden.
		Like 60% on these huge cars, beef was up like 300%.
		All these things were rising, and there wasn't shows every week on it.
		We see a show every day on it.
		And Rachel Moran, you guys didn't do one show on her.
		You didn't have her mom on there talking about how the illegal immigrant killed her daughter.
		You guys like promote hate, hate your country, change your kids.
		Like the Democrats say, there's no way I could be for supporting religion and politics because religion, he's a sinner.
		He hates the Lord.
		How can you be for changing little boys and little girls and then you say you're for God?
		Anyway, happy Easter, Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Mary is in Maryland.
		Good morning, Mary.
		Or Marie, excuse me.
		Good morning, Marie.
unidentified		Good morning.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you hear me?
		Yes, I can.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		People have to remember, my bloodline comes from Africa.
		When Africans were born here, we did not come with a Bible tucked in the ends of our garment.
		We came here to this country by force.
		We did not even speak English.
		We were made to speak the language.
		And in the Bible, when my mother took me to church, I started reading it as I got older.
		In the Old Testament, in Exodus, is everybody listening to me?
		And I hope you are.
		Chapter 21, verse 20, 21, it says you can beat your slaves one edge of their life.
		So why would I teach my daughter to open a book like that when we had nothing to do with writing those words to say that you can beat your ancestors that way?
		If you take the Bible away from African Americans today, they will fold.
		They will fall completely apart because they know nothing else in order what we were taught here in America.
		That's all I have to say.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Next up is Eric in Marion, South Carolina.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Eric.
unidentified		Hey, how are you doing?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good, thank you.
unidentified		First of all, first of all, my first thing I'd like to say is I am a Christian.
		Two, I voted Democrat because Democrat policies represent my Christianity more than Republican policies, I feel.
		And, oh, I am against homosexuality, and I am against women abortion.
		Now, I'm going to tell you, those two things are moral things.
		They're not government things.
		And I want all you Christians out there to remember one thing.
		Jesus Christ told us all who are Christians that our government, that his government is not of this world.
		And there's another thing.
		You remember when he sent Peter to the lake and told him the first thing she finded to take the two pieces to go and pay the silver?
		And they said, well, why have we got to pay something?
		He said, because we live within this government.
		He said, we live within this world.
		And so why we live within this world, we got to pay the taxes.
		But remember, our kingdom is not this world because with his kingdom come, he's going to set all these things right.
		So all you Christians are going thinking that Republican or the Democratic Party is going to save you.
		No, no, no, no.
		All they're going to do, what it will do is they're going to trap you within.
		It's going to trap Christians within.
		The Christians are going to find them.
		Because the first time that you go against this president here, you Christians, find out what he does to Christians.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		DeAndre is in Baltimore, Maryland.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, DeAndre.
unidentified		Good morning, C-SPAN.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		Peace and blessings to everybody in the world and Happy Easter.
		So I'm a Shia Muslim, and basically we're like a minority of Islam.
		We believe in the doctrine of Imam Hussein, which is to always stand with those who are being oppressed and persecuted unjustly, you know, by tyranny and imperialism.
		And for example, like you know, Iran, you know, intervening in Syria and fighting against terrorist, radical, you know, Sunni extremists in Syria and you know, the original Syrian civil war crisis.
		But now, after 14 years, you know, Syrian, Syria fell, and now it's, you know, ran by HCS, which is this, another rebranded name of ISIS and al-Qaeda, you know, and they're going on like a religious tirade over there.
		But let me get back to this, the main topic here.
		So in America, we have this thing called Christian Zionism.
		And Zionism is essentially the religious ideology that God promised the land of Palestine to the Jewish people.
		Now, the founder of Zionism, Theodore Herzl, was an atheist Jew.
		So he didn't even believe in God, but he believed God.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		DeAndre, I'm curious, though, as to how your faith, though, affects the political decisions that you make today.
unidentified		Oh, yeah, absolutely.
		So my faith, right?
		And I believe in Jesus and he is the Messiah and He will return.
		And, you know, for Christians, this should be like, you know, like Christians, like, you know, he's God, you know, and he's going to, you know, the Christian Zion, the Christian, Judeo-Christian ideology just doesn't align with, you know, the political aspect of things when Israel and America, you know, or the Christian Zionist political party as well are essentially arming and funding a war that's destroying and obliterating the land of where Christianity was birthed, where, you know,
		where the gospel originated out of, you know, like places like Syria and Palestine.
		This is where like the birthplace of Orthodox Christianity, this is the, you know, this is where Jesus and Mother Mary came from.
		But, you know, the ones who have all the influence and pull and backing in our government and everything, you know, like are completely like, you know, ideologically opposed, you know, and like unaligned to all of this.
		But there's this idea of Christian Zionism that Christians must protect Israel and be like the bathering ram for you know for them to establish the third temple and and Christians in America just go along with it.
		But meanwhile, you know, like it's the practices and the teachings and ideology that comes from these people, like they're, they are the deniers of Jesus Christ.
		You know, so like they're already like, you know, they look at Christians as idol worshipers.
		You know, and me as a Muslim, I look at Christians as my brothers, and we believe in the same God and the same Messiah.
		You know, so when I see what's happening, you know, in the Holy Land and with American foreign policy, which is led by Christian Zionists, it's just, you know, it's all going to fall apart eventually.
		But we just, people need to look in the C.I. Schofield reference Bible, Cyrus Irvin Schofield, started the dispensationalist movement, which essentially just kind of neutered the true Christian, Orthodox Christian identity.
		They kind of just neutered them after World War II.
		Now the whole boomer falls.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's go ahead and hear from Scott in St. Paul, Minnesota.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Scott.
unidentified		Good morning.
		My opinion is that I don't see how your religion does not affect the way you vote because this is part of your core being.
		You do not take and vote for somebody who is the antithesis of your religion or your core being.
		You know, it's that simple.
		You know, I mean, you don't, it's a reflection of your own self.
		You know, you don't, if you, for example, if you have a business, you run a business, and you are a Christian, you probably run your business in an ethical and fair manner.
		And you treat your customers as such.
		You don't put them in the trick bag or screw them over, you know.
		And it's the same thing with voting.
		You know, if you are a vote, you vote for somebody who is reflective of your core being and who you are.
		You are who you vote for.
		That's it.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Gina is in Alexandria, Virginia.
		Good morning, Gina.
unidentified		Hi.
		Good morning, Suceans.
		Happy Easter.
		I just wanted to say, I just ran across Google the Coast Man coverage of Trump's rally when he formulated a sex act on a microphone.
		And I was wondering, because you all covered all his rallies.
		I was just wondering: did y'all attempt to sue him for not giving parental guidance?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So, Gina, our question this hour is how your religious faith impacts your politics.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Do you have thoughts on that?
unidentified		I can tell you, but you just showed a clip of Trump, and then you let that lady talk about Tamil Harris's rally.
		So, try not to be hypocritical.
		I mean, it shouldn't take a lot of effort.
		Parliament Harris laughed about religion, and this is what Trump is trying to promote into our policies now.
		And this is what he did.
		I just want to know: did y'all attempt to try to sue him?
		Because children were watching.
		My grandkids can't watch these men anymore.
		And I'm sorry about that.
		But try not to be too hypocritical.
		It shouldn't take that much effort.
		Okay.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Gene is in Detroit, Michigan.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Gene.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I just wanted to say that religion is a part of your core being.
		And if you believe in God, which I do, and accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, then one of the main things is being obedient to his word.
		And Jesus gave us two great commandments: to love the Lord God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength, and to love our neighbor as ourselves.
		So what that means to me is you treat people the way that you want to be treated.
		Even the ones that people look down on, you're not supposed to look down on anyone.
		You're supposed to consider others as better than yourself.
		So when I see someone in politics who does all the opposite things that the Word of God says we should do, there's just no way I can support them.
		And that's how I feel about Trump.
		You know, the Word of God says that we are not to be boastful.
		We are to think of others as better than ourselves.
		We're not to call them names.
		And he definitely said we are not to seek retribution, that he himself, God, will seek retribution.
		And over the years, I've learned that in our religion, we grow, we expand, we become deeper as we get closer to God.
		And we learn that we don't judge people, but neither do you follow someone who does the opposite of what God says that we should do.
		And I feel that our country right now has almost turned our back on God.
		You know, we have our own particular things that we want to see done.
		But when it's all said and done, we are accountable to God only for ourselves.
		We're not accountable for the woman who has an abortion.
		We're not accountable for the gay person.
		But God is going to ask us, what did we do and how did we contribute to make this a better world?
		And what we have in our White House now is tearing the world apart, our country apart, and dividing our people.
		And I just pray that one day we will restore the Sabbath day to be the day of rest as it was when I grew up.
		And we knew the presence of God.
		And we tried to treat people the way that we wanted to be treated with love, with compassion, with kindness.
		And we don't have that now.
		Everybody wants what they want and money.
		The love and pursuit of money is the main goal.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		A couple of comments we've received on text and social media.
		John in Lubbock, Texas says, no, I don't let my religion affect my political decisions because I don't want politics affecting my religion.
		And then we have a comment here on X.
		I don't believe, but I remember, my politics aren't shaped by faith, but by the memory of what faith once asked of us, compassion, justice, and repair.
		Then earlier this month on Washington Journal, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins was on discussing the Trump administration's approach to family issues and policy.
		And here he discusses the idea of the separation between church and state.
unidentified		Well, I think the separation of church and state, go back to the origins of it with Thomas Jefferson, was to assure the church that the government was not going to pick sides in the faith in terms of denominations and who was elevated and who was not, and that the government was not going to dictate the activities of the church.
		That does not mean that the church and the church as individuals collectively coming together cannot speak into the public policy of our country.
		That's long been the understanding that we can speak into this.
		And so this idea that's been twisted of separation of church and state that somehow you have to check your faith at the door of government, of entering into public discourse, is nonsense.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Can a or should a pastor, preacher, priest from the pulpit advocate a political party or political candidate from the pulpit?
unidentified		I think they should be free to do so if they so choose, because when you look at the candidates or the parties, you're talking about the policies.
		You cannot separate the parties from the policies.
		And so, yes, I think they should be free to do so.
		That's why we have advocated for a long time the removal of what's called the Johnson Amendment from the IRS code, which goes back to 1954 when Lyndon B. Johnson was a senator.
		He was opposed by some nonprofits, wasn't actually churches of nonprofit organizations, that opposed his reelection.
		So he inserted something into the tax code that prohibited 501c3 organizations from engaging in any type of political activity.
		Now, John, that said, I do not think that nonprofit organizations, churches, should be able to use funds to fund political campaigns.
		And there's actually legislation that was just introduced last week.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Meaning giving money to a candidate.
unidentified		Right.
unidentified		I do not think they should be fair.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		But they can speak in support of that candidate.
unidentified		I think, look, a pastor should be free to use his First Amendment right from the pulpit to teach and educate his people.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		It's a free speech issue.
unidentified		It's a free speech issue, but it's also one of stewardship as a pastor.
		There was a time in this country when before 24-7 cable television, people looked to the church.
		Many people looked to the pastors to understand the times and what these events meant in the bigger scope of things.
		And so I think pastors should be free to give instruction, spiritual instruction, because so much of what is done today in the political realm has roots in biblical teaching.
		And so we need to be free to speak to those issues.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Back to your calls on how your religious faith impacts your politics.
		Let's go to Rick in Columbia, South Carolina.
		Good morning, Rick.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		Happy Easter to everyone.
		Everybody who's called today, they got their point.
		Everybody got a point.
		But you got Christian people condoning what's happened in Palestine where all the babies, people are being killed, indiscriminately, blowing up buildings.
		And they're supposed to be Christian.
		And they condone it.
		Take the log out of your eye before you try to take it out of somebody else's and judge.
		We're not the judge.
		God is a homosexual.
		I'm not their judge.
		I might not agree with what they're doing, but God is the only one.
		God is the only judge for anyone.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So, Rick, how do your feelings about your faith show up in your politics, in your political decisions?
unidentified		Well, in my heart, I go by what God says.
		You see, I go by what the Bible says about politics.
		If it's wrong, it's wrong.
		And right is right.
		You got the devil, and you got faith.
		The devil's out there, too.
		Just like God is out there, the devil is out there.
		Which one do you choose?
		Which side are you on?
		Because we can't judge anyone unless we be judged.
		So everybody with their little thoughts and positions, the guy quirkers who just talk, who is he?
		He's not God.
		You feel me?
		He's not God.
		Nobody's God.
		God is the only judge in this world, and you will be judged by your deeds.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay, let's hear from Robert in Indiana.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Robert.
unidentified		I agree with this guy.
		Right.
		God says, serve me or serve the world.
		He didn't go to that cross just for a bunch of idiots that don't believe that he done it.
wayne paul ▲ ● ▼		We know that he done it.
unidentified		He says.
		And he gave us laws when they took the commandments out of our government.
		Look what this country's got now.
		Look what we've got.
		Hatred.
		Everything about money.
wayne paul ▲ ● ▼		Money does not buy you into heaven.
unidentified		Whatever you get here on earth is not going to go to heaven with you.
unidentified		You've got to have an individual being with God.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Like the man said, I want to let you finish your point, but can you turn down the volume on your TV a bit, please?
unidentified		Love him.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Was there anything else, Robert?
unidentified		Yeah, the people need to wake up.
wayne paul ▲ ● ▼		All these storms and all this destruction, that's not the that's God.
unidentified		He's showing you what he can do.
wayne paul ▲ ● ▼		You show me a mag shop, a tornado, an earthquake, and a flood, and I'll vote for him.
unidentified		Okay.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Ted is in Tampa, Florida.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Ted.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		No, religion does not impact my politics.
		Although I classify myself as a Christ follower.
		However, I think that people should really get politics and religion out of it.
		It's supposed to be separate.
		We live under a constitution that means we should participate as far as politics.
		But at the same time, the Bible tells me, work out your own faith and fear and trembling, your own salvation.
		So I keep it separate.
		I walk with God.
		I don't walk because of people's religion, because there's thousands of religions.
		I don't believe in religion.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Charles is in Camden, New Jersey.
		Good morning, Charles.
unidentified		Good morning, ma'am.
unidentified		How are you?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good, thank you.
unidentified		Happy holidays to everyone.
		I would like to say that, dude, we are such a good religious people.
		We always want to forgive people.
		Let's forgive the people who got out of prison and you don't let them work in different government jobs.
		Let's clear their record.
		Let's show them a nice holiday time.
		Clear their record so they can have a decent job and feed their family and children like everybody else.
		You're letting everybody else out of jail or forgiving them.
		Let's forgive those because they needed them denty times.
		They're supposed to be free.
		Thank you so much.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Let's look to a couple of comments we received on social media.
		Lonnie, to the question of how his religion influences politics.
		No, my ethics do.
		And then Bruce Bertram says, my faith in God impacts my whole life.
		My politics have to fit with the way that I live.
		And let's coming up, we're going to finish this segment for now.
		Coming up next, we are going to review the week in politics with syndicated columnist Cal Thomas.
		And later, we'll have author, law professor, and ABC News legal contributor Kim Whaley here to discuss the use of executive power by the Trump administration.
		We will be right back.
unidentified		Tonight on C-SPAN's Q&A, technology reporter Nicole Coby, author of The Long History of the Future, talks about how technology evolves and discusses why many predicted technologies, including driverless and flying cars, smart cities, hyperloops, and autonomous robots, haven't become a reality.
nicole kobie ▲ ● ▼		If you've ever tried to build anything, you know, whether it's like an IKEA cabinet or, you know, something a little bit more complicated than that that doesn't come with instructions, it's very difficult to build something.
		So engineers who are working on these kinds of problems, you know, whether it's driverless cars or flying cars or, I don't know, even sillier ideas like Hyperloop, they're taking science that we know works and they're applying it to the real world, to a physical object.
		And then they're trying to build that.
		And it's kind of in the details where things start to fall down a bit.
		It's kind of in, you know, how you actually make it happen, the materials you choose, the business model, all of that can just kind of take something that sort of works in the lab or works in an academic paper and just make it completely fall apart, even though people have spent maybe 80 years on an idea.
unidentified		Technology reporter Nicole Kobe tonight at 8 Eastern on C-SPAN's Q ⁇ A. You can listen to Q&A and all of our podcasts, wherever you get your podcasts, or on our free C-SPAN Now app.
		Weekends bring you Book TV, featuring leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.
		Here's a look at what's coming up this weekend.
		John Green examines the history of tuberculosis and his friendship with a tuberculosis patient in his book, Everything is Tuberculosis, The History and Persistence of Our Deadliest Infection.
		The Nation magazine's legal analyst, Ellie Mistahl, author of Bad Law, looks at 10 laws he believes are ruining America and offers his thoughts on how to reform them.
		Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt shares his book, Genesis, a collaboration with the late Henry Kissinger, on the promise and challenges posed by artificial intelligence.
		And then on afterwards.
		Pulitzer Prize-winning author Viet Van Wen reflects on how society can build allegiances beyond racial identity and have more global solidarity.
		In his book, To Save and to Destroy, Writing as an Other, he's interviewed by author Ijoma Aluwo.
		Watch Book TV every weekend on C-SPAN2 and find a full schedule in your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		Washington Journal continues.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		I'm joined now by Cal Thomas, who's a syndicatum columnist and also author of the book, A Watchman in the Night, What I've Seen Over 50 Years of Reporting on America.
		Welcome back to Washington Journal.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Nice to be here, Kimberly.
unidentified		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And congratulations.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I understand that last Thursday marked the 41st anniversary of your column.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Right.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		I'm a lot older than I look.
unidentified		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, President Trump is nearing his 100th day in office.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What would you say are his accomplishments thus far?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, there's been a lot of chaos, of course.
		He ran on closing the border and controlling illegal immigration in this country.
		And by any standard, he has succeeded in that.
		Now the problem is the economy.
		And prices are still too high.
		He promised to bring them down right away.
		That's a very difficult thing to do just for one person in the White House.
		And then he has the added problem now as the Supreme Court decided early Saturday morning not to deport these Venezuelans to El Salvador.
		Now that's just a temporary hold, according to the Supreme Court.
		One of the things that concerns me and a lot of other commentators, and I'm not alone in this, is the judge shopping that's been going on for many, many years in this country, not just under this president.
		The Supreme Court dealt with that some time ago, but not fully, and it hasn't been implemented yet.
		So a liberal will go to a liberal judge to try to get something accomplished that that liberal wants to do.
		And a conservative will go to a conservative judge appointed by a conservative president to try to get something done that that conservative wants done.
		I think that's a bad way to do it.
		And it diminishes the credibility, I think, of the legal system, which is already lacking credibility in the minds of some people.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, since you brought up the topic of immigration, there have obviously been quite a few developments on that recently, including the case of Kilmar Abrigo-Garcia.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Do you think that he should be returned to the U.S. from El Salvador?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, no, he had to, you know, Senator Van Holland went down to El Salvador in that picture moment and met with him in better surroundings, by the way, than some of those other people who are in this enormous cage had.
		And he has been, his case has been heard by two immigration judges, the last of which ordered him deported.
		And so he's just been sitting around in the United States.
		He's not a Maryland man any more than when I go to France.
		I'm a French man.
		He is a citizen of El Salvador.
		There have been other allegations that have come out about him, that he beat his wife, that she had to seek a restraining order against him.
		There is speculation that some of the tattoos on his arm and hand are a code for MS-13, the gang.
		And so he's had his due process.
		And this is up to the president.
		And no court is going to be able to say, okay, bring him back.
		And the president of El Salvador is saying no.
		So it's one of those limbo cases, I think.
		And in our politics in this town, there are too many cases where a single case becomes a national case or a case that the Supreme Court wants to rule on for everybody.
		Those aren't the cases that ought to be adjudicated.
		The issue itself on whether you have a right to be in this country if you have violated our immigration laws to get here is the main issue, none of these other things.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		You mentioned the Oval Office meeting with the President of El Salvador, and in that meeting, President Trump also suggested that he might deport homegrown criminals to El Salvador.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Here's that exchange.
unidentified		You mentioned that you're open to deporting individuals that aren't foreign aliens, but criminals, to El Salvador.
unidentified		Does that include potentially U.S. citizens fully naturalized in America?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		If they're criminals, and if they hit people with baseball bats over their head that happen to be 90 years old, and if they rape 87-year-old women in Coney Island, Brooklyn.
		Yeah, yeah, that includes them.
		Why do you think there's a special category of person?
		They're as bad as anybody that comes in.
		We have bad ones, too.
		And I'm all for it.
		Because we can do things with the president for less money and have great security.
		And we have a huge prison population.
		We have a huge number of prisons.
		And then we have the private prisons.
unidentified		And some are operated well, I guess, and some aren't.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		But he does a great job with that.
		We have others that we're negotiating with, too.
		But no, if it's a homegrown criminal, I have no problem.
		Now, we're studying the laws right now.
		Pam is studying.
		If we can do that, that's good.
		And I'm talking about violent people.
		I'm talking about really bad people.
		Really bad people.
		Every bit as bad as the ones coming in.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm not aware of any 90-year-old rapists, but anything's possible these days.
		I think that would violate the Constitution.
		United States citizens, people who are here legally with green cards, that's just not going to happen.
		I'm a very firm supporter of prison reform.
		Unlike a lot of conservatives, I'm not a lock them up and throw away the key.
		I think you ought to have restitution for property crimes.
		It doesn't do any good for the individual or for the country to lock people up if you steal my TV set.
		For the violent criminals, need to be in prison in the United States, hopefully reformed, in order to keep the public safe.
		But I think the president's way off base in saying that U.S. citizens who commit crimes can be deported to El Salvador or anywhere else.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I want to switch topics to Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency.
		You have one of your columns where you say that today's boogeyman is Elon Musk.
		What do you mean by that?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, everybody has to have an enemy in politics, right?
		Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican, you need to have somebody.
		This guy's trying to destroy the country.
		No, no, this guy's tried to destroy the country.
		Well, you're a bigot.
		Well, you're a secular humanist.
		Well, you're a Bible-thupping bigot.
		And, you know, this is not the way real people have conversations in America.
		We ought to stick to the issue and what works.
		Most people in the polls show that they believe the federal government is too big, costs too much, is inefficient, and doesn't deliver for them.
		I called, for example, just one story.
		I called the Social Security office the other day.
		A recording told me the waiting time was two hours.
		Really?
		The post office, I mailed a book from one state to another.
		Yes, it was media mail, the cheapest rate, but in previous experiences, it got there in four days.
		This time, it got there in 11 days.
		I've had birthday cards and anniversary cards and others sent to me that never showed up at all.
		So we have a real problem with inefficiency, bloated government, costing too much.
		And you have a lot of people in this town, as you know, Kimberly, who are entrenched and they have their little territory to protect, and they like the deep state, and they like the system the way it is.
		So, you know, that's why you're seeing a lot of opposition to this.
		But I think Musk is on the right track mostly.
		I think there's been a little overdue in some areas, but I think he's got the right objectives.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I'm looking at an article here from Notice.org that nearly a billion dollars in Doge savings disappeared overnight, criticizing the way that these savings, the Department of Government Efficiency is calculating how they're calculated and whether or not these are real savings.
unidentified		What do you think?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, speed can be dangerous, and you can wind up hitting a bridge abutment or running off the road or hitting somebody else.
		I would like to see the pace a little bit slower.
		And I also would like to see, and I said this in a previous column, I think the president needs to go on television in a prime time address and no ad libs, stick to the script, and tell the American people exactly what he's trying to do and why it is in their best interest.
		In the interview that Brett Baer of Fox News did with Musk and some of his team, Musk said in response to this old canard that the Democrats have used for years that they're going to take away your Social Security.
		No, no, we're going to fix the inefficiency in the system.
		So in the end, you are going to have more in your Social Security check.
		Now, that's the kind of thing that appeals to the public.
		And I think the president, rather than just going all over the place and answering stuff like, oh, yeah, we're going to take homegrown criminals and put them in a prison in another country.
		I think he needs to stick to the things that got him elected and explain along the way what he's doing and why he's doing it.
		I think the 100th day in office would be a great time for him to do a primetime address.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		One more topic I want to cover with you before we turn to our callers.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I want to get your thoughts on the Trump administration's policy towards Ukraine and its negotiations or attempts at negotiations between Ukraine and Russia on the war.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, Putin can't be trusted.
		He announced an Easter ceasefire and his people are still firing on Ukrainians.
		I think the president's completely wrong when he says Ukraine started this war and it never would have happened if I was in office and had won that election that he still continues to claim falsely that he did win.
		So I just think that you can't trust Putin.
		You couldn't trust Stalin.
		You can't trust the Ayatollahs.
		There are a whole lot of people you can't trust.
		And there's only one reason for being engaged in a war and that's to win it.
		If you're not in it to win it, as the saying goes, then you shouldn't be in it in the first place.
		And just to have this stalemate, giving Ukraine just enough weapons to hold off Russia in some areas is not the way to go.
		Now, the president suggested unilateral withdrawal of U.S. help if Ukraine basically doesn't give in to Russian demands.
		Putin has said he wants to restore the old Soviet empire states, and he has no problem doing it by force.
		We should take him at his word.
		But somebody in the administration needs to figure out how to stop him.
		And that's the goal.
		And I don't see anybody doing that.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		The point person on this has been Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
		And on Friday morning, he was speaking to reporters about the possibility of ending peace talks between Russia and Ukraine if a deal can't be reached soon.
		Let's listen to those comments.
unidentified		I think it's important to remind everybody that the Ukraine war is a terrible thing, but it's not our war.
unidentified		We didn't start it.
marco rubio ▲ ● ▼		The United States has been helping Ukraine over the last three years, and we want it to end.
unidentified		But it's not our war.
unidentified		I want everyone to understand that.
marco rubio ▲ ● ▼		And the reason why I make that point is the president has spent 87 days at the highest level of his government repeatedly taking efforts to bring this war to an end.
		We are now reaching a point where we need to decide and determine whether this is even possible or not, which is why we're engaging both sides.
		As you know, Ambassador Witkoff has had not one, not two, but three meetings with Vladimir Putin to determine the Russian perspective on this and understand what it would take for them to end it.
		We've, through General Kellogg, myself, and others, have had repeated engagements with the Ukrainians.
		So we came here yesterday to sort of begin to talk about more specific outlines of what it might take to end a war to try to figure out very soon.
		And I'm talking about a matter of days, not a matter of weeks, whether or not this is the war that can be ended.
		If it can, we're prepared to do whatever we can to facilitate that and make sure that it happens, that it ends in a durable and just way.
		If it's not possible, if we're so far apart that this is not going to happen, then I think the president's probably at a point where he's going to say, well, we're done.
unidentified		You know, we'll do what we can on the margins.
unidentified		We'll be ready to help whenever you're ready to have peace.
marco rubio ▲ ● ▼		But we're not going to continue with this endeavor for weeks and months on end.
marco rubio ▲ ● ▼		So we need to determine very quickly now, and I'm talking about in a matter of days, whether or not this is doable over the next few weeks.
ronald reagan ▲ ● ▼		If it is, we're in.
marco rubio ▲ ● ▼		If it's not, then we have other priorities to focus on as well.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		You know, former President Biden had said before the invasion, he was asked about if Russia were to go into Ukraine, what would he think about it?
		And Biden said, well, if it was just a small incursion, maybe it wouldn't be that big a deal.
		I'm paraphrasing, but that's the essence of what he said.
		That signaled Putin, hey, they're not going to stop.
		And now that they are in there and have been in there for some time and have been killing women and children and destroying buildings and all kinds of other stuff, Secretary Rubio is right in one sense.
		The only way to end the war is for one side to give in, to quit.
		And the signals we have been sending is that we expect that to be Ukraine.
		President Trump continues to say wonderful things about Putin, who is a murderer, who locks up and kills journalists, who denies people their rights as human beings.
		And then you have, you know, Zelensky, who is a pretty good guy.
		I mean, I just, this is a big mistake.
		It's cost the United States a lot of money.
		It's cost the Ukrainians and the Russians a lot of lives.
		And the only way I see it ending is either in victory or defeat for one side or the other.
		Right now, it looks like Russia is going to be the winner.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can the U.S. just walk away?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's a big question.
		And we've had this problem before.
		You know, I think of John F. Kennedy's inaugural address just behind us here in 1961, where he said, we'll pay any price and bear any burden in the promotion of our way of life, democracy, around the world.
		Well, now we've gone from that to almost retreating.
		It's a difficult world out there, and the dictators are watching.
		And they're saying if the United States is not going to, and Europe is watching, the United States isn't going to step up and defend democracy, who is?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		We're going to take your calls for our guest here, Cal Thomas, and you can find his columns on CalThomas.com.
		Let's go our phone lines again for Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		For Democrats, 202-748-8000.
		And for Independents, 202-748-8002.
		Let's start with Gabriel in Durham, North Carolina on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Gabriel.
unidentified		Hey, thank you.
		Always a pleasure.
		I would say, you know, there's a couple of things that I agree with you on, and I think that you try to do a broad stroke of, you know, finding a way to thread the needle.
		But, you know, when it pertains to your comments on Doge, those are probably the most concerning to me.
		And let me elaborate, and I'll ask you the question that's part of this.
		Is that how can the government, you referenced the IRS being on hold for two hours, which the IRS is.
		The IRS, Republicans, the Republicans have been trying to, in many ways, gut the IRS, even though it's the first time that it just had a recent omnibus that gave it money over the Biden administration to be functional.
		And those very people now that are government employees, and I know many of them, I know them in the VA, they care about the principles of taking care of patients, veterans.
		They care about taking care of folks that are calling and trying to do their level best.
		They're not always the most strong work ethic, but they're good people.
		And they've been fired.
		And it looks like you're saying the inefficiency and the way that the Doge team is going about it by just mass layoff is permissible.
		And that there's not a funding problem that has to do with the source of tax revenue, but has to do with the source of bloatedness in the people that are actually keeping the government.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Did you have another question or did you just want Cal to respond to these points?
unidentified		Yeah, the answer would be, how do you square what Doge is doing and then the potential for there to be a pulling of the rug out from our government side?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay, well, let's let him respond.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, you covered a lot of things, Gabriel, and I really love your name on Easter Sunday morning, especially.
		Very good name.
		I was calling the Social Security Office, not the IRS.
		Let's begin with the debt, $37 trillion, the biggest debt that we have ever had in our lives.
		Democrats used to say, we are passing our debt along to our grandchildren.
		We can't afford this.
		Now that the Republicans are in control of government for now anyway, they don't say anything like that.
		No nation has ever been able to sustain itself with that level of debt.
		I wrote a book a few years ago called America's Expiration Date.
		And there are three things that contribute to the decline of any nation in history.
		One is massive national debt.
		The second is uncontrolled immigration without assimilation.
		And the third is the loss of a shared moral value system.
		I argue that all three of those have been in force in recent years.
		Look, the government has grown too big.
		Somebody has to cut it or we will not be able to go on like this.
		It's just too efficient.
		Yes, I know good people who are in government and their motives are good at all the rest.
		But we just can't go on like this.
		If you have a credit card that is maxed out, you're going to have to cut back.
		You're going to have to have fewer dinners out.
		You may have to buy a less expensive car, cheaper clothes.
		You might have to eat in with the frozen dinners in the microwave more.
		You just have to cut back.
		Now, we do that in our personal lives when we realize that we've gone too far financially, and we have to do it in our national life, too.
		We just can't go on like this.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Even though you were talking about Social Security, Gabriel mentioned the IRS, and the IRS tends to have a pretty good return on investment per dollar spent on it in terms of what the data tells us in terms of revenue generated per dollar spent on the agency.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		But there are also cuts happening there, and I think that's what Gabriel was talking about.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		The thing about the IRS, the two worst amendments, as I wrote in a column last week, ever passed were prohibition and the income tax.
		Fortunately, prohibition was overturned.
		The income tax in 1903, we continue to have with us.
		The number of pages in the tax code, 18,000 pages.
		When all of the regulations and interpretations are added, it goes to 75,000 pages.
		The last person I ever knew who did his own taxes was Bill Archer, the former, the congressman from Texas and the head of the House, I think, Ways and Means Committee.
		A number of years ago, I used to tease him about it.
		The thing is indecipherable.
		You need instructions on the instructions.
		We pay a tax attorney to do our taxes.
		I have no idea.
		If line one is greater than line two, subtract line one from subsection A, unless it's raining on Tuesday, in which case you multiply it by four.
		I'm exaggerating a little, but not by much.
		If you read through this stuff, it's indecipherable.
		This violates the Geneva Conventions against torture.
		I mean, why did we get to this point?
		All the bureaucrats write this stuff.
		It's more than Congress passes, and it needs to be changed along with a lot more in government, in my view.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Bobby is in West St. Paul, Minnesota on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Bobby.
unidentified		Good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
		Mr. Thomas, it's an honor to talk to you.
		Thank you, Bobby.
		I need your opinion on this.
		I'll give you mine.
		I'll condense this as quickly as I can.
		It concerns the Menundez brothers, who in cold-blooded killed their parents on a premeditated killing.
		And now they're looking for, I believe, a new trial.
		I need your opinion, and here is mine.
		It was premeditated.
		They came in.
		They shot their father.
		They shot their mother.
		The mother was still alive.
		They went back out to reload.
		In that moment in time, maybe some sanity could have come into their heads.
		But oh, no, they had to go back in.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So, Bobby, this is a little outside the realm of our topic today, but I'll go ahead and let Cal respond if you have some thoughts on this.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, the jury, of course, convicted of that.
		The thing that amused me, if there's anything amusing out of this, is that after they killed their parents, they appealed to the jury for sympathy because they were orphans.
		That made me laugh out loud.
		No, I think they're taking another look at it now.
		They've got a different prosecutor now in Los Angeles County.
		And of course, the governor, Governor Newsom, is the final word on this, as he was on the Sirhan-Sirhan parole appeal, which apparently was denied.
		So I don't know.
		We'll see how it works out.
		But it's one of those cases that continue to be followed by a lot of people, including yourself.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Lance is in Sterling, Colorado, and our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Lance.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		Happy Easter to everybody.
		And what I'm saying, I was watching Fox News, and I happen to turn it over to C-SPAN Juan.
		And there's Cal Thomas, and I got respect for him.
		I like his humor.
		I like his truthfulness.
		And I think about sometimes I even watch his replays after he's been on this channel, and I've listened to him for years.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Would you like to be my agent?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Thank you very much.
unidentified		Well, how much is that?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, we'll talk about it later.
unidentified		What's your question?
unidentified		Could you give me your opinion of Joe Biden?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's a sad case, and I've written, I was one of the early ones to write a column about it and his decline.
		The cover-up is massive.
		People are coming out now who are part of the cover-up in the media saying, oh, yeah, we knew it all along when they were cutting people off who were making the case that he had lost a step and maybe more than one step, slurring his words and the rest.
		And the people in the administration, his chief of staff, Ron Clain, who swore that he was articulate and engaged in all the meetings he was in.
		Now he says the opposite.
		I mean, this is why I often say the only people with convictions in Washington are in prison.
		You know, truth is hard to find in this town.
		And it's really sad.
		It's sad on a number of levels.
		Sad for him and his family, too.
		I don't mean to diminish that.
		He was set up in this position.
		We were told he was going to be different, less chaotic.
		He had foreign policy experience, unlike Trump and all of these other things.
		And then we find that he was just basically a figurehead.
		It was a very sad story.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Tav is in Minneapolis, Minnesota on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Tav.
unidentified		Yeah, happy Easter to both of you.
		Thank you.
		So I'm calling Cal because I think it's about time you retired.
		I think, you know, you're really good at manipulating people to vote against their own interest.
		And you're such a hypocrite.
		Just within a solemn conversation, you said that, you know, the only ones with convictions in Washington are the ones in prison.
		Well, we have one who is convicted is in the White House right now.
		But I'm going to move away from that and just say, you just talked about the post office.
		You talked about the IRS.
		And the Republicans have traditionally and have really cut back on the funding for these programs.
		In fact, I think it was Biden who passed a law to add staff to the post office over a course of 10 years.
		And that has been ripped apart by the GOP.
		And then I just want to say this, you know, this part of like, you made this example of how a household budget might be like the federal government.
		But you think of all this cut that Doge has done indiscriminately.
		These are programmers.
		They're not accountants that are going through and cutting things and then having to bring people back because they made mistakes, major mistakes.
		And I was just watching Washington Journal yesterday and they were talking about the national parks.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay, I do want to let Cal respond to some of the things.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, thanks.
		Just the hypocritical thing is always interesting to me.
		Look, you want to talk about the post office.
		They're going up in, I think, July to 73 cents a stamp.
		And they've got four more increases before 2027, I believe.
		The post office is a mess.
		You stand in line.
		It's inefficient, as I mentioned earlier.
		Stuff doesn't get delivered on time.
		Sometimes it gets lost in the mail.
		It's been in place since Ben Franklin invented it in, I think, 1792.
		What else has been around that long that hasn't been revised and fixed?
		We don't have a revenue problem in this town.
		We have a spending problem, as Ronald Reagan used to say.
		We have a debt, not because the American people are taxed too little, he said, but because their government spends too much.
		Now, Musk has acknowledged that, yes, they made a few mistakes.
		When you move that fast, you inevitably do.
		But government needs to be cut.
		We've got to save money.
		There's no other way to do it.
		Sanders and AOC on their oligarchy tour are talking about billionaires and millionaires again.
		If you took 100% of what billionaires have, 100%, it wouldn't be enough to reduce the debt significantly.
		So it's not taxing.
		It's spending.
		And that's what needs to be brought under control.
		And that's what Musk and his Doge folks are trying to do.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And I should point out to folks that you have a column specifically about the post office titled Time to Stamp Out the Post Office that folks can find on your website and also in the newspapers that carry your column.
		Let's go to Kevin in Washington, D.C. on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Kevin.
		Hi there, Kevin.
unidentified		Are you there?
		Little worst.
		Yes, I'm here.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What's your question for Cal Thomas?
unidentified		Have you been following the biggest waste in U.S. history was the investment in the PLA?
unidentified		They were supposed to, a guy named Peter Holtz is playing victim, but he participated in research in China that created COVID, and it resulted in trillions of dollars of cost.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Kevin, I'm not sure we're familiar with what you're talking about.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you be a little bit more specific with what you're asking?
unidentified		So I'm talking about NIH funding.
		It's a disaster.
		And Peter Holtz.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, this has been talked about for ever since COVID began, where you had Dr. Fauci and others denying that the virus originated or came from a laboratory in Wuhan, China.
		There was speculation about whether bats were responsible.
		I think we've heard all of those arguments, and we've moved on from them.
		There are some people in Congress who want to haul Fauci and some others before congressional committees again and to get to the bottom of it, whether that's going to happen, I don't know.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I should point out that the White House recently relaunched the COVID website to be now called Lab Leak, the true origins of COVID-19.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Any thoughts on this sort of rebranding?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		You know, the way you establish the narrative in Washington determines how the debate and the argument goes.
		So the nomenclature, the language that is used, you think of pro-choice, pro-life, you think of some of these other labels that drive a debate.
		And it's kind of funny, actually.
		I didn't know about that.
		So what's it called now?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Lab Leak.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Lab Leak, okay.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Lab Leak, the true origins of COVID-19.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Good for them.
		Yeah, and it was a lab leak.
		I mean, I don't think there's any question about it.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay, let's go to Larry in Southport, North Carolina on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Larry.
unidentified		Yes, not the national debt.
		I don't know why people don't do their own research, but you are doing a great job this morning.
		That our nation is bankrupt, as well as who funds the money for all this woke money that's going overseas.
		It's billions of dollars for condoms and DEI research, research on mouth to change genders.
		And we borrow money and then send money right out the back door to all these other nations.
		If I had a cup and borrow a million dollars and only bring 300 in, that is something wrong with that.
		It's the same as in the United States and send money back to China that we borrowed from them.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, of course, as long as you have, as long as you're spending other people's money, there's not a lot of restraint, is there?
		When you're writing checks in your own checkbook, you are limited, depending on how much you have in your account.
		But with the government, it's unlimited.
		They tax, they spend, they borrow, and it's mostly, sadly, many of them to sustain themselves in office.
		This, in my view, is why we need term limits.
		Recycle Congress and trash for the same reason, because each left in one place too long begins to emit a foul smell.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Simone is in Tennessee on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Simone.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I just wanted to say you don't seem to be taking some of these cuts, the impact of some of these cuts seriously on the public.
		Government does things that private companies and businesses and so forth and local states and government, localities and state governments can't.
		If you ran an organization, you would never conduct cuts in this manner if you wanted to save money or reduce your budget.
		The post office is a lifeline for many people, especially in rural areas.
		And just shutting down the post office or completely doing away with that organization is really absurd.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, no, no, no.
		There are many, many ways now to get packages and mail to people.
		The establishment of the post office was made a monopoly for letter delivery.
		FedEx, UPS, all of these other package delivery services are prohibited from delivering letters.
		But they deliver packages to rural areas.
		They deliver packages to virtually anywhere.
		So I think it's long past time for reform.
		You've got a huge debt at the Postal Service because of their unfunded mandates for retirees.
		They take in, I think the figure is $200 and some million dollars, but out the door is $400 and some million dollars for these pensions that are required to be paid.
		So you talk about people being laid off too fast.
		Yes, I agree.
		Some of that is true.
		And I would like to see some kind of transition office to help people find jobs in the private sector rather than just turning them out.
		But we just can't go on like this.
		We can't.
		You get to a point in your personal life where you say, maybe you retire or you lose a job or whatever it is.
		And you say, you know, we can't keep spending as we've been spending because we can no longer afford it.
		Government never says we can no longer afford it.
		They just tax more and borrow more.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's go to Mike in Nassau, New York on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Mike.
unidentified		Cal, hello.
		I'm from Chatham, New York, which is outside of Albany, New York.
		First of all, Cal, I've listened to your or read your calm.
		I'm 53 years old, probably since I was a 13-year-old kid, so this is great to talk to you.
		I remember on Crossfire McLaughlin groups.
		I really appreciate talking to you.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		That goes way back.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Good memory.
unidentified		Exactly.
		But what I want to say about the, I'm calling out the independent line because I've told you I voted for Trump the first time and I couldn't the second time.
		But about the government inefficiency, I'm outside of Albany, New York, the home of the state capital and the government inefficiency.
		It's hilarious because when you go to the bar, the first guy in the bar are always state workers.
		I went to high school with a bunch of state workers.
		I know a guy who's two guys that have been there at least 30 years.
		And like you said, they're getting ready at 55 to retire at 75% pay.
		And these guys didn't know what they did for 20 years.
		There's true plenty of lack of work and whatever you want to call it.
		Inefficiency, wasteful spending.
		You see it right here in New York State.
		Like I said, I'm right outside of Albany.
		I see it all the time.
		The first guys in the bars are the state workers.
		Cal, it was very nice to talk to you.
		Thank you.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, thanks for calling in.
		Yeah, well, you can always vote them out of office, but a lot of people just go into the voting booth and they voted for one party all their life and they just continue to do it.
		And then they complain, as you have, about the way things are.
		Vote them out of office.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from Dave in Dana Point, California on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Dave.
unidentified		Yeah, Cal, I have a few that I'd like to ask you.
		First, I'd like to make a statement.
		You say it wrong.
		You need to say it like this.
		My father-in-law, Mr. John Ellena, told me this.
		It's easy spending somebody else's money, isn't it?
		That's the real way of putting it.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		That's what I said earlier.
unidentified		Oh, I must have missed that.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		I said, Congress, as long as they're spending somebody else's money, there'll be no stopping them.
		If you're spending your money, you have to live within your means.
		Government does that.
unidentified		Yes, the way I put it, it's blunt and to the point.
		It's just right there.
		And another thing I want to ask you is I want to thank you for what you're doing is I'm curious on how these people, I just don't understand this.
		They can't figure it out that the federal government, I believe all governments across the United States and states included, all have a spending problem.
		So I don't understand why these people don't understand that.
		That's another thing I wanted to ask you.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, here's the explanation for that.
		Let me give you, we have moved from a time when I was growing up from inspiration followed by motivation followed by perspiration to envy, greed, and entitlement.
		If you look at some of these Medicare supplemental ads that are on television every year around this open season time, there are certain words that are common to all of them.
		Free, deserve, entitled, benefit.
		Government has become a first resource for a lot of people and not a last resort as the founders had intended.
		The founders wanted limited government so the people could be unlimited.
		Calvin Coolidge, our 30th president, said he wanted taxes to be less so the people would have more.
		Now we've reversed that and all you hear, especially from the Democrats, is evil millionaires and billionaires, and they're not paying their fair share.
		We hear this all the time.
		We've heard it since the Franklin Roosevelt administration.
		The rich aren't paying their fair share.
		No, you government people are spending too much.
		We need to turn the debate around.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I do want to mark the day as Easter, which many people are celebrating all over the world.
		And last week, White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt updated reporters on President Trump's plans to celebrate Easter at the White House, but also she talked about the implementation of the president's campaign promise to create a White House faith office, which has put together a week-long celebration that culminated today.
		I want to play some of her comments and then I'll have a follow-up question for you.
karoline leavitt ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		The president promised millions of Christians across the country on the campaign trail that he would create a White House faith office when he returned to the White House, and he has delivered on that promise.
		The White House faith office has put together an extraordinary week-long celebration currently underway for Holy Week ahead of Easter Sunday.
		The president signed a Holy Week proclamation, filmed a special presidential video message, and will be hosting a pre-Easter dinner tomorrow night and a White House staff Easter worship service on Thursday.
		The President and the First Lady are honored to continue the tradition of the White House Easter egg roll, which will take place on the South Lawn next Monday.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Now, the person heading up that White House faith office is a woman named Paula White-Kaine, who you have referred to in a piece that you wrote earlier this month as a heretic and a grifter, given her efforts to raise money for, among other things, what she calls, quote, seven specific supernatural blessings.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you talk about your position on her and do you think she should be removed from her position?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, I don't think we need government to advance faith of any kind or non-faith either.
		I think the God of heaven is perfectly capable of doing that for himself.
		And as far as Paula White Cain is concerned, she has said if you send her $1,000, she'll give you certain blessings.
		And the 2020 election, God was going to send a couple of angels from Africa, I think it was, to make sure that Trump was elected.
		So I said in my column, they must have been held up by TSA for extra security because they never made it and he lost that election, despite what he says.
		We've seen this in the hyper-charismatic and Christian nationalist movement, that somehow people think that government should have a role in imposing biblical truth on the country.
		Now, there are certain things, of course, Ten Commandments, law didn't come from Harvard, came from God.
		Don't murder, don't steal, don't commit adultery.
		Some presidents have it like that third one.
		But the whole point of the First Amendment is not just that Congress does not establish a religion of any kind, but neither does it prevent the free exercise of your faith.
		So that's good enough for me.
		And the last thing I would say about that on Easter Sunday, when Jesus of Nazareth was standing before Pontius Pilate, and Pilate asked him if you're a king, and he says, yes, it is as you say, but my kingdom is not of this world.
		That's all I need.
		All I need.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Wes is in Spartanburg, South Carolina on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Wes.
unidentified		I thought that was perfect.
		Oh, thank you.
		I'm glad you can distinguish between a bunch of tongue-talking snake handlers on Easter Sunday.
		I really am.
		That's good.
		I've talked to you.
		This is the third time I've talked to you, Cal.
		Well, thanks.
		And I did admire your arguments, like I said earlier, that in order to strengthen my positions against them.
		But that being said, you talk about the Postal Service.
		I mean, this is a perfect collection.
		The reason why we tax the wealthy more, like a progressive index system that Roosevelt, the progressive at that time, did, was not to punish the rich.
		It wasn't to do that.
		It was in order to make sure that you didn't have concentrations of power of wealth like that.
		You got to think about it.
		Why couldn't we take the subsidies we subsidize Musk with, billions of dollars, and just subsidize the pension system?
		Why is it that pensions are somehow passe, but 401ks, which Trump just crashed into a wall?
		I'm not going to mention how much I lost, not only in my investments in stocks, but what happened to the bond market, too.
		I mean, he just crashed this thing.
		How can one man do that?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's coming back.
		But let me address something else that you said, which you hear a lot about, a concentration of wealth.
		There is no concentration.
		There's no limited amount of wealth.
		If you make $2 and I make $1, and I say, you owe me 50 cents to make it fair.
		No, I should ask how you made the $2.
		Where'd you go to school?
		What's your philosophy of life?
		How did you get to where you are?
		But now we're into envy, greed, and entitlement.
		If you make $2 and I make one, it's not fair.
		Spread the wealth around, said Barack Obama.
		If there was only a certain amount of wealth available, like a certain amount of food at the table, and you took a bigger portion than I was able to, that might be unfair.
		But there's no limited amount of money that if you're making a certain amount, or if a billionaire is a billionaire, and I'm only a thousand-heir or a hundred-air, that I can't make more money.
		That's just a false narrative that the Democrats, sadly, have been promoting for generations.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Matt is in St. Louis, Missouri on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Matt.
unidentified		Oh, thank you for calling.
		Thank you for taking the call.
		I feel that your TV screen, my TV screen here needs a disclaimer that says you might need a life jacket due to all the sophistry that's spewing from it this morning.
		Starting with Ed Populum.
		Argument to Med Populum is when someone uses population to make an argument.
		The idea that the majority of people feel that there is too much spending in the federal government, well, that's to claim Ed Populum is not going to get it.
		You need to show evidence.
		I'm from Missouri.
		It's a show-me state.
		Show me.
		You say there's waste.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, we have shown you.
		Haven't you looked at the list the Doge has put out?
		Social Security checks going to people over 100 years old, 120, 130 years old, incredible waste at all levels of government.
		It's out there, and they have a webpage you can go to, the Doge website, and see some of this misspending.
		So it's not being hidden.
		It's not being covered up.
		It's out there for people to see.
		And a lot of people are outraged by it, and so am I.
		It's my money, they're misspending, and yours too.
unidentified		Can I respond?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Yes, of course.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		This is America.
unidentified		Thank you.
		You're welcome.
		Okay, great.
		So my response to that is, you are aware that they had to delete all types of stuff from that list because they were lying.
		You realize that, right?
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		No.
unidentified		Or are you going to just, or is there more sophistry coming toward it?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear your response.
		That references an article that I pointed to earlier about this story and notice that nearly a billion dollars in Doge savings disappeared overnight in a late-night update to its webpage.
		Doge removed hundreds of previously claimed cuts and altered scores of others to boost the item's claimed savings value.
		I'm guessing this is what the callers are.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Well, yeah, but yeah, sure.
		Well, Elon Musk has admitted this.
		When you move this quickly, and I said earlier, I think that we ought to slow it down a little bit so people can catch up and understand what is being said and done, you're going to make some mistakes.
		And some of these have been rolled back.
		But the instances of legitimate waste, fraud, and abuse is beyond denying, unless you are into denial, which, as you know, is not just a river in Egypt.
		So, yes, but we shouldn't focus on the mistakes.
		We ought to focus on the reality.
		And the reality is there's a lot of waste, fraud, and abuse.
		I have long advocated that every agency of government should come before Congress every appropriations time and justify not only their budgets, but their existence.
		Reagan used to say the only proof of eternal life in Washington is a government program.
		And there's a lot of truth in that.
		It's easier to deprive Dracula of blood than it is to cut a government program.
		They go on and on and on.
		I mean, we had a national tea tasting commission in this country in the 1930s.
		People couldn't, apparently the government thought people couldn't make up their mind what tea they preferred.
		So they had a bunch of bureaucrats reviewing tea.
		And this thing went on for on and on.
		You had a national helium reserve until the Hindenburg blew up because some people thought that helium-powered blimps might be good in warfare.
		These things go on forever unless they're cut.
		And that's what Musk and the Doge people are trying to do.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, thank you so much.
		That's all the time we have for this segment.
		But Cal Thomas, I really appreciate your time.
cal thomas ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Kyle Thomas is a syndicated columnist, celebrating his 41st year of that column, and also the author of the book, A Watchman in the Night, What I've Seen Over 50 Years Reporting on America.
		Coming up next, we are going to talk with author, law professor, and ABC News legal contributor Kim Whaley to discuss the use of executive power by the Trump administration.
		We'll be right back.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		British writer Phil Tenline has written a book titled Ghosts of Iron Mountain.
		The publisher Scribner calls it an investigative masterpiece for readers curious about the surprising connection between John F. Kennedy, Oliver Stone, Timothy McVeigh, QAnon, Alex Jones, and Donald Trump.
		In his introduction, author Tinline says the book is the true story of a hoax, a hoax that shocked the nation in the late 1960s and that once created, seemed impossible to extinguish.
		Those involved in the hoax include Victor Novaski, E.L. Doctorow, John Kenneth Gowbray, and the author, the writer, Leonard Lewin.
unidentified		Author Phil Tinline with his book, Ghosts of Iron Mountain, The Hoax of the Century, Its Enduring Impact, and What It Reveals About America Today.
		On this episode of BookNotes Plus with our host, Brian Lamb.
		BookNotes Plus is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
		Watch our signature interview program Q&A all week on C-SPAN 2.
		On Monday, Kentucky Republican Congressman James Comer, House Oversight Committee Chair and author of All the President's Money, talks about his committee's 15-month investigation into the business practices of then President Joe Biden and members of President Biden's family.
		In this interview, Representative Comer argues that the Bidens have benefited financially from corrupt financial dealings involving Ukraine, China, and other countries.
james comer ▲ ● ▼		Six different banks had filed 175 suspicious activity reports against the Bidens, most of which were while Joe Biden was Vice President of the United States.
		And then they were subject of another 50 suspicious activity reports.
		So let me put that in perspective.
		No bank would file a suspicious activity report against the son of a prominent politician unless they were darn sure that a financial crime had been committed.
		Because when you file one of those, the bank examiners roll in your bank and it causes a lot of problems.
		So the banks knew that there was some bad things going on here.
		And that's when the investigation really took off.
unidentified		James Comer with his book, All the President's Money.
		Watch Q ⁇ A Monday at 7 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN 2.
		You can listen to Q&A and all of our podcasts, wherever you get your podcasts, or on our free C-SPAN Now app.
		There are many ways to listen to C-SPAN radio, anytime, anywhere.
		In the Washington, D.C. area, listen on 90.1 FM.
		Use our free C-SPAN Now app or go online to c-span.org slash radio on SiriusXM Radio on channel 455, the TuneIn app, and on your smart speaker by simply saying play C-SPAN radio.
		Hear our live call-in program, Washington Journal, daily at 7 a.m. Eastern.
		Listen to House and Senate proceedings, committee hearings, news conferences, and other public affairs events live throughout the day.
		And for the best way to hear what's happening in Washington with fast-paced reports, live interviews, and analysis of the day.
		Catch Washington today, weekdays of 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern.
		Listen to C-SPAN programs on C-SPAN Radio, anytime, anywhere.
		C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
		Washington Journal continues.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We're joined now by Kim Whaley, who is a University of Baltimore School of Law professor and also an ABC News legal contributor, but at the moment is a Fulbright scholar in the Netherlands and a visiting professor at Leiden University there, also author of the recent book, Pardon Power, How the Pardon System Works and Why.
		Welcome to Washington Journal.
unidentified		Great to be back with you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, thank you for joining us again.
		And I want to get your thoughts first on the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was sent to El Salvador by the Trump administration in March, despite an immigration court's order that was supposed to prevent his deportation.
		What sorts of protections, if any, would you say that the law has for Mr. Abrego Garcia?
unidentified		There are two big overarching constitutional and legal questions, not just with Abrego Garcia, but with the hundreds of others that have been sent to El Salvador without process.
		And by that I mean due process.
		We've heard the concept, due process, the right to have a hearing and notice before you're deprived of your liberty.
		It goes all the way back to the Magna Carta before the Constitution was even ratified.
		And, you know, if your brother gets picked up off the street by the cops, the first thing he's going to want to know is what did I do wrong?
		And the second, he's going to want to know if he has a chance to say his side of the story.
		Listen, you have the wrong person or you're charging me with something I didn't do.
		It's due process, that basic concept that Abrego Garcia and others like him, for slightly different reasons, have been denied.
		That's very, very serious because it means that the government doesn't have really any checks and balances if it decides that someone who is originally here illegally, which was Mr. Abrego Garcia's situation, or someone who's born in the United States and have been there for generations, if the government can just put you on a plane to another country, which is what happened here, and say, listen, you're outside the United States,
		so the Constitution doesn't apply to you, then that's really just washing away foundational constitutional guarantees.
		The second big problem here is, as you indicated, that there are a number of federal court orders that have been in place to protect due process protections.
		And just to be clear to listeners, the Constitution does apply to everyone in the United States, including people who are there not legally.
		The Constitution protects everyone.
		And if the administration gets away with ignoring court orders, then the power gets concentrated in one place and ultimately in one man.
		And that doesn't look like a constitutional democracy anymore.
		That's like a dictatorship or a monarchy where you get rights if the king likes you or here if Donald Trump sees likes you, then you might get your rights.
		If he dislikes you, then you don't.
		Those are the two big issues with the Albrego-Garcia case, due process on the one hand and ignoring court orders on the other.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		The appeals court that is involved in this, the federal appeals court, has said that it is shocking that the Trump administration claims it can't do anything to free Kilmar Obrego-Garcia from an El Salvador prison and return him to the U.S.
		Three judge panel from the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals said that now the branches of government come too close to grinding irreparably against one another in a conflict that promises to diminish both.
		This is a losing proposition all around.
		The judiciary will lose much from the constant intimations of its illegitimacy to which by dent of custom and detachment we can only sparingly reply.
		The executive will lose much from a public perception of its lawlessness and all of its attendant contagions.
		The executive may succeed for a time in weakening the courts, but over time, history will script the tragic gap between what was and all that might have been, and law in time will sign its epitaph.
		That was quoted from an ABC News article.
		What's your response to what the court's been saying here?
unidentified		Yeah, that was a stunning opinion from out of the Fourth Circuit.
		I think it was a Reagan appointee.
		You know, the federal judges understand this.
		I mean, they're schooled on the Constitution.
		And when I speak to groups that don't have law degrees or aren't necessarily lawyers or judges, I encourage people to think about a pyramid or a triangle.
		That's the situation that the American revolutionaries fought against, where the power came from the divine to the king, and he was at the pinnacle of the triangle, and he gave out rights or no rights based on whether he liked you.
		The revolutionaries flipped that.
		The framers of the Constitution flipped that.
		We now have an inverted triangle where it's the power of the people at the very top.
		And it trickles down to the president.
		He's not a king.
		And it's messy.
		It's complicated.
		You have to make compromises.
		It can be slow.
		But one of the primary checks to ensure that the power of the people does not get abused is the federal court system.
		And what the judge is saying here is: listen, we don't have an army.
		We don't have police officers.
		The only police officers that exist to actually enforce court orders are the U.S. Marshal Service.
		The Marshal Service is controlled by the President of the United States.
		So in this moment, the law enforcement apparatus, as well as the military, all answer to Donald Trump.
		And before Donald Trump, really, I think there was a sort of handshake agreement, presidents preceding Donald Trump, that they all believed in the constitutional order.
		They didn't perceive of themselves as somehow above the law and able to flout the other branches.
		And essentially, Donald Trump is saying to the judges, to Congress, what are you going to do?
		I'm not going to abide by your authority under the Constitution.
		How are you going to make me?
		It's a standoff.
		And in this moment, there isn't any clear mechanism, as this judge indicates, for the judges to uphold the rule of law other than the people really demanding it publicly through protests, by calling representatives.
		The direct checks on the constitutional authority of the president are failing right now.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		There is one attempt that happened over the weekend to put a check on the president's authority in the Supreme Court blocking the Alien Enemies Act deportation of Venezuelan men.
		This is a story from the Washington Post.
		The Trump administration was planning to deport at least 30 Venezuelan men under a rarely invoked wartime statute before the court ruled to temporarily halt it.
		I want to read a bit of that decision that came down very early Saturday morning, which said there is before the court an application, excuse me, an application on behalf of a punitive class of detainees seeking an injunction against their removal under the Alien Enemies Act.
		The matter is currently pending before the Fifth Circuit.
		Upon action by the Fifth Circuit, the Solicitor General is invited to file a response to the application before this court as soon as possible.
		The government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this court.
		And then Justice Thomas and Justice Alito dissented from that court order, and a statement from Justice Alito was to follow.
		What was your assessment of this decision from the Supreme Court this weekend?
unidentified		Well, definitely the Supreme Court, now the majority, is realizing this is a red flag moment for the Constitution and for their own legitimacy.
		But let me unpack just a little bit the distinction between the Albrego-Garcia case and these kinds of cases.
		So for our listeners, because it is confusing and it's hard to sort of keep everything straight.
		I mean, I mentioned that non-citizens get due process.
		What does that look like?
		Before you can be deported, you get a hearing before an immigration judge.
		So Albrego Garcia got that in 2019, and the judge held that he can stay in what's called a withdrawal of revocation.
		He can stay in the United States and specifically cannot be sent to El Salvador.
		And he was sent to El Salvador without another hearing saying that he could be sent to El Salvador.
		That's his specific issue is with respect to the ignoring of that 2019 judge's order saying he can't be sent to El Salvador.
		With the Alien Enemies Act, what Donald Trump is saying is that we're essentially at war or de facto war with immigration because that's what's required to trigger that statute.
		And so for anyone he determines to be within the enemies of the United States, and I'm paraphrasing, you get no due process.
		You don't get an immigration judge at all.
		The Supreme Court, in a case that was a class action challenging that, just basically denying due process, ignoring the Constitution, the lower court judge, it was in Washington, put a freeze on that.
		Supreme Court said, no, you can't do it across the country.
		You've got to file it in a case-by-case basis in different places.
		So there was one part of Texas where the judges said you can't do it anymore, put an injunction in place.
		So the Trump administration moved the people from that part of Texas to another part of Texas where there was no injunction.
		And the ACLU and other lawyers representing these individuals got word of the idea that they were going to be deported again.
		And as we discussed a moment ago, the Trump administration's position is once you leave America, Constitution doesn't apply to you anymore and we have no control over what happens to you.
		So they went to the Fifth Circuit and said, you have to stop this.
		That is the plaintiffs.
		The government said, we're not going to do anything.
		We're actually not going to deport these people.
		The lawyers were not persuaded and then went in an emergency motion all the way to the United States Supreme Court.
		In the middle of the night, the Supreme Court sided with the plaintiffs and said, no, we're halting this.
		So I think it really suggests, I mean, the fact that this was in the middle of the night, the fact that the Fifth Circuit hadn't weighed in, there were all these machinations, the fact that previously the Supreme Court had kind of sided with the Trump administration and making it harder to stop these deportations because now they have to be filed across the country, not in one place.
		I think it demonstrates the court knows this is very, very serious.
		And as I said, their own legitimacy, the president's willingness to listen to the Supreme Court is now on the line.
		And I'm sure these justices, there were two dissents.
		They're sure these justices don't want to become All of a sudden, irrelevant under the Constitution, the way, frankly, Congress has allowed to have happen.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's look at that dissent, which was authored by Justice Alito, but Justices Thomas and Alito dissented.
		The dissent says, among other things, shortly after midnight yesterday, the court hastily and prematurely granted unprecedented emergency relief proceeding under the All Writs Act.
		The court ordered the government not to remove a putative class of detainees until this court issues a superseding order.
		Although the order does not define the putative class, it appears that the court means all members of the class that the habeas petitioners sought to have certified, namely all non-citizens in custody in the Northern District of Texas who were, are, or will be subject to the March 2025 presidential proclamation entitled Invocation of the Alien Enemies Act regarding the invasion of the United States by Trende Aragua and/or its implementation.
		And although the court does not specify what it means by the government, it appears the term is intended to embrace all the named defendants, including the president, basically arguing here that this ruling was too broad.
unidentified		Right, so the Supreme Court, in that earlier case I mentioned where it said, okay, you can't do a class action, you got to file what are called habeas petitions all across the country.
		The Supreme Court has relied on procedural technicalities or which sometimes are very important.
		I don't mean to minimize that, to basically not step in in that instance or not allow the lower courts to make sweeping rulings that way, big gestures.
		The problem is that the Trump administration is not acting in good faith.
		I think, meaning, you know, they're not listening to what the Supreme Court has been saying.
		The Supreme Court's also made clear these folks get due process.
		And last Saturday, Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, announced that 10 more had been sent to El Salvador.
		So they're playing this game on the one hand where the court is making rulings, and on the other hand, the Trump administration is treating them as optional.
		So there's nuanced technical arguments that Justice Alito is making, but he's ignoring the bigger picture, which again, you don't need to be a lawyer to understand.
		A rule doesn't matter if people don't adhere to the rule and there's no accountability for violating the rule.
		We'll all go through a speed limit.
		We'll go 65 miles an hour into 55 until we get a ticket for speeding.
		And then we have to pay that ticket, so we'll slow down the next time.
		It's the ticket for speeding that makes us slow down, not the speed limit.
		And right now, I think that the court is realizing there aren't any tickets for speeding through the Constitution that are left for this particular president.
		We're left to hope he will, like a benevolent king prior to the foundation of the American United States of America under the Constitution, like a benevolent king, just kind of do the right thing.
		That at some point he'll decide to pay attention to the law or he'll decide he has too much power or he's made too many changes or whatever it is.
		And I just don't think over the years anyone would really argue that Trump has a strong sense of integrity.
		That is what the internal check that makes him motivated to adhere to the rule of law.
		And I think the majority on the court is now maybe too late, but now at least they're now finally recognizing that.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		We are going to go to calls with questions or comments for our guest, Kim Whaley.
		Our line for Republicans is 202-748-8001.
		For Democrats, 202-748-8000.
		And for Independents, 202-748-8002.
		Let's start with Anne-Marie in Tampa, Florida on our line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Anne-Marie.
unidentified		Yes.
		Hi.
		I'm just can't even believe what I'm hearing.
		Why would we have rights for people that are not even legal?
		They came into this country illegally, let alone people that are part of gangs.
		I mean, I don't get it.
		How would they?
		Here, Trump is doing a good thing getting all these people out, which is what should be done.
		They shouldn't have been here to begin with.
		And how do they get rights?
		I mean, there's a million things of rights in the United States, you know, people in the United States that, you know, are put aside for it.
		Really?
		Now we're talking about gang members getting rights?
		No, they need to go.
		I commend President Trump for trying to clean up the United States and get us back to what we were way before the Bidens got involved.
		Well, I'm so glad for that question, actually.
		There is, of course, a very robust deportation system in the United States under every president, Democrats and Republicans, and it's been going on for many years.
		But as just let me reiterate to underscore the point, the question isn't whether people should be deported.
		That's not the question.
		The question is: what's the process for deportation?
		Do they get to say, I'm not a gang member?
		Or does the government, who has all the power, power over law enforcement, the power over military, government puts you in prison, that's legal.
		If I put you in prison, that's kidnapping.
		Government has more power than regular people.
		The question is: do you get, you, whether you're illegal or not, get the right to say, listen, that tattoo doesn't make me a gang member.
		And the reason this affects everyone, not just people who are in the United States illegally, every single person.
		Because if the government can deprive someone of their ability to say their side of the story, the ability to require the government to come up with some evidence before they're deprived of their liberty, life, liberty, property, that's a due process clause.
		If they can do it for one person, they can do it for anyone in the United States.
		Anybody who's listening right now could be walking home from the supermarket one day and a black power pulls up and takes you away and puts you in a foreign prison.
		What is happening right now is you would not be able to do anything about that because the Trump administration's position is we kicked you out of the country, so now the Constitution doesn't apply to you.
		So if you want your rights or the rights for your children or your friends or your family or coworkers, if you want to be sure none of them get picked up off the street by a black van and deported out of the country because they said something that the Donald, the Trump administration doesn't like, if you want to make sure your family is protected, then the Trump administration must be held accountable for depriving people of the ability to say their side of the story,
		even for people who might be in the country illegally.
		And just to be clear, it's not clear that these hundreds of people are all illegal.
		Actually, Mr. Albrego Garcia has a court order from 2019 allowing him to stay in the country.
		So we should not be sweeping all of this with a broad brush.
		But I completely agree that there should be a robust immigration system.
		Congress should be funding it and making changes.
		That's been a political football now for many, many years.
		And the American people have a right to require and demand more accountability at the border, but not this way, not by suspending the actual due process clause of the Constitution, because then we're all at risk, every single one of us.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		On the topic of, on the case of Mr. Abrego Garcia, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was last week with President Trump and the leader of El Salvador in the Oval Office and made some comments about the role of the U.S. judiciary in foreign policy and also the possible return of Mr. Abrego Garcia from El Salvador.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's listen.
unidentified		I don't understand what the confusion is.
marco rubio ▲ ● ▼		This individual is a citizen of El Salvador.
		He was illegally in the United States and was returned to his country.
		That's where you deport people back to their country of origin, except for Venezuela that wasn't refusing to take people back or places like that.
unidentified		I can tell you this, Mr. President.
marco rubio ▲ ● ▼		No, the foreign policy of the United States is conducted by the President of the United States, not by a court.
marco rubio ▲ ● ▼		And no court in the United States has a right to conduct the foreign policy of the United States.
unidentified		It's that simple.
unidentified		End of story.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		What's your take on what Secretary Rubio said there?
unidentified		I mean, Secretary Rubio is picking up on another Supreme Court ruling that came out recently in the Albrego Garcia case.
		So what the lower court judge said was, listen, Albrego Garcia gets due process.
		Supreme Court has said recently that all these folks get due process, whether they're here illegally or illegally.
		The lower court said, okay, Donald Trump needs to facilitate his return and actually effectuate, meaning you need to try to get him back, but actually get him back.
		I mean, we're paying El Salvador $6 million a year in taxpayer dollars to house him in El Salvador.
		So just stop paying.
		Say, send him back or you're not going to get your money, for example.
		Do it.
		The Supreme Court said, well, it's okay to say facilitate.
		It's okay to tell Donald Trump to try to get him back.
		But you can't, lower court, say that you must get him back.
		He must get him back because that interferes, according to the Supreme Court, with the president's power over foreign affairs.
		Now, the foreign affairs power is not expressed in the Constitution.
		It's been implied, just like, say, abortion was implied for many years, implied.
		It was read in between the lines in a series of cases.
		It's not expressed in the Constitution.
		But what Rubio is saying is that so long as the president just cites foreign affairs, he's a king.
		He can do whatever he wants, even if that means stripping people of their constitutional rights.
		I think that's wrong.
		Why?
		Because the due process clause is not implied.
		It's there in black and white in two places.
		It's in the Fifth Amendment.
		That protects your rights to not be thrown into prison or executed without a hearing.
		Again, if the federal government decides to do it.
		And then it's in the 14th Amendment.
		That protects everyone's right to not be thrown into prison or executed without a hearing if a state tries to do that, if state law enforcement tries to do that.
		But Rubio is picking up on that language out of the Supreme Court's decision saying, listen, if it's foreign affairs, we can do whatever we want.
		That's just not how the Constitution was drafted and structured.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Dave is in Long Island, New York on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Dave.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		Kimberly, you've made a lot of my points for me.
		Now I want to point out the extreme danger of what you just said.
		If you're allowing the courts to compel a president to do something involving a foreign country, what if that foreign country says no?
		Are the courts going to order the president to declare war on a foreign nation that can lead to a nuclear war and destroy all of the human race and life on earth?
		Because that's what people like you are saying.
		You're saying the courts can compel the president to do something to a foreign country, and if they say no, start a war and terminate humanity and all life on earth.
		Additionally, let's take a look at what defying the Supreme Court means.
		The Supreme Court recently made a decision on guns, okay, semi-automatic firearms, but yet the district of courts would not strike them down.
		The appellant courts would not strike them down, and the Supreme Court won't even take up their own appeal on the ban on semi-automatic firearms violating the Second Amendment that they made.
		So the Supreme Court won't even enforce their own decisions.
		So, based on that, a reasonable person could ask: what does the Supreme Court mean if they won't even enforce their own decisions?
		But we cannot have courts ordering the president to declare war on a foreign country.
		Thank you.
		Well, I didn't say that, and that's certainly not what the Supreme Court said, and that's not what the foreign affairs power means.
		On the guns thing, that's a different subject matter, and some of what the court said is actually under regulations for guns, not under the Second Amendment.
		And there were some misstatements, legal misstatements, understandably, in what the caller just said.
		But let's be clear, this crisis is of the Trump administration's own making.
		They admitted, they admitted on the record that they sent him to El Salvador erroneously.
		So, this is a man who I understand he's been moved, but was for a while in a maximum security prison that some lawyers have claimed would actually violate the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment if it were to happen in the United States of America.
		I mean, the Foreign Affairs Power doesn't give a president the power to do that.
		That's really scary stuff.
		And I think what the lower court is saying is: listen, you've got to fix that error.
		It does not require declaring war in El Salvador.
		It just says he could put a plane down there and pick him up.
		He could say, listen, we're not going to pay you the $6 million if you don't turn him back over.
		And frankly, Bukele, the president of El Salvador, sat in the Oval Office and said, you know, I'm not returning him because Donald Trump, and I'm paraphrasing, wants me to keep him.
		So that is within the president's prerogative to negotiate how to undo that unconstitutional action by the president.
		But, you know, Donald Trump isn't even really making the argument that what he did was about foreign affairs.
		He's arguing that it's really the court should butt out completely.
		And that is not how the Constitution is set up.
		We need to have judges, second-guess people in power.
		Who has more power probably than anyone else on the planet?
		Donald Trump in this moment.
		But even if you'd support Donald Trump, he won't be in that office forever.
		And there might be a president you don't like.
		But if we stand by and allow that kind of power to be exercised with no authority, then you could have a president the next round that you don't like that is doing that to people that you don't want to see it done to.
		And then it's too late.
		Now is the time to make sure the rules of the game are enforced.
		The personnel manual for presidents that's set forth in the Constitution in 1788 still holds in 2025.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Joanna is in Germantown, Maryland, on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Joanna.
unidentified		No, I'm a Democrat, and I'm on the line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Oh, excuse me.
unidentified		Yeah.
		Anyway, Professor, you've stolen my thunder.
		First of all, I want to say that I don't think this has anything to do with foreign policy.
		It's about constitutional rights of everybody that lives in this country.
		Another thing is there's one, it's really not about deporting people who are here illegally.
		It's about sending people to a horrible, brutal, notorious prison.
		Let me tell you a little bit about it that I've read about it.
		Up to 80 men in a cell, two toilets, lights on 24 hours a day.
		No books, no magazines, no newspapers, no letters, no nothing.
		They starve them.
		They feed them very, very lightly to keep their energy levels down, and they're never allowed outside.
		Now, if you're going to send somebody to something like that, which I don't think anyone should ever be in, you better be damn sure that they have committed pretty heinous crimes to get that kind of punishment.
		This is about due process.
		There is an estimate from what I've read that at least 50% of the original group that they sent to this prison have no criminal records at all.
		Nothing.
		I saw a situation about a man, a young man, I think he's gay, he's a makeup artist.
		He was going to his asylum hearing.
		People can claim asylum in this country, and they're entitled to a hearing.
		He was going, and he was picked up.
		He's never been charged or convicted of a crime.
		We've got to hold to the Constitution.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I do want to let Kim respond to some of the points that you've raised.
unidentified		Yeah, I really want to underscore a few words that Joanna said, which is you better be sure you're right.
		You better be sure you're right.
		So we really need to set aside the whole topic of immigration because the issue is not about immigration in this moment.
		It's not about whether some of these people are even gang members and they should belong in or out of the country.
		It's about the government better be sure they're right before you take someone's freedom away and put them in any prison.
		How do we do that in the United States?
		The government has to make a claim.
		In the criminal context, we call that an indictment.
		Then you give the other side the evidence that, you know, you exchange evidence.
		Then you go before a court and a jury.
		I mean, this isn't always in the immigration context, but this is the gold standard.
		And the government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you're the one who did it.
		Sometimes they only have circumstantial evidence.
		Everyone's seen this on TV millions of times, right?
		Or millions, I'm exaggerating, but many times.
		Or you've listened to podcasts or you've seen a movie with these jury trials.
		It's the same thing.
		Now, in immigration, you don't get that, the defendants don't get a full-blown jury trial right, but the government does have to produce evidence that, okay, we don't want gang members.
		We don't want violent people.
		Is that person a gang member or a violent person?
		Before you take that liberty away, the government has to produce some evidence.
		There is none happening right now.
		Trump administration is saying, trust me.
		And I want you to really think about if that was your brother, would you still agree that trust the government is a good enough standard for your brother to be sent to a prison?
		That's the conversation.
		If you think trust the government is not enough for your brother to be sent to a foreign prison for the rest of his life without being able to make one argument for a judge, if you're okay with the government, every government, not just the Trump administration, every American government for the rest of time until the Constitution's amended or something, if you're okay with that, then you should be supporting what Donald Trump is doing.
		If you're uncomfortable with the scenario I'm painting, then all of us should be joining hands right now and saying, no, these people get hearings.
		Maybe they get deported afterwards, but they get hearings.
		The government has to be made to present their evidence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Stephen is in West Palm Beach, Florida, on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Stephen.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		Okay, I'm going to try to stay calm here.
		I hope you'll be patient, okay?
		There is a difference.
		I want to speak about these things because these things caused me tremendous anguish over the last 15 years, starting with the first two years of the Obama administration.
		There is a difference between agency and legitimacy, or agency and representation, I should say.
		If our representatives betray our agency, like in the failure to repeal the Affordable Care Act, are there any choices between electing someone like Mr. Trump and overriding various norms of, let's say, constitutional behavior or violence?
		You mentioned that the court is dealing with procedure, but it has gotten to the point where procedure is trumping substance in the spirit of the law, if I understand, as per Montesquieu.
		To wit, Holman, the guy that's the head of, I believe it's ICE or the Border Patrol, whatever he's in charge, Homeland Security, put it beautifully when he was interviewed with Caitlin Collins just last night, I believe.
		The court was perfectly willing to allow Biden to throw open the borders and not vet the entrance to let the people come in and then engage in what was known as catch and release, a phrase I couldn't believe first enunciated to me by baby Bush.
		But ICE must use extreme vetting to keep from sending them out of the country.
		This was despite several states taking the federal government to court over decades for not defending the borders.
		Just a couple more things.
		There is nowhere in the Constitution where it is stated that the executive must follow a court order.
		That started with Marbury.
		Sure, you can claim that Trump is in contempt of court, but it can also be true that the court can be in contempt of the executive or for the Congress of that matter.
		Contempt is in the eyes of the beholder.
		We can go on ad nauseum about the failures of the government, but the judiciary in particular.
		The failure to strike down overly vague legislation that allows, for example, the existence of, quote, the right to privacy.
		The ridiculous statement that things like the Progressive Tax Code, to the point where half of the population does not even have to pay federal taxes, is somehow reflective of the equal treatment under the law, if I understand under the 14th Amendment.
		The outlawing of automatic firearms, which many people hold in the fear of our own government, which, by the way, are much, much less dangerous to this government than the Pennsylvania flintlock was to the British and their muskets.
		Lastly, as Breyer said, when it comes to the law, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
		Or to put it differently, Ms. Whaley, what goes around comes around.
		Thanks for your patience.
		Wow, I really appreciate that thoughtful exposition and sort of travel into history and some other areas of the law.
		You know, if we have a lot of time, I would take it point by point.
		There are a number of things that were said that are not entirely accurate or certainly don't have the full picture in mind, but I want to make a couple points.
		One is that, yes, what goes around comes around.
		And one thing that I think Republicans or Democrats, independents, anyone should agree with is that the revolution was fought, many people died, and a constitution was formed for we the people.
		That was revolutionary.
		That was extraordinary.
		It is not an unlimited monarchy, period.
		We are not a government with unlimited power in one man, ever.
		It's shared between three branches.
		And what the caller, I think, is underscoring, which I agree with completely, is that the United States Congress has abdicated its oversight authority.
		There was a bipartisan bill to address immigration prior to the election.
		Donald Trump reportedly blew it up because immigration has been a polarizing topic that makes an impact in elections.
		Both sides of the aisle politically have utilized that.
		I'm not an expert in immigration, but I just want to make clear, immigration, just like you mentioned privacy.
		There is nothing in the Constitution giving the president any power over immigration, any power over foreign affairs.
		It's implied.
		The Constitution is all about a balancing act.
		People ask me all the time: can President Obama do that?
		Could President Trump do that?
		Can President Biden do that?
		The question is, they can if someone doesn't stop them.
		They can if the other two branches sit back and allow it to happen.
		And that's happened too much.
		And we've seen a steady accumulation of power in the presidency.
		And that ultimately leads to a limit on individual liberty.
		People are the losers because we don't have the power of the federal government.
		And so I think if this is upsetting to people, we should go to our members of Congress and have them get a backbone and actually start doing their job and passing legislation to control not only the presidency, but if you don't like how the federal courts are operating, Congress can change their jurisdiction as well, including the appellate jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Eddie is in New York on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Eddie.
unidentified		Hi, yes.
		I'd like to ask you a couple of questions possible.
		Brainerd, whatever his name was, he did have a deportation order.
		Two judges said that he was a member of MS-13, correct?
		He had a with withholding of deportation, a revocation of deportation.
		So actually, it's not exactly an asylum ruling, but there were an order saying he should not be deported to El Salvador.
		As far as establishing affirmatively that he's a member of that, my understanding is the government has not met its burden of proof, although there is some question relating to a Chicago bulls shirt that he wore in 2019, that the government believes that, like we've heard about tattoos, is indicative of that membership.
		And I would certainly encourage that kind of evidence being presented before an immigration judge with respect to every single one of these people.
		And if the judge agrees that there's sufficient evidence to satisfy the law for deportation, by all means, these people should be deported, consistent with federal law.
		And if we don't like the law, we should tell our members of Congress to get together and amend the law to make that deportation process less cumbersome.
		The answer is not for a president to bulldoze through the Constitution completely.
		You didn't answer the question.
		He did have a deportation order.
		Two federal judges determined he was a member of MS-13.
		Venezuela said, yes, he is a member of MS-13.
		He did have a deportation order.
		The answer is no.
		He did not.
		He had a revocation of deportation that needed a second hearing.
		Another judge had to decide whether to deport him.
		That didn't happen.
		That's what the entire fight is about.
		Whether he gets, because essentially the prior judge determined that he was not in the country legally, but that he could not be deported to El Salvador because it was not safe for him there under the laws that apply to the government for deportation.
		So what he is saying is, give me a hearing.
		We might end up exactly where we are now.
		Again, the question is, does he get a hearing?
		Does the government have to actually, in 2025, to change the 2019 ruling saying he can't go to El Salvador?
		The government wants to change that and send him to El Salvador.
		He gets the right to go before an immigration judge.
		He might lose.
		But no, there is not a standing deportation order.
		And no, there is not a finding by a court in 2025 that he should be deported to El Salvador because he's a member of MS-13.
		That is not true.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		So, I want to read a little bit from a BBC article, kind of breaking down some of those nuances you were just describing.
		The judge who presided over his 2019 case said that based on the confidential information, there was sufficient evidence to support Mr. Abrego Garcia's gang membership.
		That finding was later upheld by another judge.
		As a result, Mr. Abrego Garcia was refused bail and remained in custody.
		During this time, he applied for asylum to prevent his deportation to El Salvador.
		In October 2019, he was granted a withholding of removal order, court documents show, a status different from asylum, but one which prevented the U.S. government from sending him back to El Salvador because he could face harm.
		Mr. Abrego Garcia's lawyers say that he was granted the status based on his well-founded fear of persecution by Barrio 18, the main rival gang of MS-13.
		He said that prior to him entering the U.S., his family and their business had been threatened and extorted by Barrio 18.
		Since 2019, when he was released with the protective order, Mr. Abrego Garcia's lawyers say that he had yearly check-ins with immigration officials, which he has attended without fail and without incident.
unidentified		Right, so that has to be lifted for him to be sent with a finding that in 2025 he's a danger by virtue of participation in MSN 13 or whatever the other standards are, that he needs to be deported to El Salvador.
		That didn't happen.
		The 2019 order is still in place, giving him a protected status in the United States.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Well, that is all of the time that we have.
		Thank you so much for your time and for answering all those questions from our callers.
		This was Kim Whaley, who is the author of the book Pardon Power: How the Pardon System Works and Why, as well as a Fulbright scholar in the Netherlands and a visiting professor at Leiden University there.
		Thank you so much.
unidentified		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Now, coming up, we are going to be in open forum, and so you can start calling in now.
		Our numbers for Republicans: 202-748-8001, for Democrats, 202-748-8000, and for Independents, 202-748-8002.
		will be right back.
unidentified		This week, watch a primetime encore presentation of our 10-part series, First 100 Days.
		We explore the early months of U.S. presidencies, from George Washington in 1789 to Donald Trump in 2017.
		We'll learn about the decisions made and how they shaped the White House, the nation, and history.
		Monday, the first 100 days of Jimmy Carter's presidency in 1977.
		After defeating President Gerald Ford in the 1976 election, he promised to move the country forward after the Watergate period.
		President Carter offered proposals on energy, taxes, welfare, and reform of government.
		Jimmy Carter passed away in December 2024 at the age of 100.
		American dreams endured.
		We must once again have full faith in our country and in one another.
		I believe America can be better.
		We can be even stronger than before.
		Let our recent mistake bring a resurgent commitment to the basic principles of our nation.
		Watch First 100 Days, Monday at 8 p.m. Eastern, on C-SPAN 2, or online at c-span.org.
jimmy carter ▲ ● ▼		Democracy is always an unfinished creation.
ronald reagan ▲ ● ▼		Democracy is worth dying for.
george h w bush ▲ ● ▼		Democracy belongs to us all.
bill clinton ▲ ● ▼		We are here in the sanctuary of democracy.
george w bush ▲ ● ▼		Great responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies.
barack obama ▲ ● ▼		American democracy is bigger than any one person.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Freedom and democracy must be constantly guarded and protected.
unidentified		We are still at our core, a democracy.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		This is also a massive victory for democracy and for freedom.
unidentified		Washington Journal continues.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We are in open forum, ready to hear your thoughts and comments about public policy today.
		Let's start with Alan in Fayetteville, North Carolina on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Alan.
unidentified		Good morning, ma'am.
		Good morning, Cease and audience.
		I really, I'm a 78-year-old black African American, Vietnam veteran, marched in the civil rights era.
		And I just don't get these people.
		We've been telling them day by day what was coming.
		They didn't believe it.
		You got these people calling in.
		We got to get all these criminals out of the White House.
		Look at what is in the White House.
		I mean, get all these criminals, I'm sorry, out of the country.
		Look what is in the White House.
		We got a criminal in the White House.
		Then, Lord, have mercy.
		Lordy, have mercy, boy.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Rick is in Golden, Colorado on our line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Rick.
unidentified		Hi.
		Yes.
		The first thing is the individual Jet on before where she's advocating these due process.
		Does she really believe that we can afford or even should take as many as 20 million people and put the due process of full jury trial, appeal all the way to Supreme Court, legal fees paid by American people?
		I mean, this is ridiculous.
		That could never be done.
		So first off, I think you need to push these people to answer those questions.
		And then secondly, asylum was defined after World War II in an agreement, or I believe it's possible of the nations, and you're required to claim asylum in the first country that you set foot in.
		So obviously, somebody coming from El Salvador did not set their first foot in America in order to claim asylum.
		They had to come through some other countries, Guatemala, Mexico, so on and so forth.
anthony j hilder ▲ ● ▼		So if we start forcing what the true letter of the agreement of asylum is, they're not even eligible for asylum.
unidentified		And so, you know, it's time that we got to start thinking about, and I'm saying that we don't do some due process of these people because there are circumstances that perhaps we'd want to do it.
		And then, you know, she made a point that he was in danger of a rival gang.
		So now the America is responsible to protect other countries because he's in a gang and he's going to be, he's fighting with another gang or another gang is dangerous to him.
		I mean, how far do we go to protect the rest of the world?
		A lot of things she said did not make very good sense to me.
		All right.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from Mary Lou in Newington, Connecticut on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Mary Lou.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		Now, Miss Whaley, she says she is a professor of law.
		How did she get into law school if she does not know what the word illegal means?
		The word illegal means it is not legal.
		The people coming across our border came across illegally, and they do not have any right to due process because they are illegal.
		I would like her to answer my question if she knows what illegal means.
		And I would like to hear what she says about that.
		Thank you.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Unfortunately, Mary Lou, she's already gone for the day, but did you have any other points that you wanted to make?
unidentified		I'm looking at her on my screen right now.
		No, but I want to say to you, too, and C-SPAN and everybody, the word illegal means that these people have no rights.
		I mean, the judge in Baltimore or anything, they can't say that the guy can come back from Ecuador, El Salvador, because he is not legal.
		My husband was an immigrant, and he came into this country, and he had to wait five years to pull his green card.
		He came as an immigrant, and he had to be legal.
		Legal means not an illegal.
		I'm sorry, I get so excited.
		Thank you for listening.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Dave is in Maryland on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Dave.
unidentified		Yeah, I'd just like to say that our democracy is eroding.
		The only thing that keeps us, keeps democracy in place here are the judges standing up to Donald Trump, who really doesn't exactly know what the hell he's doing, okay, with tariffs and the immigration.
		Freedom of speech is under fire, okay?
		So, I mean, you may not agree with what some people say, but you're still free to say it, okay?
		The whole country is getting a vibe that's not very good.
grant in minnesota [2] ▲ ● ▼		He promised to bring prices down, and yet where are the prices going?
unidentified		They're going higher.
		I wanted to buy an SUV.
		Will I be able to do it?
		Probably not because of this tariff.
		And how in turn does that affect people making vehicles?
		So I think like, you know, Donald Trump is just doing a terrible job.
		And, you know, people need to stand up, protest, get out, and call your congressmen, senators, and tell them what you think of what's going on.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Next up is Armando in Fairfax, Virginia on our line for Republicans.
unidentified		Good morning, Armando.
		Good morning.
		Thanks for getting my call.
		I'm an immigrant from South America, and I live most of my life in this country.
		What I don't understand is how can the first caller call Donald Trump and all the White House dignitaries now criminals when the last four years it was The administration who led all these criminals coming into the country, and now look what we're doing.
		Donald Trump wants the best for this country.
		And I don't understand why Democrats think like they hate Donald Trump because he defends the Constitution of the United States and for the people who voted for him.
		I mean, they're going to go and get protest because a patriot guy, a true American, is trying to save the United States from all these countries that they abuse and their enemies.
		I really don't understand that.
		How can you be against your country?
		And now you're defending terrorists and criminals and MSM-13 members.
		I mean, what about when Iran, Russia, and all the enemies get hostage Americans?
		Do any of these Democrats in Congress go and have margaritas and drinks and coffee with them to save them?
		It's so ridiculous to me to see this.
		And now that I'm not a Native American, as you see, my accent is heavy, but anybody can understand that these Democrats are enemies of the United States.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay, let's hear from John in St. Louis, Missouri on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, John.
unidentified		Hi, thank you for taking my call.
		Wow, I've had a lot to say, but I really want to speak to Armando now.
		Armando, I am not a Democrat.
		I call the Democrat line.
		I'm not a Republican.
		What I am is an American, and I'm an African American at that.
		There are a lot of things that I agree with Mr. Trump on.
		I don't believe in illegal immigrants being in the country.
		I do believe in a president that's going to stand up for our borders and protect us from our enemies like Russia and other dictatorship type countries.
		But Mr. Trump isn't doing that, sir.
		And I don't want us to make this as about an issue about Republicans or Democrats, because guess what?
		We're all the same.
		But what we're seeing here is a president that promised us that he would run for a third term.
		Donald Trump is playing chess, not checkers.
		And what he's doing is he's testing the legal aspects of the Constitution.
		And if he can get past those walls of the Constitution and with no issues or anything behind it, trust me, he will set up where he can change that Constitution and seek a third term.
		And he does that on just about any issue that he wants to do it on.
		We have to remember as Americans, not Democrats or Republicans, that America is great because of our diversity.
		And if we are able to allow immigrants like yourself, Armando, to come over and do the legal process and become legal, that's what makes America great.
		And most of these people that were deported, they weren't criminals and they weren't here illegally.
		They're students being ripped off the streets from school who are here on with with immigration papers to go to school.
		I mean, Donald Trump basically is doing whatever he wants to do, Armando, America.
		And remember, Armando, if you can't see that, then you could very well be the next person that he deports.
		As an African American who actually founded this country, I'm worried because I can get deported or anything based on any allegation that he wants to make as long as he can get past this hurdle because that's what he's doing now.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		I'm going to get to some other folks.
		Let's hear from Cindy in New Jersey on our line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Cindy.
unidentified		Yes, good morning, C-SPAN.
		Good morning, Kimberly.
		I guess my concern is it just seems that everyone from South America seems to be deported.
		What about other countries, Asia, Poland, Italy?
		What about these other people that are being that need to be deported?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Can you turn down the volume on your TV, please, Cindy?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		And then go ahead and continue.
unidentified		Yes, I'm concerned that being a person of color, that I could be picked up at any time, as the person from Missouri was saying.
		I guess my concern is it's just not everyone from South America that should be deported.
		What about the other countries?
		And that's my comment.
		Have a great day, everyone.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Next up is Andrea in Texas on our line for independence.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Andrea.
unidentified		Thank you so much.
		You know, I'm listening to everyone, and I'm an independent.
		And the guy from Missouri hit it for me right on point, trying to help everyone to get away from your tribal thinking.
		This is not about Donald Trump, people.
		It's not.
		And I think that every time we bring his name up, that kind of triggers something in the people who voted for him.
		But it's not about him.
		This is about the legal judicial system that we have.
		That's what this is about.
		The woman that was on there a while ago is a lawyer.
		She was not advocating illegally or not illegally.
		She was simply telling us the law.
		And then you had a woman right after that come and say that she was defending a guy that is here illegally.
		No, she wasn't.
		We have to learn how to listen.
		We hear, but we're not listening.
		This is not about Donald Trump.
		There are some things that I like that he's doing.
		Like the guy again from Missouri said, I like that he is, you know, don't want illegals here.
		But it's the way that he's doing it is the problem.
		It's not that he's doing it, it's the way that he's doing it.
		You guys have to listen to that.
		It's not about the Donald Trump.
		It's just the way that he's doing it.
		And didn't we just finish talking about Easter?
		What happened to that Christianity stuff we just talked about a while ago?
		This is the hypocrisy that we were talking about earlier.
		Are we Christians or are we not?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Now let's hear from Carol in Elgin, Texas on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Carol.
unidentified		Good morning, C-SPAN, and thank you for taking my call.
		And the answer is yes, I'm a Christian.
		I'd like to wish everybody a happy Easter.
		Hope you have a wonderful day.
		And it's always good to kind of start off things by thinking what would Jesus do.
		And I agree with the lady, the previous color, that this is about the legal system in the United States.
		I did not vote for Donald Trump.
		I don't like Donald Trump, but he cannot, and I think he cannot just sit here and override the Constitution.
		And we're seeing it happen in front of our face.
		And the question is, what are we going to do about it?
		And that's why it's a constitutional crisis.
		But there was a lady that called early and said these people don't have rights because they're illegal.
		It's completely wrong.
		If you're in this country and you're standing on the ground of the United States of America, you have the same rights that everybody does.
		You're protected by the Constitution, whether you're a citizen or not.
		We're all protected under the same document and by the same laws called equal protection under the law.
		And we see Donald Trump doing a lot of things.
		And I need people to think about things.
		This isn't, I don't really want to mention Trump, but it's what he's doing to the Constitution.
		Remember, he's making an argument right now that's going to be coming up in May in front of the Supreme Court on the 14th Amendment about citizenship obtained by being born here, which is how all of us right now who are listening, most of us, except for Armando, attain our citizenship by being born here, and he wants to change the 14th Amendment.
		That's a really interesting thing to watch happen.
		And I want everybody who believes in the Second Amendment to pay attention to that case.
		Because if the president, by presidential decree, can change an amendment to the Constitution, and he can do it because he doesn't like a clause in the 14th Amendment, then that means another president who comes along after him can start changing the Second Amendment.
		And you've had people mention they don't like the rulings that are coming down on the Second Amendment and things that aren't being enforced.
		But think about that.
		The amendments to the Constitution are put in the Constitution through a ratification process.
		And it takes, I believe, three-quarters of the states to ratify an amendment to the Constitution.
		It has to be proposed in Congress.
		It has to be voted on.
		It has to be passed.
		And then it has to be ratified by all the states, which is exactly why we don't have the Equal Rights Amendment for women, because it hasn't been ratified yet.
		So I wish everybody have a happy Easter.
		I wish you'd think about what Jesus would do.
		And I really think you need to back off a little bit and realize we all have the protection of the Constitution.
		That's why it was written to make our country a greater place and provide for a better country and a better union.
		And I thank you for taking my call.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Judy is in South Beach, Oregon, on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Judy.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Oops, I got to turn my TV down.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
unidentified		Well, the last guy kind of stole my thunder.
		But another thing I'd like to point out is when the senator from Maryland went to El Salvador and had lunch with Garcia, look at the way he was dressed.
		Garcia was dressed in the clothes he was picked up.
		And he was picked up after he worked, after he got done working.
		He picked up his son and was going home.
		To me, just look at he had a plaid shirt.
		He did not look like he was a gang member.
		Just, you know, stop listening to what Trump is telling you and start watching what he's doing and how he's doing it.
		He just doesn't care about anybody that isn't of value to him.
		And we're in a very dangerous situation.
		I've been going to the protest and I was carrying a sign saying, save our democracy.
		I'm going to change my sign to fight to get our democracy back because we have lost so much with the Trump administration controlling the Justice Department, controlling all aspects of government.
		We have to fight like hell to get it back.
		Thank you very much.
		Bye-bye.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Travis is in Warren, Texas, on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Travis.
unidentified		Yes.
		I was a Democratic.
		I voted Democratic up till the first time Donald Trump ran.
		And that man changed this country.
		He gave people the right to Travis, you still there?
		Yes, ma'am.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		I said, I voted for Donald Trump all my life.
		I voted for a Democrat all my life.
		And when Donald Trump went for office, I voted for him because I realized that Democrat is not for anybody.
		And they're for themselves, like Nancy Felosi and all them.
		When they go in, they're not billionaires, but when they go out, they're billionaires.
		And just like the people in California.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Ruben is in Austin, Texas on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Ruben.
unidentified		Yes, sir.
		Good morning for taking my call.
		I want to start off by saying that I was a Democrat all my life, not really knowing the issues between a Republican and a Democrat.
		And the first term of Obama, that's when he got vetted.
		You know, he stands behind abortion, gays and lesbians.
		Look what's happening now.
		You know, what's been hit as a Christian, I don't want no unborn baby to be murdered.
		And the Democrats are their soul is so deeply entwined with that that it bothered me, you know, completely.
		As a Christian, I can't stand, I can't back a group that their golden, you know, what do you call it, is abortion.
		And now what's going on, you know, with men competing against women, toppling them in every sport and all that and everything.
		And I just got, you know, no common sense.
		They lost, the Democrats have lost their way and their common sense.
		It's the Democrat, the course that they have taken is everything that they touch, even the monuments and everything around the Boy Scouts, everything that they touch, they destroy.
		And I can't be with them.
		I'm going to be with the one that, the group that has common sense.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
		Matt is in Napoleon, Indiana on our line for independence.
		Good morning, Matt.
unidentified		Yeah.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Yes, go ahead.
unidentified		Okay, good deal.
		I was a Democrat, you know, and that's the party.
		I mean, that's only my opinion, plus a lot of others of crazy.
		You know, I know a lot of people which came over here legally.
		I am friends with a lot.
		I work around a lot.
		And they work for me.
		You know, I was a Democrat.
		It's a party of crazy.
		I don't really understand where this crazy is out coming from.
		What's their agenda?
		That's what I'm wanting to know.
		What is their agenda?
		What's their final outcome agenda?
		You know, you can bring illegals over here.
		Yeah, they did.
		And for one reason, change the democracy.
		They won't dilute.
		That's what it's all about.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Ty is in Sugar Creek, Ohio on our line for Republicans.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Ty.
unidentified		Yes, just like going to work now.
		I got a question.
		All these federal judges that write all these injunctions, why can't the president write an executive order that would stop the injunctions by if they get repealed and overturned, that that judge would be loses actual judgeship.
		Okay.
		Okay.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from Betty in New Jersey on our line for Democrats.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Betty.
unidentified		Hi, how are you doing today?
		Happy Easter.
		The reason I'm calling is I've been listening to everybody, and I just don't understand with the Supreme Court.
		They gave President Trump presidential immunity, and what the Supreme Court gives, they can also take away.
		And I personally feel he's going crazy with all these executive orders and all these decisions, whether it be with his cabinet, which in my opinion, he cries DEI.
		I think they're all a bunch of DEIs, and nobody stops them because of this power.
		Why doesn't the Supreme Court justice just find the intestinal fortitude, take it away?
		They take away his presidential immunity, then he's accountable for everything.
		I just feel he's doing all this because he knows no one can touch him.
		I don't feel all these lawyers that are kowtowing to him should.
		I don't think that whether you be Republican or Democrat in the House should count.
		He's one man.
		And I just, I seem so awestricken that so many people are afraid of one person.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Next up is James in Dubuque, Iowa on our line for independence.
		Good morning, James.
unidentified		All right.
		I think our legal immigration system is misguided.
		Most countries, like for example, my 65-year-old sister moved to Columbia.
		In order to do that, she had to prove that she could provide for herself.
		She lives very comfortably, in fact, better than she could here on her Social Security check.
		But most countries, you cannot go there and live for free as we provide for these millions and millions of people who come to take advantage of our system.
		It doesn't make any sense.
		We are bankrupt and we're being taken advantage of.
kimberly adams ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Well, that is all the time we have for Open Forum and for Washington Journal today.
		We're going to be back with another edition of the show tomorrow morning at 7 a.m. Eastern, and we hope you'll tune in then.
		Have a great day, and to those celebrating, happy Easter.
unidentified		C-SPAN's Washington Journal, a live forum involving you to discuss the latest issues in government, politics, and public policy from Washington, D.C. and across the country.
		Coming up Monday morning, former Trump Administration Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shilkin discusses proposed cuts to the VA, and then Axios politics reporter Brittany Gibson previews the week ahead at the White House and some news of the day.
		Also, Scott Kennedy of the Center for Strategic and International Studies discusses escalating trade tensions between the U.S. and China.
		C-SPAN's Washington Journal.
		Join the conversation live at 7 Eastern Monday morning on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, or online at c-SPAN.org.
		This morning, Vice President JD Vance met with Pope Francis at the Vatican.
		According to a release from the office of the Vice President, Mr. Vance expressed his gratitude to Pope Francis for inviting him to meet on Easter Sunday and for the hospitality the Vatican has extended to his family.
		Well, coming up next, President Trump speaks at an Easter prayer service and dinner at the White House.
		And then pop singer Katy Perry and TV personality Gail King are part of Blue Origin's historic all-female space crew and the new Shepard program's 11th human flight.
		And later, Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene holds a town hall at Ackworth Community Center in her home state of Georgia.
		Tonight, on C-SPAN's Q&A, technology reporter Nicole Kobe, author of The Long History of the Future, talks about how technology evolves and discusses why many predicted technologies, including driverless and flying cars, smart cities, Hyperloops, and autonomous robots, haven't become a reality.
nicole kobie ▲ ● ▼		If you've ever tried to build anything, you know, whether it's like an Ikea cabinet or, you know, something a little bit more complicated than that that doesn't come with instructions, it's very difficult to build something.
		So engineers who are working on these kinds of problems, you know, whether it's driverless cars Or flying cars, or I don't know, even sillier ideas like Hyperloop.
		They're taking science that we know works and they're applying it to the real world, to a physical object.
		And then they're trying to build that.
		And it's kind of in the details where things start to fall down a bit.
		It's kind of in how you actually make it happen, the materials you choose, the business model.

▲