CSPAN - Washington Journal 05/30/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 30, 2025 07:00-10:03 - CSPAN

03:02:57

Washington Journal 05/30/2025

Participants

Main

greta brawner

cspan 52:19

sean spicer

17:22

Appearances

brian lamb

cspan 01:46

chuck schumer

sen/d 01:13

donald j trump

admin 04:17

joni ernst

sen/r 01:57

karoline leavitt

admin 00:53

mark carney

can 02:03

peter navarro

admin 01:11

tammy bruce

00:45

Clips

col ronald d ray

00:21

dominic michael tripi

winn 00:25

jason riley

00:24

Callers

dennis in north carolina

callers 00:06

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		And former White House Press Secretary and digital show host Sean Spicer talks about political news of the day and media coverage of the Trump administration.
		Also, NAACP President and CEO Derek Johnson covers the fifth anniversary of the killing of George Floyd and reaction to Trump administration policies so far.
		Washington Journal is next.
		Join the conversation.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, everyone.
		Welcome to the Washington Journal.
		On this Friday, May 30th, we'll begin with President Trump's trade and tariff agenda.
		After two courts this week struck down the president's sweeping tariffs.
		Do you support President Trump's tariffs and trade agenda?
		That is our conversation in this first hour of the Washington Journal.
		Democrats, join us at 202-748-8000.
		Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Independents, 202-748-8002.
		You can text instead of calling at 202-748-8003.
		Just include your first name, city and state, or post on facebook.com slash C-SPAN.
		And you can also go to X and post with the handle at C-SPANWJ.
		Good morning, everyone.
		We'll get to your thoughts in a minute.
		Let's start with a recent poll that was done in the month of May by Marquette Law School.
		When they asked people, what do you think of the president's job on tariffs?
		63% said that they disapprove of how he's handling tariffs, while 37% said they approve.
		Do you agree or disagree with those numbers by Marquette School?
		We'll get to your thoughts here in just a minute on whether or not you support the president's tariffs and trade agenda.
		At an event this week at the White House, the president was asked on Wednesday about his tariff policies, the actions that he's taken, on again, off-again tariff policy.
		And this is what he had to say in response to a reporter's question.
unidentified		Mr. President, Wall Street analysts have coined a new term called the taco trade.
unidentified		They're saying Trump always chickens out on your tariff threats, and that's why markets are higher this week.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		What's your response to that?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I kick out.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Chicken out.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Oh, then I chicken out.
		I've never heard that.
		You mean because I reduced China from 145% that I set down to 100% and then down to another number?
		And I said you have to open up your whole country.
		And because I gave the European Union a 50% tax tariff, and they called up and they said, please let's meet right now.
		Please, let's meet right now.
		And I said, okay, I'll give you till June.
		I actually asked them, I said, what's the date?
		Because they weren't willing to meet.
		And after I did what I did, they said, we'll meet anytime you want.
		And we have an end date of July 9th.
		You call that chickening out?
		Because we have $14 trillion now invested, committed to investing when Biden didn't have practically anything.
		Biden, this country was dying.
		You know, we have the hottest country anywhere in the world.
		I went to Saudi Arabia.
		The king told me, he said, you got the hottest comp, we have the hottest country in the world right now.
		Six months ago, this country was stone cold dead.
		We had a dead country.
		We had a country people didn't think it was going to survive.
		And you ask a nasty question like that.
		It's called negotiation.
		You set a number.
		And if you go down, you know, if I set a number at a ridiculous high number, and I go down a little bit, you know, a little bit, they want me to hold that number.
		145% tariff.
		Even I said, man, that really got up.
		You know how it got?
		Because of fentanyl and many other things.
		And you added it up.
		I said, where are we now?
		We're at 145%.
		I said, whoa, that's high.
		That's high.
		They were doing no business whatsoever, and they were having a lot of problems.
		We were very nice to China.
		I don't know if they're going to be nice to us, but we were very nice to China.
		And in many ways, I think we really helped China tremendously because, you know, they were having great difficulty because we were basically going cold turkey with China.
		We were doing no business because of the tariff, because it was so high.
		But I knew that.
		But don't ever say what you said.
		That's a nasty question.
		Go ahead, to me.
		That's the nastiest question.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		President Trump in the Oval Office on Wednesday asked by a reporter about his on-again, off-again tariff policies.
		This morning, we want to get your thoughts on that after two courts ruled against him.
		You heard the president talking about those tariffs against China, 145%.
		The International Trade Court in New York ruled against the president this week on these sweeping tariffs.
		Now, their ruling on appeal is halted until the appeals court can take a look at this case.
		So his tariffs stay in place for now.
		We'll get your thoughts on all of that coming up here on the Washington Journal.
		But first, we want to talk to Dan Primack, who's a business editor with Axios.
		He joins us this morning to talk about an announcement by President Trump later today.
		What will we hear from him?
unidentified		Well, we're not exactly sure, but the announcement is going to be about U.S. Steel, which is the big Pittsburgh-based steel company, which agreed well over a year ago in late 2023 to be acquired by a Japanese company called Nippon Steel.
		And when it agreed to that, President Trump, who wasn't yet president, running for president, said he opposed the deal.
		He thought U.S. Steel should remain American.
		President Biden then actually blocked the deal, saying it was a national security concern.
		Now it seems that there is an agreement.
		Exactly what it is, no one quite knows.
		People on the inside suggest it's the original takeover with Nippon agreeing to do additional U.S. investment.
		But Peter Navarro, the president's economic advisor, yesterday poured some cold water on that.
		So it's really a TBD.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Well, what were the specific national security reasons given by the Biden administration and what process did they go through?
unidentified		They were pretty weak, to be honest.
		The president doesn't really have to enumerate them.
		He really just has to say national security concerns, which is why U.S. Steel sued after that for a case that's currently in court.
		Although if Trump allows the deal to go through, that case kind of becomes irrelevant.
		You know, there is basically the belief that steel is an essential component to a lot of the U.S., including in the military.
		And thus, if there was, for example, if a foreign company was to buy it and say, shut it down immediately or reduce the quality of the steel, that could create national security concerns.
		What was always so strange about this, though, was this is a Japanese company, and Japan is one of the U.S.'s strongest allies.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		So, what have the U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel, what have they said leading up to this announcement by the president later today?
unidentified		Absolutely nothing.
		That's actually not completely true.
		U.S. Steel on Friday, last Friday, issued a brief statement, basically just praising President Trump, basically kind of just kissing his butt a little bit.
		Beyond that, they've said nothing.
		And as a business reporter, what's so interesting about this is you have the president basically suggesting there is a deal, and you have this merger agreement out there to take a public company private.
		There's a share price.
		It's $55 a share, this buyout offer.
		The stock has traded all this week.
		The New York Stock Exchange has opted not to halt the stock, which it almost always would do if there was a pending merger agreement.
		It won't explain why it's not.
		And U.S. Steel has kept its mouth shut.
		Nippon has kept its mouth shut.
		The White House has talked a little bit, but hasn't gotten into details.
		This is in an age of not normal in the business world, this is beyond not normal.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Well, you said that the chaotic process has, quote, opened the door for potential impropriety.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		What did you mean?
unidentified		I mean there is a group of people.
		We don't know how small or how big, who know what's going to be announced this afternoon, who know if there's going to be a merger at $55 a share.
		And if you know there's going to be a merger at $55 a share and the stock's been trading kind of between 52 and 53 this week, you'd mortgage everything you've got and buy as much stock as you could.
		You don't.
		The reason that these agreements, when there is one, get announced fairly quickly is to reduce the possibility of insider trading because you've got lawyers and you've got people at the company, in this case, lots of politicians who know what's happening.
		Here, you get a quasi-announcement last Friday.
		Trump isn't going to speak until 5 p.m. today in Pittsburgh, which is after the markets close.
		You have a large universe of people who know what's going to happen here, deal or no deal.
		That creates just an enormous opportunity for insider trading, which is usually why the exchange would halt it or the SEC would take a look, but the SEC has also been completely silent.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		So, what are you watching for next?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		I mean, is this whatever the president announces, is it a done deal or is there a role for Congress?
unidentified		I don't believe there's a role for Congress.
		I mean, if President Trump announces that there is an agreement that Nippon and U.S. Steel have agreed not only to the merger agreement, but also some additional qualifications.
		For example, there's this talk of a so-called golden share, which means the U.S. government wouldn't have equity in U.S. steel, but would have a say in how it's operated.
		So, we want to see the details.
		We also want to see the details of this supposed $14 billion of investment from Nippon into U.S. Steel, into U.S. steel-making capabilities, whether there is anything kind of firm about that or whether it's kind of just a handshake agreement.
		I will tell you: the Steel Workers Union, which has opposed this deal from the get-go, they came out with a statement the other day basically saying, as of right now, they don't really believe the promises because the initial investment promises, which were much smaller before Trump got involved, were really just that-promises.
		There was nothing forcing Nippon Steel to make good on it at any point.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Dan Primack, business editor with Axios, will be watching later today.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Thank you for teeing it up.
unidentified		Thank you.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		And we'll have coverage of the president's announcement, 5 p.m. Eastern Time, as you just heard, in Pennsylvania at the U.S. Steel Iron Works.
		You can watch that right here on C-SPAN on our free video mobile app, C-SPANNOW, or online at c-span.org.
		Back to our question here this morning: Do you support President Trump's tariffs and trade agenda?
		That is the conversation we're going to have here on the first hour of the Washington Journal.
		There are the lines on your screen.
		If you're a Democrat, dial in at 202-748-8000.
		If you're a Republican, 202-748-8001.
		And Independents, 202-748-8002.
		The President's tariffs and trade policies in the headlines this morning.
		Take a look at the national newspapers and their headlines, starting with the Wall Street Journal this morning: Appeals Court lets tariffs stand for now.
		A federal appeals court temporarily put a hold on a ruling that would that would that voided President Trump's tariffs while it considers the administration's challenge to the lower court decision.
		And then this is from USA Today this morning: Court tangles up Trump's tariffs.
		Levies continue as the appeals play out.
		And the Washington Post this morning, Trump trade gambit hobbled by setbacks.
		You also have the Washington Times rulings add more uncertainty to trade.
		And finally, this morning, the New York Times rulings on tariffs clash, clouding the president's trade outlook.
		Let's get to your thoughts.
		Joe in Epworth, Georgia, Republican.
		Joe, do you support the president's tariffs and trade agenda?
unidentified		Hey, Grandma, I love C-SPAN.
		Been calling your great network for over 30 years.
		I totally support Trump, not only on tariffs, but on everything he's doing.
		I think he's the best president in the history of the world, and I think with him as president, we'll have the best economy and stock market in world history.
		So I'm a fired-up Trump supporter, as are most people in my hometown of LJ, Georgia.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Steve, Tampa, Florida, Republican.
unidentified		Good morning, Greta.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		I have a comment on tariffs, but first I'd like to correct something that was misstated yesterday.
		A caller called in and said that the no tax on Social Security not being in the bill was a hoax.
		It was not a hoax.
		Now, the host of your show agreed by not shaking her head that it was a hoax.
		The reason for that not being in the bill was the Robert Byrd rule of the Senate, which prevents any changes to Social Security during a reconciliation bill.
		It has to be in a normal manner.
		So I just wanted to correct that.
		Okay.
		As far as the tariffs, certainly I'm a supporter of Trump.
		He's negotiating.
		People, that reporter yesterday called him a taco because he changed what he's doing.
		That's what negotiation is.
		You go in, you throw out a number, and then you see the response.
		He knows what he's doing.
		He's trying to reduce the national debt of $37 trillion, and he will be successful at it.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Steve, what do you make, though, of those on the other side of the negotiating table?
		Not the criticism being that they won't take him seriously.
		If he backs down, what leverage does he have if he continues to back away from these steep tariffs?
unidentified		He doesn't back away.
		He negotiates.
		Now, the trade court never said anything about Biden's administration continuing the tariffs in the last administration.
		These are the same tariffs that Trump had put in the first time, and the Biden administration continued to use those tariffs.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Under the same act, though, Steve, did the president use this emergency act that he's using this time around during the first administration?
		Because that is what the court ruled on.
		And I'm just going to read from the Washington Times.
		Rulings add more uncertainty to trade.
		The trade court ruled that the 1970s-era law, Mr. Trump was using the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, doesn't give the president the expansive powers he is claiming to impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country in the world.
		That last part, a quote from this international trade court.
		Tom in Bethesda, Maryland, Democratic caller.
		Tom, let's hear from you.
unidentified		Hi, I strongly agree with Trump's tariffs.
		First off, they're sending the markets into absolute chaos.
		They're sending every business into chaos, especially small businesses, large ones too.
		Many of the trade deals these companies and individuals have made, some of them took years and years to establish, been going on for years smoothly.
		And this just sends an immediate wrench into it all.
		We're going to be feeling the ramifications for a very long time.
		Very, very long time.
		Our economy might never quite recover the same way again as these trade deals that were made are lost to other countries.
		And we have suffered through long-term impacts that will diminish our country economically.
		And I find that true for much of what Trump does.
		We are seeing so much dismantlement of American deals and institutions that we will be sealing for decades and decades to come as we lose our place as a world power.
		This is an absolutely embarrassing downfall of America.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Tom, what have you personally, how have you personally reacted to the president's tariff and trade agenda?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Have you made some financial decisions based on it?
unidentified		Here and there.
unidentified		Here and there.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		What are they?
unidentified		I don't want to go into too much details.
		Investments and backing less spending on certain things.
		Definitely being more careful with my wallet.
		Okay.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Tom there in Bethesda, Maryland.
		We'll go to Willie, who's an independent, Little Rock, Arkansas.
		Good morning to you, Willie.
		Thanks, Donnie.
unidentified		Hi, here and there.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Willie, you have got to mute your television.
		Just listen and talk through your phone.
		Are you there with us, Willie?
		All right, I have to move on.
		Dave, who's in South Dennis, Massachusetts, Independent?
		Morning, Dave.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Good morning.
		I remember many, many, many years ago when many, if not most Republicans were free traders.
		Well, that's gone down the tubes.
		The tariffs are on, the tariffs are off, they're high, they're low.
		I don't know how a businessman is existing today.
		Tariffs just kill things.
		We made a big trade agreement almost with Great Britain.
		We have a trade surplus with Great Britain.
		Like, why would you do that?
		That's insanity.
		And I guess the biggest place to attack is China.
		We want everything built in the United States.
		I'm not certain, but I think most of Trump's MAGA hats are made in China.
		So that's like hypocrisy.
		And it's going to kill our country.
		It's going to kill the people who want to start a business or continue a business.
		And, you know, I live here on Cape Cod, and already people are reporting that Canadians are not coming here.
		And in the summer, you used to see plates all over the place from Canada.
		So we'll see what happens.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Dave, let me pick up on that and talk about this court ruling by the International Trade Court.
		You said it's going to devastate businesses, and that's what these businesses argued.
		I'll get to that in a second, but let's begin with what the court ruled on.
		And this is from the New York Times this morning.
		A U.S. trade court struck down tariffs imposed by President Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, but a federal appeals court temporarily paused the ruling.
		Tariffs under a separate national security provision are not affected.
		So here is what was ruled illegal by the trade court.
		All the tariffs on China, on all goods, at 30%.
		That's the latest rate.
		For Mexico, most goods at 25%.
		Canada, also most goods, 25%.
		And then this baseline tariff that the president put in place on Liberation Day of 10% on all countries, they ruled that that was illegal as well.
		The reciprocal 60-plus countries, that's paused.
		So that from the New York Times on this international trade courts ruling.
		Now, about the case itself, turning you to the Wall Street Journal's reporting this morning on this, states cite rising costs to justify this tariff suit.
		On Wednesday, the U.S. Court of International Trade sided with 12 states and a handful of small business owners in ruling that Trump didn't have the authority to impose sweeping tariffs.
		These states, which all have Democratic attorneys general, included a basic argument to justify the suit.
		The levies will lift prices for things that they buy.
		goes on to say that the economic arguments made it possible for the states to sue in the first place.
		And they explain why states that account for just one-fifth of the U.S. population played a role in at least temporarily blocking tariffs affecting the entire country.
		One of those states was Oregon.
		The argument revolved in part around a cryogenic system used to detect photons.
		According to the complaint, the state-run University of Oregon bought such a system from a Swiss manufacturer in November 2024 for $182,733.
		But the system didn't ship until April.
		By that point, tariffs were in effect and the university had to pay an additional $18,579, according to the customs broker.
		Delaware said its transportation department would have to pay more for tractor parts made in Mexico and for chainsaws and trimmers made in Germany.
		Among other imports, New York State cited potentially higher costs of construction materials and Canadian electricity imports.
		Illinois said it buys around 15,000 imported computers for state employees each year, and it has to pay the cost of any tariff under its contract with the supplier.
		Those are some of the states and small businesses who sued the administration over these so-called Liberation Day policies.
		Let's listen to the president's trade advisor in the administration.
		He came to the reporters yesterday, Peter Navarro, outside the White House just minutes after the appeals court reinstated the president's tariffs for now while the appeal plays out.
		This is what he had to say.
unidentified		The tariffs remain in place.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		The court told us, they didn't all but tell us, they told us, go do it another way.
unidentified		So you can assume that even if we lose, we will do it another way.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		And I can assure the American people that the Trump tariff agenda is alive, well, healthy, and will be implemented to protect you, to save your jobs and your factories, and to stop shipping foreign wealth, our wealth into foreign hands.
unidentified		So you are working on a plan B, right?
		Of course.
		There's no Plan B.
		It's Plan A, okay?
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		Plan A encompasses all strategic options.
unidentified		And when we move forward, we had a full view of what the battlefield looks like.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		We are not naive about rogue justices in the judiciary and Democrats filing lawsuits.
unidentified		This has got to stop, by the way.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		This weaponization of the judiciary to stop President Trump from doing what he promised the American people, this has got to stop.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Peter Navarro in the White House driveway yesterday talking to reporters about that court's decision.
		You heard him say that they're going to pivot.
		Now, the Wall Street Journal front page this morning, they've got some details on how this administration could pivot based on what the court ruled.
		White House devises Plan B on trade policy.
		They say, first, the administration is considering a stopgap effort to impose tariffs on swaths of the global economy under a never-before-used provision of the Trade Act of 1974, which includes language allowing for tariffs up to 15% for 150 days to address trade imbalances with other countries.
		That would then buy time for Trump to devise individualized tariffs for each major trading partner under a different provision, it says, under the same law used to counter unfair foreign trade practices.
		So, the administration eyeing a different plan here in response to the courts, the International Trade Court, we're having you tell Washington, lawmakers, and this president what you think of this administration's tariffs and trade agenda.
		Dave, let's hear from, excuse me, let's go to Sandra, who's in North Carolina, Democratic caller.
		Hi, Sandra.
unidentified		Hello.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
		It's your turn.
		What do you think of the president's tariffs and trade agenda?
unidentified		I think it's nothing but an extortion racket.
unidentified		If he doesn't get money under the table from all of these countries for himself, there is no trade deal with this country.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Randy in Salem, Virginia, Independence.
		We'll go to you, Randy.
		What do you think?
unidentified		Well, I live in a blue-collar community where people rely on factory jobs to support the families.
		And for years, we've been seeing these factory jobs pack up and go overseas because they can't afford to pay the tariffs that they're charging us.
		So people here are going hungry because the factory jobs are leaving.
		And people say that Trump's trying to line his pockets with under-the-table money.
		No, that was the last administration.
		And I'm not a Trump supporter by no means, but I agree with him 100% that fair is fair.
		If they're going to charge us these tariffs, we should charge them to make it even across the board.
		That way, maybe they'll drop their tariffs and we can afford to keep our American factory jobs here in America and keep our American people employed.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Randy, why don't you hang on the line?
		I want to play for you the Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer of New York.
		And what he had to argue on the Senate floor is that these tariffs are going to hurt middle and lower class families.
		Let's listen to what he had to say and get your response on the other side.
chuck schumer ▲ ● ▼		Donald Trump's trade war strikes again.
		Walmart announced today it plans to raise prices in stores across America because of Donald Trump's tariffs.
		Here is what Walmart will say on its earning call: quote, given the magnitude of the tariffs, even at the reduced levels announced this week, we aren't able to absorb all the pressure given the reality of narrow retailed margins, unquote.
		Walmart's raising prices is a canary in the coal mine for the devastation Trump's tariffs will have on Main Street.
		If a retailer as big as Walmart can't escape the pain of tariffs, what chance do small businesses have?
		Their customers are inevitably going to see prices rise.
		Walmart's announcement is a glaring reminder that even after supposedly backtracking on some of his tariffs, significant damage will not go away.
		The chaos he's unleashed is eating away at retailers, restaurants, small businesses, and middle-class families' wallets.
		It's still estimated these tariffs will cost thousands of dollars for each family each year.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		The Democratic leader in the Senate a few weeks ago on the Senate floor there talking about the president's tariffs agenda hurting middle-class and lower-class families.
		Randy, you held on the line.
		Well, how do you respond to Senator Schumer?
unidentified		Well, like I said, you know, what's hurting the middle-class families is not being able to have a job because the factories are shutting down and going to Mexico and going to China and going to other countries.
unidentified		So there's no jobs for people to have.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		That's what's hurting the people.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Donnie in Horse Cave, Kentucky, Republican.
		Donnie, let's hear from you.
unidentified		Yes, I think we're all not seeing the whole full picture.
		Trump is trying to bring jobs back.
		I mean, common sense has to kick in.
		If we're not, if we don't have jobs, we can't buy the store merchandise in the first place.
		So why would that even matter if we don't have jobs?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		That's kind of my take on it.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Donnie, making the same argument as the previous caller, Mark in Cloverdale, Indiana, Independent.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Mark, what do you think?
unidentified		Good morning.
		Yes.
		I'm calling in to say that we don't need to be supporting all the other countries in the world, especially like the European Union.
		We have to pay their military bills and we have to give them the edge on trade.
		I was over in England years ago and most of the people just wander around.
		I saw hardly no factories going.
		Nobody really outwork it.
		Only thing they were selling is their monarchy and their history to foreigners.
		And I thought to myself, we're supporting all this.
		It's about time we stand up as Americans and say, enough is enough.
		We're going to work here and we're going to keep what we have.
		I'm 78 years old.
		I worked 80 hours a week until I was 75 years of age.
		And I don't feel that I have to be paying taxes or supporting trade things with other countries when the French people don't hardly work at all and all they can do is lay on the beach.
		Even the Canadians are that way.
		These socialistic countries are continuing to take advantage of us.
		It's time that we take care of our own children here and love them and make sure that they have jobs, that they continue to progress, and also that we don't get rid of our own workforce and abortion clinics.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Mark there in Indiana, USA, today, front page this morning.
		Court tangles up Trump's tariffs.
		The Court of International Trade ruled May 28th that Trump didn't have the authority under the legislation and emergency he cited April 2nd to impose the tariffs on imports.
		After an uproar, Trump paused most of the tariffs for 90 days to hammer out trade deals with specific countries.
		Separately, on May 29th, a federal judge blocked the Trump administration from collecting tariffs from a pair of Illinois toy importers.
		U.S. District Judge ordered the administration May 29th not to collect tariffs from learning resources in Hand to Mine based in Vernon Hills, Illinois, while the case is litigated.
		The two court decisions drew immediate condemnation from the Trump White House as government lawyers appealed the trade court ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and argued it removes the leverage the president sought to bring countries to the negotiating table.
		Now, the president's posting on Truth Social after that decision, the U.S. Court of International Trade incredibly ruled against the United States of America on desperately needed tariffs.
		But fortunately, he goes on to talk about the full 11-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Court has just stayed the order by the Manhattan-based Court of International Trade.
		He says about the International Trade Court, where do these initial three judges come from?
		How is it possible for them to have potentially done such damage to the United States of America?
		Is it purely a hatred of Trump?
		What other reasons could it be, the president said about this international trade court?
		Now, A little bit more about this trade court in the papers this morning, the Wall Street Journal reporting on it.
		It's based in Manhattan, as the President says.
		There are justices on, judges, excuse me, on the court, and usually it's a three-panel ruling.
		This is from the New York Times this morning.
		It currently has 14 judges appointed by six presidents.
		A single judge typically presides over a case, but a three-judge panel hears cases that raise constitutional questions or have significant implications, like the Trump tariff case.
		Congress created the court in 1980 as a successor to the U.S. Customs Court.
		The Customs Court had operated for decades in Manhattan, a legacy of when New York City was the busiest harbor for U.S. imports.
		The current court has largely operated in obscurity.
		Here's a quote: Most lawyers will get out of law school without knowing that it exists, said one specialist attorney.
		Now, reaction from Canada came from the Canadian Prime Minister to the International Trade Court's ruling, but before there was a stay put on that ruling.
		And this is what Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney had to say.
mark carney ▲ ● ▼		Mr. Speaker, the government welcomes yesterday's decision by the U.S. Court of International Trade, which is consistent with Canada's long-standing position that the U.S. IEPA tariffs were unlawful as well as unjustified.
		That said, we recognize that our trading relationship with the United States is still profoundly and adversely threatened and affected by similarly unjustified 232 tariffs against steel, aluminum, and the auto sector, as well as continuing threats of tariffs against other strategic sectors, including lumber, semiconductors, and pharmaceuticals.
		It therefore remains the top priority of Canada's new government to establish a new economic and security relationship with the United States and to strengthen our collaboration with reliable trading partners and allies around the world.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		The Canadian Prime Minister reacting to the International Trade Court ruling against the President.
		Now that ruling is paused until the Appeals Court can take a closer look at it.
		We're getting your reaction this morning and asking whether or not you support President Trump's tariffs and trade agenda.
		There are the lines on your screen.
		Democrats 202-748-8000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		You can also text, include your first name, city, and state at 202-748-8003.
		Post on facebook.com/slash C-SPAN or on X with the handle at C-SPANWJ.
		Andy in Phoenix, Arizona, Republican.
		Good morning to you, Andy.
unidentified		Good morning to you, Greta.
		Hey, I believe that the executive has the privilege to negotiate tariffs with other heads of state and not the judicial.
		There's two acts.
col ronald d ray ▲ ● ▼		There's the 1934 Reciprocal Tariff Act, which gives the president the latitude to negotiate tariffs with other foreign leaders, unless I read it wrong, but there's also a 1974 Trade Act that also gives the President latitude to negotiate tariffs.
unidentified		So the appeals court probably put it on pause, the ruling, because they're going to have to figure this out.
		Because, again, the executive does have the privilege, and you can look up those two acts.
		And if I'm wrong on that, you can correct me and I'll gladly eat what I just said.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Well, then if the president can do that, then why didn't he just use that act rather than this emergency act that he put in place, you know, sweeping tariffs?
unidentified		Not sure why that one, but maybe these come to light and they can basically adjust and use those acts. to move forward on the tariffs.
		I am for reciprocal tariffs.
		I don't think it's fair if you had a business and you were doing trade with other businesses and they wanted to charge you more than you charge them.
		So there is an unbalance of trade.
		And this Trump going back and forth, like some of the other callers said, I believe it's just negotiations, right?
		When you go sell something, you may want $4,000 for it and you end up selling it for $3,500.
		That doesn't make you a loon.
		It's just part of negotiation.
		But again, the 1934 Reciprocal Tariff Act and the 1974 Trade Act does give the president that latitude.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		You may be interested in this.
unidentified		Thank you.
unidentified		Yep.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Andy, you may be interested in this column today by Jason Willick in the Washington Post.
		Tariff ruling is a big setback for Trump, he argues.
		And he says, whatever emergency economic powers Congress delegated to the president, the trade court held they can't go that far.
		Trump has claimed essentially unlimited tariffing power, but quote, an unlimited delegation of tariff authority would constitute an improper abdication of legislative power to another branch of government.
		Many rulings against Trump have been straightforward applications of settled constitutional principles.
		This trade court's opinion is bolder, cutting new ground on the separation of powers.
		After all, President Richard Nixon unilaterally imposed sweeping tariffs in 1971 in response to an economic crisis.
		In 1975, the U.S. Courts of Customs and Patent Appeals said that it did not exceed Nixon's authority.
		The trade court judges say Nixon's tariffs were more limited than Trump's, and that Congress in 1977 meant to constrict, not expand the president's tariff discretion.
		They also note that Congress in 1974 created a specific pathway for the president to respond to trade deficits with limited temporary tariffs, but that Trump did not invoke this authority.
		He reached for broader emergency powers instead.
		Thomas, Daytona Beach, Florida, Democratic caller.
		Good morning to you.
unidentified		All right.
		I think we need to look back a little bit in history real quick.
		NAFTA and the making China a favored trade partner.
		Those are Republican ideas.
		Those ideas, you don't have to take my word for it.
		You can go to the Library of Congress, people who really care, and you can look it up.
		It'll show you the vote totals and who voted for these things.
		I don't think Trump is really serious about trying to get jobs back here.
		If he was serious, he wouldn't be negotiating with the people in the other countries.
		He'd just say, hey, I got a dog here going crazy.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, he would just keep these tariffs in place.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Is that what you're saying?
unidentified		If he was interested in keeping jobs in the U.S. Yep, you know, he's not serious about it.
unidentified		If he was, he would put the tariff on there and leave it alone and see if the companies come back.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Thomas, I'm going to let you and your dog go this morning.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Susie in Macon, Georgia, Republican.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		Yes, I definitely support everything that Trump is doing.
		What I am hearing over and over again is people expecting perfection.
		No one's perfect.
		And you try something, it doesn't work.
		You try something else and you work it.
		And that is exactly what Trump is trying to do, but he is getting knocked down left and right, no matter what he tries to do.
		We forget that the last administration never made a mistake.
		Just ask them.
		My concern this morning, I would like to know these people who continually say that Trump is making money for himself off of what's going on.
		I would like someone to ask them for their proof of that.
		I have not seen any facts given related to that accusation.
		And I sure would like to know where their facts are.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Susie, Macon, Georgia, Republican.
		Tara, Columbus, Georgia, Democrat.
		Hi, Tara.
unidentified		Good morning.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Do you support the president's trade and tariffs agenda?
unidentified		No, ma'am.
		I do not support it at all.
		For me, I guess I go back from when my parents were actually working in the dental mill here in Georgia.
		And when those jobs went overseas, you know, it wasn't like they were going to get, I just don't feel like they're going to get those jobs back here.
		One, they're not going to pay people the money that it's going to take to run those meals.
		You can't just bring it back and think that you're going to make what, $7, $14, maybe even $10 working in the mills.
		It's just not enough to even just survive here off that type of money.
		I just don't feel like using the tariffs to try to bring jobs back over here is going to work.
		I just don't see it working at all.
		All right.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Tara's there.
		Tara in Columbus, Georgia, Democratic caller.
		More calls coming up.
		But first, some programming notes for you, starting with the front page of the New York Times.
		Here's a headline to share.
		Moscow steps up pace of invasion amid peace talks.
		Related to that, this morning, the UN Security Council will gather on the request of Russia to discuss the war with Ukraine.
		Russia is also alleging threats to international peace and security by European countries.
		And this comes amid a recent escalation in the conflict between the two countries, including a three-day drone assault on Ukraine.
		We will have coverage of the UN Security Council discussion live 10 a.m. Eastern Time on C-SPAN.
		You can download the free video mobile app, C-SPAN Now, if you're on the go or online on demand at c-span.org.
		And then at 1.30 p.m. Eastern Time, President Trump and Elon Musk will hold a press conference as Mr. Musk prepares to leave government service.
		He served, as you know, as a senior advisor to President Trump and head of the Department of Government Efficiency.
		That'll be live at 1.30 p.m. Eastern Time on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, our free video mobile app and online at c-span.org.
		Again, 1.30 p.m. Eastern Time, Elon Musk and the President holding a news conference.
		Mr. Musk is sure to be asked about his comments that the tax and spending bill was disappointing.
		So watch our coverage there.
		And then as we said earlier, 5 p.m. Eastern Time, the President is going to be making an announcement on steel ownership in this country.
		He's traveling to Pennsylvania to do this.
		It's at 5 p.m. live on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now or online at c-span.org.
		Stephen in Lexington, Kentucky, Independent.
		Let's hear from you on the president's trade and tariff policies.
unidentified		Yeah, good morning, and thank you for having me.
		I definitely don't agree with it.
		It's not, the way he uses it is very manipulative.
		It's like he's just trying to rig the system whenever he wants.
		And they call him Taco.
		I'm a millennial, and it's a joke around the whole millennial chat that Trump always chickens out.
		And it's because he wants to manipulate the market.
		He wants to be able to pull the rug whenever he wants.
		And when people call him out, he gets upset.
		So the lady that said, oh, I don't know how he's making money for himself.
		He's got a meme coin.
		Do you know what a meme coin is?
		It's a coin that doesn't really exist, but you're making money off of it because people think that there's value behind it.
		There's not.
		He sells hats.
		He used to sell stakes.
		Like, oh, and his kids, they all have contracts with Saudis, with the Qatari government.
		It's like the hypocritical people don't see that it goes both ways, Democratic and Republican.
		It's a rich versus poor deal.
		But back to the tariffs, it's not fair because every state gets affected by it.
		It doesn't matter what industry you're in.
		If you're buying stuff from other economies around the world, you're going to be affected by it.
		I'm in the manufacturing world, and clearly a lot of elderly people are retired right now, just sitting.
		In the manufacturing world, we're getting so struck back and forth.
		More money, you got to put in more money for inventory.
		Oh, wait, he changed his mind.
		We got to not put increased prices to our customers.
		Oh, wait, Trump once again changed his mind.
		It's like a wave pool back and forth.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		And how do you as a business, as a manufacturing company, how do you pivot quickly?
		Can you pivot quickly?
		I mean, once you put higher prices in place, you can take them back.
unidentified		No, you can't.
		See, we have not increased our prices in two and a half years because we were waiting for enough data points to make a decision for it.
		And we were actually waiting for our competitors to do the same, and nobody can figure out when to do it.
		It's so terrible right now in the manufacturing world.
		And there's not enough people for all the jobs that are supposed to come back here as we are taking away immigrants that would fill those jobs.
		It makes no sense.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		So I'm very against it.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Stephen in Lexington, Kentucky there in Independent.
		Let's listen to the president's economic council director, Kevin Hassett.
		He was in the White House Driveway too with reporters yesterday.
		And this is what he said on the potential impact of the legal and policy back and forth on tariffs and what it's doing to consumers and businesses.
unidentified		I'm not that worried about the uncertainty.
		In fact, if you look, we've had really strong job servers.
		We had an explosion in capital spending in the first quarter, 20% equipment spending up, 10% overall capital spending.
		And so what's happened is that the belief, it's not the uncertainty, the beliefs, the high confidence that President Trump is going to land this plane is making everybody create jobs in the U.S., move factories in the U.S., and receive, receive into the data.
		And so I don't think that there's a heck of a lot of uncertainty where we're going to, like, maybe someone wonders, is the rate going to be this or that at the margin, but I think people are highly confident that President Trump is going to land this plane.
		And that's why there's so much activity coming to the U.S., why job creation is so high.
		And why, by the way, we just had one of the biggest increases in consumer sentiment that we've ever seen because people understand, oh, now I understand what's going on.
		I see that this is going to happen and I'm planning according to it.
		Have you seen?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		One of the president's economic advisors, Kevin Hassett, yesterday, saying he's confident the president is going to land this plane on tariffs and trade.
		Do you agree with him?
		Continue to call in this morning.
		We'll get more of your calls here.
		Some reaction on Capitol Hill, though.
		Ed Markey, the senator from Massachusetts, saying Musk is out.
		Tariffs are blocked.
		Small businesses relieved.
		The court's decision provides much needed relief for Main Street.
		But rather than wait for an appeals process to play out, Congress should terminate this illegal emergency authority once and for all.
		Do you agree with the senator there?
		Should Congress step up and take action on the president's trade and tariffs agenda?
		And then Congressman Jimmy Panetta, continued progress in our fight for working families, our small businesses, and our economy.
		A federal court has checked the administration's reckless and chaotic use of tariffs, recognizing the balance of power when it comes to trade.
		I was proud to be on the Amicus brief, he says, for that ruling.
		Sidney in Brandon, Florida, Democratic callers, Sydney, let's hear from you on this.
		Do you support the president's tariffs and trade agenda?
unidentified		No, not at all.
		And one of the reasons is because, you know, if one of the focuses is to bring jobs back, the reality is businesses moved things out of the country to make more money.
		And the businesses are not just set up to hire people.
		I hear people talking about my job, my jobs.
		But the reality is, the jobs belong to the business.
		And if they don't need people to do the job, then they're not going to be hiring people.
		They're going to be just continuing to try to make themselves more stable.
		And the way that this is being done, and especially with Trump, who's a confidence type of guy, you know, he does a whole lot of stuff, and he's making money off of it simply because he can have people bet on the way this goes because there are people in the stock market that's not based on a lot of their stuff they're doing.
		You have people who are just who have money when they talk about the millionaires and billionaires that can invest.
		And they don't have businesses.
		They just have money.
		And so he's making money for people that when he changes this stuff back and forth, and we're not getting the benefit is not the country.
		The benefit is for them people that have money to play the market like they gambling down in Vegas.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Sidney.
		Let me go to Richard, who's in Anderson, South Carolina, a Republican.
		Richard, what do you say?
unidentified		Yes, I'm for the tariffs.
		Basically, what Trump is saying is that he wants a fair tariff.
		The problem is, how do you get to a fair tariff?
		And he took a global stance on the tariffs.
		You know, we're tariffs globally for all countries to box in China.
		So China has to negotiate.
		And China is the enemy.
		And through tariffs, they've funded their military and their society at our expense.
		So somebody had to do this at some point.
		And I think Trump thought with his election, he was the person to do that.
		So basically, I'm not real confident on attorneys running the economy of the United States.
		I think that's up to Congress.
		I think that's up to the President.
		I do think Congress should get involved.
		The problem is there's no bipartisan support for anything anymore.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		So all right.
		Richard in Anderson, South Carolina, says China's the enemy.
		The Washington Post, China and U.S. decoupling continues despite tariffs pause.
		And this piece is about the Secretary of State Merco Rubio announcing Wednesday that the United States would revoke visas of Chinese students in the United States, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.
		He also said the administration would enhance scrutiny of all future visa applications from the People's Republic of China and Hong Kong.
		Let's hear from you.
		Richard, yeah, go ahead.
unidentified		Okay, you're a mother.
unidentified		Are you a mother?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		I am.
unidentified		Okay.
		You have child sick and you need antibiotics.
		Do you want to rely on China to provide those antibiotics, or do you want to make it here?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		And your point being that we should stop all trade with China, Richard?
unidentified		I think it's a process.
		I think Trump is starting the process.
		And in the negotiations, hopefully the pharmaceutical companies will build plants here and we will not have to rely on anyone else for our antibiotics or medical medicine that we need.
		So that is a concern.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
unidentified		Would it be a concern for you?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Well, Richard, we'll leave it there.
		Going on to Elkin, North Carolina, Matthew, an independent.
		Matthew, what do you say?
unidentified		Yeah, I disagree with the tariffs.
		And to the guy's point there, the last caller, it's not about China.
		All the smart people are getting fired and stuff.
		And when it comes to tariffs and what we did to China, I mean, Canada, it just messes up everybody's economy, you know, their business.
		They don't know what's going on.
		Everything is so confused.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Okay, well, USA Today writes about that, Matthew.
		They say the 145% tariffs Trump initially imposed on China nearly halted trade between the countries, and they reached an agreement May 12th to lower tariffs to 30% while negotiations continue.
		Likewise, Trump threatened Europe with 50% tariffs, but agreed to postpone the start to July 9th for more talks.
		Trump said the start and stop tariffs were part of trade negotiations.
		He denied being afraid to impose harsh tariffs as a Wall Street skepticism about the import taxes under the acronym TACO for Trump Always Chickens Out.
		You call that chickening out, Trump told reporters, as you heard earlier.
		It's called negotiation.
		Wall Street stock index futures rose by more than 1.5% before trading began May 29th.
		The U.S. dollar rallied 0.2% against the yen and 0.3% against the Swiss franc as currencies and assets that have benefited from the tariff-induced market turmoil fell.
		But markets have swung wildly through Trump's tariff announcements.
		The SP 500 index is up 3.8% since they were announced.
		European stocks are up 2.2%.
		And China's benchmark indexes are nearly flat.
		Let's go to Jim, Grossbeck, Texas, Republican.
unidentified		Jim, your turn.
		Yeah, yes, ma'am.
		I'd just like to say that you're 36 or fixing to be $37 trillion in debt.
		So all this unfair trading, I support Trump's trade design 1,000% because you don't have any choice.
		I mean, what he's doing is trying to bring back and start growth in the United States of America.
		He's trying to bring back all these factories that were left because of taxes.
		He's bringing them back.
		And it doesn't matter what he does.
		He could save six babies out of a burning house.
		And the Democrats would still say something.
		The trader Schumer, you played him a while ago.
		He's nothing but a Palestinian traitor.
		He turned on his own people, Israel.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Jim's thoughts there.
		Texas, A Republican in Texas.
		John is next.
		He's in Virginia, a Republican.
		John, good morning.
unidentified		And good morning.
		I do support what Donald Trump, President Donald Trump, is doing.
		But here's how I think it should work.
		I think whatever tariffs any other country puts on us, we should match them equally.
		In other words, if Canada charges us 10%, we should charge them 10% tariffs.
		If China charges us 30%, we should charge them 30%.
		And if other countries knew that, that would incentivize them to lower their tariffs because they would have to pay the same.
		And I think that would be a good thing.
		All right.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		John, with his thoughts in Virginia, we'll go to Maryland, Pasadena, Maryland.
		Bill, Democratic caller.
		Bill, good morning.
unidentified		Hi, I've worked most of my career in manufacturing, primarily improving businesses and reducing costs.
		So a big part of all of the analysis when making investment to making improvements or building new plants is the price of the raw materials, labor, and other things.
		So the tariffs are affecting that immensely.
		But time has a way to make those things go away.
		So on the surface, I would not support Donald Trump's tariffs, but I take a wait and see attitude, the fact that these will settle down to some sense where people can start thinking about making investments in manufacturing.
		So I think that's important to take that wait and see.
		I believe Donald Trump will essentially level out over time.
		So I'm waiting.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Bill, how are you personally waiting?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Like what decisions have you sitting back and waiting before you take action?
unidentified		Well, the reality is that most companies are going to be doing the same.
		They're not going to make investments now.
		They're not going to fund manufacturing investments until they see what their return is going to be.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		So does that do damage to the economy?
unidentified		It has a short-term effect.
		We hope it has a short-term effect.
		It's a wait and see.
		And unfortunately, companies are not going to invest in this environment until they have a clear picture of what the tariff future and the business future is going to be.
		Even the effect of the labor market.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Bill there in Pasadena, Maryland.
		We'll go to Scott in Bowie, Maryland, Independent.
		Scott, what do you say?
unidentified		Yeah, I don't agree with the tariffs or trade.
		I would say that for the millennials that use the term taco, they shouldn't trivialize it because the reality is that he's manipulating the market.
		It's more like the taking the pillow on that movie where Travolta is manipulating the market in order for him to enrich himself.
		So I hope people look at it from that perspective.
		And the fact of trying to bring manufacturing back to the U.S., even if they were to do that, which would be great, it won't be based on human labor.
		I mean, China and other nations have moved so far ahead of the U.S. technologically.
		I think that's something that we haven't really looked at.
		And there was a caller that you had a few calls ago that a lot of racist statements said, Would you want something from China?
		It's very hard to find a lot of things made in the USA in this country.
		So the reality is we've been using products made in China and Vietnam and Indonesia because they're quality, they're good.
		We need to be more accountable, and we need to hold Congress more accountable in order to help invest in the people in this country instead of trying to point fingers at everyone else.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		That's my dick.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Scott there in Bowie, Maryland.
		We'll leave the conversation there for now.
		Later on this morning on the Washington Journal, the NAAC president and CEO Derek Johnson will join us to discuss the fifth anniversary of the killing of George Floyd and reactions to Trump administration's policing policies so far.
		But first, coming up, a conversation with former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer will talk about media coverage of the Trump administration.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		American History TV, Saturdays on C-SPAN 2, exploring the people and events that tell the American story.
		This weekend, at 6:45 p.m. Eastern, Columbia University presents the Bancroft Prize to the 2025 winners Kathleen Duvall, author of Native Nations, and James Tajani, for his book, A Machine to Move Ocean and Earth.
		And at 7:30 p.m. Eastern, American History TV tours the International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C. Historian and curator Andrew Hammond highlights espionage tools and artifacts from the museum's collection, including a letter from George Washington about a Revolutionary War spy ring.
		Then at 8 p.m. Eastern on Lectures and History, George Mason University's John Turner teaches a class on the history of Islam and Judaism in America.
		At 9.30 p.m. Eastern on the presidency, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, author of The Pardon, examines the origins and politics of the president's right to pardon using Gerald Ford's 1974 pardon of his predecessor Richard Nixon as a case study.
		Exploring the American story, watch American History TV Saturdays on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org slash history.
		Book TV, every Sunday on C-SPAN 2, features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.
		Here's a look at what's coming up this weekend.
		At 3:15 p.m. Eastern, Vicki Nguyen of NBC News talks about her family's 1979 escape from Vietnam and their journey to become Americans in her book, Boat Baby.
		And at 4:15 p.m. Eastern, the New Yorkers Michael Luo, author of Strangers in the Land, traces the experience of the Chinese in America, chronicling their persistence amid anti-Asian violence.
		At 8 p.m., journalists Alex Thompson and Jake Tapper talk about President Biden's decision to run for re-election in 2024 amid concerns that he was experiencing cognitive decline in their book, Original Sin.
		Then at 10 p.m. Eastern on Afterwards, Republican Oklahoma Senator James Lankford shares his book, Turnaround, where he speaks about his faith, the challenges the country faces, and what he believes needs to happen to improve the country.
		He's interviewed by Wall Street Journal congressional reporter Siobhan Hughes.
		Watch Book TV every Sunday on C-SPAN II and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		Washington Journal continues.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Joining us this morning is Sean Spicer.
		He's the host of the Sean Spicer Show and of course the former White House press secretary for the Trump administration during the president's first term.
		Sean Spicer, you and I spoke about a month ago before the White House correspondence dinner here in Washington about the relationship between the president, his administration, and the media.
		Since then, has it changed?
		How would you describe the relationship?
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Well, good morning, Greta.
		Great to be with you again.
		I think it's probably a status quo.
		Maybe a little better in the sense that the release of a new book about President Biden's decline, I think, has caused many in the media to reflect on how they're covering stories to some degree.
		I just, I don't know.
		So if anything, maybe a little better, but that would be a stretch at best.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		How would you describe the White House's strategy or strategy to communicate with the media, their media strategy?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		And is it different than the president's first term when you were the White House press secretary?
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I think it's a lot different.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Hindsight's obviously a real great way to be able to look at things and they have the ability to look at what worked and what didn't.
unidentified		I would say that there was a stat yesterday in Politico's playbook that noted that whether you like President Trump or not, there's no question he's probably the most transparent and accessible president in modern history.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Yesterday, or excuse me, Tuesday, I think, was the first time they noted in his four months in office that there had been a 48-hour period.
unidentified		Remember, we're talking over a three-day holiday weekend, where we had not seen from the president engaging with the media.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		And that says something.
		So, you know, to your point about, or to your question about the strategy, it's almost a flood the zone strategy to get out there to be seen, to talking, to engage on an almost daily, if not multiple times a day, process.
		That means they get to really make sure that their message is out there.
		The president himself is the biggest messenger, right?
		I've always reminded people the job of the White House press secretary, or for that matter, any press secretary, is to speak in lieu of the principal.
		In the case of this president, he is out there so often, it is a very different dynamic because the press secretary doesn't have to go out and say, well, here's what the president thinks or here's what he's going to do on this particular policy because you can actually, if you're a member of the press corps, ask him yourself or he's proactively saying it or putting it on Truth Social.
		So this is a very, very different president than we've ever seen before.
		And then secondly, to your point, vastly more accessible than the first term.
		I think we entered the first term thinking about traditional norms.
		I was reflecting on this the other day when I was going through some old pictures.
		We had done the weekend address, right?
		So previous presidents had always done this end-of-the-week address that we go out to radios, stations, and what have you.
		And we started to realize that it was such an antiquated way of communicating with the people because the president was talking almost on a daily basis that we just went away with the tradition of it.
		And again, part of it was we looked at traditional norms.
		And I think they look at this and they have now looked at this in the second term and said, we kind of can plow our own path.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		And what path have they plowed here that's different?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		What would you point to?
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Well, the first, I mean, two things.
		Number one, as I said, the amount of accessibility, right?
		So the President of the United States will have the press in the Oval Office or at some other signing or what have you several times a day.
		So the amount of accessibility is first and foremost a huge change.
		Like I said, you almost have multiple times a day the media being able to go in and question them.
		And then the second thing is that the scope of that, right?
		The addition of new media, independent media, to the briefing room, to these opportunities to question him, to fly in Air Force One, to be in what they call the pool, which is a representative group of reporters from print and broadcast, et cetera, that can go in and sort of report for the whole group has totally changed the dynamic.
		Look any day at the president's schedule, and at the top, it's like whitehouse.gov, you'll see what they call the pool report.
		And they've added voices into that dynamic that have never been allowed in before.
		So in the past, it was sort of this 13 person pool.
		And now it's gotten bigger and bigger.
unidentified		And look at when Caroline does a briefing in the press briefing room.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		The amount of people are there, the different and disparate voices that get to ask questions.
		And I think that's a win for America.
		To allow different outlets from all sorts of background, left, right, business, niche, and other type of media outlets to ask the White House press secretary a question or have access to the press office is good for democracy.
		It's good for the First Amendment.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We want our viewers to join us in this conversation.
		We're talking about the Trump administration and the role of the media covering this administration.
		Here's how you can join us this morning.
		Democrats dial in at 202-748-8000.
		Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		And Independents, 202-748-8002.
		You can also send a text, first name, city, and state, to 202-748-8003.
		Sean Spicer, let's go to the Oval Office.
		This week on Wednesday, the president was holding a swearing-in, and he was, once again, taking questions from reporters.
		This question was about this so-called taco acronym from Wall Street analysts saying that it stands for Trump Always Chickens Out on the Tariff Agenda.
		We'll take a listen and have you react on the other side.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Please.
unidentified		Mr. President, Wall Street analysts have coined a new term called the taco trade.
unidentified		They're saying Trump always chickens out on your tariff threats, and that's why markets are higher this week.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		What's your response to that?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I kick out.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Chicken out.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Oh, I chicken out.
		I've never heard that.
		You mean because I reduced China from 145% that I set down to 100 and then down to another number?
		And I said you have to open up your whole country.
		And because I gave the European Union a 50% tax tariff, and they called up and they said, please let's meet right now.
		Please, let's meet right now.
		And I said, okay, I'll give you till June 9.
		I actually asked them, I said, what's the date?
		Because they weren't willing to meet.
		And after I did what I did, they said, we'll meet anytime you want.
		And we have an end date of July 9th.
		You call that chickening out?
		Because we have $14 trillion now invested, committed to investing when Biden didn't have practically anything.
		Biden, this country was dying.
		You know, we have the hottest country anywhere in the world.
		I went to Saudi Arabia.
		The king told me, he said, you got the hottest comp, we have the hottest country in the world right now.
		Six months ago, this country was stone cold dead.
		We had a dead country.
		We had a country people didn't think it was going to survive.
		And you ask a nasty question like that.
		It's called negotiation.
		You set a number.
		And if you go down, you know, if I set a number at a ridiculous high number, and I go down a little bit, you know, a little bit, they want me to hold that number, 145% tariff.
		Even I said, man, that really got up.
		You know how it got?
		Because of fentanyl and many other things.
		And you added it up.
		I said, where are we now?
		We're at 145%.
		I said, whoa, that's high.
		That's high.
		They were doing no business whatsoever.
		And they were having a lot of problems.
		We were very nice to China.
		I don't know if they're going to be nice to us, but we were very nice to China.
		And in many ways, I think we really helped China tremendously because you know they were having great difficulty because we were basically going cold turkey with China.
		We were doing no business because of the tariff because it was so high.
		But I knew that.
		But don't ever say what you said.
		That's a nasty question.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		To me, that's the nastiest question.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Sean Spencer, what do you make of the question the president is saying, don't ever say that again to the reporter and calling it a nasty question.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Was it fair?
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, look, we have a First Amendment.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Reporters can ask whatever they want.
unidentified		You know, I think the way it was asked might be a little insulting to the President of the United States and the Oval Office, but they have a right to ask the question.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		There's no question about that.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		But I also think that it was a wasted question, right?
unidentified		The whole moniker was rather stupid in the sense that, look, the President of the United States, for years, decades, both parties have allowed this trade imbalance to exist.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		This is the first president to stand up and fight for the American people and make sure that our country isn't played as a sucker over and over again so that one country, and one of your callers addressed this just a minute ago in your previous segment, saying, if Canada is going to charge us X percent or the EU or China, why don't we have reciprocal tariffs?
unidentified		Why are we the ones with a low tariff rate and they get to prevent us from having full market access to their country?
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		So I get what the president's saying.
		I think the entire story and how it was framed was ridiculous.
		It was a media-created narrative.
		If you go back and look at it, I don't think that when she says some analysts, it really was a media-created thing.
		And then the whole idea was to bait the president to saying this.
		So I get his frustration.
		Is it a fair question?
		I think it was a stupid question.
		But I also think that you have a right in the country to ask stupid questions.
		That's protected under the First Amendment.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		An Axios headline recently, journalism under pressure amid fear of retribution.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Axios reporting, executives at major media outlets are reportedly instructing their newsrooms to temper their coverage of President Trump and his administration amid growing fears of political retribution.
unidentified		Your reaction to that?
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Well, look, I don't, I mean, I think by any metric, the coverage of President Trump and his cabinet in particular has been completely out of whack.
		Look at the Media Research Center did a study a while ago.
		92% of the major legacy outlets, 92% of it was negative against President Trump.
		100% was negative against Cabinet Secretary, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
		Now, just being objective, no matter whether or not you are the biggest Trump hater in the world, do you really think, does one think that every story against Pete Hegseth that he's done nothing good, no matter how much you dislike Donald Trump or his cabinet, that just seems impossible.
		And yet the media landscape is so tilted against Donald Trump and anyone who supports him or works for him that there's a degree to which it's actually good business to be smart.
		Look, as I said, you are protected by the First Amendment to be stupid.
		You are protected by the First Amendment to be partisan.
		But to call yourself a journalist and come straight at Donald Trump and all of his policies in a biased way, again, may be protected, and you have a right to do it in this country, but that doesn't make it smart or good.
		And I think when you look at the coverage that's existed, the hostility and the personal animus that exist by many of these individuals is unbelievable.
		You know, I mentioned there's a book out right now about President Biden's decline.
		You go back over and over again, every single instance, the Russia hoax, the cover-up of Hunter Biden's laptop, all of these things tilt against one side in favor or another, and it's always against the right.
		So again, I think that there's a big difference between do you have the right to do things in this country and are they protected?
		Yes.
		Does that mean it's smart and good business?
		I would argue no.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Let's get to calls.
		Matt is in Falls Church, Virginia, Democratic caller.
		Morning, Matt.
unidentified		Son Spicer, what idiocy that you're saying?
		Number one, you act like OAN, Fox News, all the right-wing news agencies don't exist currently and have created a giant conservative news network organization that puts out your message whenever you need it all the time to tons of people around the world.
		So get over this, like, oh, our narratives aren't getting out there.
		Please.
		Now, what I'd like to talk about is...
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Hold on, hold on.
		First of all, first, just to be clear, I never said our narratives aren't getting out there, so that's a lie.
		Second of all, you named two outlets out of the entire media landscape.
		And again, does it make sense?
		Obviously, in terms of Fox, it does.
		They've made a ton of money.
		They have a big audience.
		Fox filled a big void because of the left-wing nature of so much of the other thing.
		So far, you haven't said anything that makes sense.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's let Matt finish.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		Explicitly leftist.
		Yes.
		Name the network that is explicitly a left network.
		All the other networks.
		I don't see many left voices on Fox News or OAN or the other one.
		Those are explicitly right-wing networks.
		They have no liberal voices at all.
		ABC brings on both sides.
		NBC, both sides.
		CBS, both sides.
		Even MSNBC is full of Republicans.
		Republicans who just disagree with Trump.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Matt, let's get a response from Sean Spicer on that point.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, look, Matt, I think, again, I'm not sure that you listened to what I was saying before, but everything's protected speech.
		MSNBC or CNN can be as left as they want.
		That's fine.
		I have no problem with that, and I think that's where you missed the point.
		I don't have a problem with it.
		It's protected speech.
		This is the beauty of this country.
		I have a podcast that I do every single night.
		I am very open about my bias.
		I support President Trump.
		I'm a proud conservative.
		So this is the beauty of our country, that we can have right-leaning and left-leaning.
		That's fine.
		As I said, is it smart business?
		Probably not if you're left-leaning.
		Look at CNN's ratings.
		Look at the subscription rate to the Washington Post and the New York Times.
		They're going down.
		It's because they're not doing good journalism.
		You have a book out there right now talking about not only President Biden's decline, but how the media, once again, missed a story that the American people could see with their own eyes.
		The bottom line is there's a difference, as I said, Matt, whether it's protected speech, whether it's smart.
unidentified		And there's two different pieces there.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		So MSNBC can be as left-wing as they want.
		So can CBS and ABC and the New York Times.
		That's fine.
		But at the end of the day, look at their ratings.
		Look what's happening to them.
		They're failing, and it's because of their bias and the angle and the narratives that they spread.
		I never said our narrative doesn't get out there.
		I think President Trump and his team do an excellent job.
		But they've utilized independent media and other ways to get narratives out there, to spread the message.
		And I think it's fantastic what they're doing.
		I'm not complaining a bit.
		In fact, I love where we're at in terms of the landscape.
		Go look at what's happening in Substack, for example.
		Example.
		There's a lot of journalists from the right to the left that have gone out and started doing journalism, opinion pieces, and grown tremendously because there's a market for that.
		I think the old legacy media model has completely shattered.
		And the technology that we have these days has allowed us to have voices from all over.
		You can get whatever news you want, opinion, factual stuff straight down the middle, whatever it is.
		And that's the beauty of what's going on in the country right now.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We'll go to Sal next.
		He's in New Jersey.
		Republican caller.
		Morning, Sal.
unidentified		Good morning.
		So glad a fresher breath, fresh air to hear Mr. Spicer talk about how great President Trump is doing.
		The local news for years that I've been watching the television, you know, it's so biased.
		You never hear them say one positive thing in the first administration of President Trump.
		Now, in the second administration of President Trump, all they say, everything he did is not good for the country, and we're getting taken advantage of, and he knows it.
		And President Trump is doing his best he can to help the American people.
		All four years of Biden administration, they praised the man like he was Mr. Wonderful.
		It's so biased and so easy to see.
		But the people that just despise President Trump, they will never see the positive things that he does for this country.
		I'm 66 years old, and he's one of the best presidents I ever had in my lifetime.
		And I'm so happy he's the president now because the country is going to do great in the four years, the three years coming up.
		And that's what I like to say.
		But thanks, Mr. Spicer, saying all the great things about President Trump.
		Thank you.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Sal.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Sean Spicer.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Thank you, Sal.
		I appreciate you calling in and sharing your thoughts.
		Look, I would say, and I've been in politics for 30 years.
		The one thing that I think is really different about President Trump, and I mentioned this a moment ago on trade, is that President Trump, many politicians of both sides, look at a lot of the problems, the systemic issues that we face in government and as a society and say, well, unfortunately, that's the way it's always been.
		We just can't fix it or we can't fight it.
		President Trump has been willing to fight for changes in the status quo, shaking up the system that really needs it.
		And I think many people, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, Sal, but I think part of this is for too long we've been told we just can't do anything.
		And President Trump has shown a willingness to fight for the American people to get better deals, to get a better outcome.
		You know, you think about what he did on prescription drugs a couple weeks back.
		There are things that he is doing to make the country stronger, to make life more affordable for average Americans.
		And I think it's a breath of fresh air, as you put it.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Sean Spicer, have you disagreed with any moves by this president so far or have any concerns with any actions taken by President Trump in the first four months of this second term?
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		You're going to try to get me in trouble, Greta.
		Look, there's a couple things.
		I will tell you, I understand what he's doing on TikTok, for example.
		I believe that TikTok is a tool of the Chinese government, and it's an existential threat to our national security here in America.
		So I understand, and I hope he's successful in getting rid of any links to the Communist Party in China and making it a U.S. thing.
		But I do believe that it's a threat.
		So I disagree with him on that.
		On Iran, I'm concerned about the approach on Iran right now to, quote, get a deal.
		I don't believe that Iran will ever uphold a deal.
		I believe that Iran has made it very clear that we are their sworn enemy.
		They chant death to America.
		So I'm skeptical of any deal that we might get with Iran.
		So there are some areas where I appreciate his attempt for peace.
		The president doesn't get as much credit as he should.
		And I think too many people argue over the tactics.
		But at the end of the day, for four years under his leadership during his first term, there was no major foreign incursion.
		Russia, for decades, had either annexed or gone to war.
		That didn't happen for four years.
		China wasn't the provocative, did not act in a provocative way the way it did in the last four.
		North Korea had come to a sort of an armistice, if you will.
		Gaza wasn't attacking Israel.
		The world was a safer and a better place under Donald Trump's first term.
		And I think he's trying to reset that now.
		And so I appreciate his constant effort to bring peace and stability to the world.
		So, yeah, sure, every once in a while I disagree with some of the tactics that he has, but I appreciate his willingness to fight and his attempts to make the world safer, to make our country stronger.
unidentified		But again, I mean, my issues are more quibble.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Like, I'm looking and saying, well, I wish he would do this a little differently.
		But his record of success and results speak for itself.
		And so, you know, again, I feel like sometimes you can tweak around the edges, but overall, I appreciate the fact that he's fighting for our country.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		You joked that you might get in trouble.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Do you still have communication with the president?
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		I do.
		I talked to him, I don't know, 10 days ago.
		He's been extremely supportive of me and my endeavors.
		You know, he watches.
		I've gotten a little feedback on my show you mentioned.
		It airs every day at six on YouTube and the first television network.
		So he has been incredibly helpful to me since I left the White House.
		He appointed me back to the board of the U.S. Naval Academy.
		I appreciate his friendship and his support.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		And he watches the show, it sounds like.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		He's given me some feedback from time to time.
unidentified		So I don't know that he watches every night, but he has shared with me some thoughts.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We'll go to Al in Washington, D.C., Democratic caller.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Morning to you, Al.
unidentified		Yeah, hi.
		I have been watching the debacle of the two parties conventions and the character assassination that got done on Biden and the subsequent drama non-stop that's been going on since Trump part two.
		And I see that we have two older men that are fighting in an old model.
		And it seems like the Republicans have done a better job of grabbing the electorate.
		But I think that all of us are tired of this nonsense.
		And I think it's all over America.
		There's this disconnect between all the people, all over the country, between the Republicans, the Democrats, their mainliners, and the people.
		And I think we really, the people have been suffering.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
unidentified		We have really suffered.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Al, Sean Spencer, what do you think?
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Well, Al, can you give me a specific, are you just, do you just not like the rhetoric or the policies?
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Is there something specific that troubles you?
unidentified		I'm going to use, for example, the party line I've been listening to you since you've been on the air, right?
		I think people have been spitballing one spewed thing versus another.
		The Democrats lost their way and they spun Biden out of here.
		Biden wasn't a bad guy.
		He just got older.
		He had a momentary aha moment, but Trump's had his aha moments too.
		He's much better polished, though, I noticed.
		Somebody spent a lot of time polishing him up since the first administration.
		And so a lot of Americans voted for him versus Joe.
		But Joe, Joe got a hatchet job for being old.
		And then Kamala, she was dead in the war.
		And basically, I think that the biggest cluster fudge, if you will, that's been going on right now is we have two dead parties.
		And there's a whole bunch of young people that are just sitting on the side waiting to throw their hats in the ring and say, look, this isn't working for either one of us.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's take that.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Sean Spicer.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
		So, Joe, I appreciate your concern and your question, but I respectfully disagree.
		I mean, look, President Biden, again, the critique isn't coming just from the right.
		It's from Democrats, from the media about his decline.
		There's a thing about difference between getting old.
		And I would argue, and I've maintained this for the last few years, it's not President Biden's age that I had an issue with.
		It's his mental liquidity, equity.
		Like his ability to actually function and do the job is what mattered.
		And it matters with anybody.
		So you could be 50 or 80.
		It doesn't matter in my mind how old you are.
		President Trump might be close to 80, but he certainly doesn't act like it.
		This is a guy who literally think about how early he's up, how late he goes, how engaging he is.
		I mentioned, I mean, we see him every single day engaging.
		You can't make the same argument that in terms of his activity, his spryness, et cetera.
		There's a big difference to that.
		And so I would argue that.
		And look, he went through a very robust primary, both in 2016.
		You think about the people that were involved when he won the presidency the first time, some amazing political athletes.
		The same time last cycle on the Republican side, some really strong candidates, and he dispatched them all.
		On the Democratic side, I mean, look, I can't speak for them.
		They chose to go through the process they did.
		But if you look at the people that are sort of staffing on the Republican side, JD Vance is in his 40s.
		That's pretty young as far as I can tell as a bench.
unidentified		You look at the other people that are in his cabinet that are in the leadership on the Republican side.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		I think we have a very, very deep bench of people to go to that are much younger.
		But I also am very happy with the top of the ticket.
		And I mean, I'll just say this at the last point.
		I don't make any, I don't hide who I support.
unidentified		And so I know you were saying something about the talking points or whatever, but I'm a very proud conservative.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		I'm a very proud supporter of President Trump.
		I am glad to tell you that.
		So I don't know what talking points I would be using otherwise or rhetoric that I would be using or narratives because I'm very open about it.
		I'm not trying to pretend I'm someone I'm not or that I am playing both sides or that I'm neutral or whatever.
		I am very open about where I come from and who I support and the policies and the ideology that I espouse.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We'll go to Michael next.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		He's in Bowie, Maryland, Independent.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Morning.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Morning, Michael.
unidentified		I would just like to say that the corruption on both sides of the party and the media is what really contributes to the distrust the last voter was touching on.
		And so me, I'm 30.
		I haven't watched much cable news since I was young.
		Maybe in the Marine Corps, you know, they put fuck news on in the dining halls and stuff like that.
		And I will watch it.
		And maybe now I'll watch a little bit of like Fox financial news.
		But just the blatant corruption on both sides, taking money from the Israel lobby from both sides, any corporations that you can name, whatever their message is, they can get it out.
		And it leaves mainstream, just main street empty.
		And so the big thing is, like, when you say left media, CNN and all these people are not left media.
		Like, those are like corporate left.
		You know, when I think of left media, I think of Kyle Kalinsky, Crystal Ball, Breaking Points, like Independent, people who've been on YouTube, Jimmy Doerr, maybe, people who don't take money from obviously the government or in those spaces and so.
		Those are the kind of people that I would like to see or hear more of in that press region.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Michael.
		Sean Spots, here are you shaking your head.
		You were nodding.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I think Michael's got a great point.
		So first and foremost, on the independent media, I couldn't agree more.
		I mean, my show streams on YouTube every night at 6.
		It's available as a podcast on Apple and Spotify, and you see that now.
		More and more people able to go produce a show, whether it's just a podcast or airs and streams somewhere else.
		I agree with you.
		I love that.
		And that's what's beautiful about this.
		More and more people who are cable cutters are streaming in different ways.
		But it's also a great reason why C-SPAN is such a benefit to the American people.
		There's no corporate dollars.
		There's no advertising.
		And I think that's the beauty of this.
		You get to call in and have a discussion with lawmakers or other policymakers.
		We need more of that.
		And I love why independent media has done this.
		And to your point about the voices in the briefing room, look at who Caroline Levitt, the press secretary, continues to call on.
		She's bringing in new voices, bringing in independent media.
		And that's healthy, not just because it elevates them, but it's also because it helps infect the briefing room with issues and ideas that otherwise might not get discussed.
		And so it's great how she's handling that.
		During my tenure as press secretary, I used Skype to bring in local reporters from news stations around the country that might not necessarily be able to travel to Washington to get a question or attend a press briefing room event.
		And therefore, part of it was to allow other reporters in the D.C. bubble to hear about issues, land right use, water rights, out in the Midwest, for example, or in the plains, where those issues might not resonate in the Beltway in D.C., but are extremely important to so many Americans.
		And so I think Caroline's done a fantastic job.
		I think the rise of independent media has been phenomenal and allowed more people to get a message out or a point of view that otherwise wouldn't be on traditional cable.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		And for those who have just streaming services, that is why C-SPAN has reached out to companies like YouTube and Disney who carry Hulu and Google who carry YouTube TV to say you should stream us so that people can have a lot of money.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
		Yeah.
		I mean, again, I think C-SPAN is a huge, huge asset to America.
		Not just the coverage that we get of both chambers on one and two, but programs like Washington Journal that allow policymakers, lawmakers, personalities to come on and have this question time during Washington Journal.
		So it's a huge benefit.
		I hope that all these streaming services carry C-SPAN as well because it's an important service to the American people.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Sean Spicer, host of the Sean Spicer Show, airs every day at 6 p.m.
		And the former White House press secretary for the Trump administration.
		We thank you for the conversation.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		Thanks, Rod.
sean spicer ▲ ● ▼		I appreciate being back with you.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Later on in the show, we're going to be joined by NAACP President and CEO Derek Johnson.
		We're going to talk about the fifth anniversary of the killing of George Floyd and then as well as reaction, we'll get his reaction to the Trump administration's policies, policing policies so far.
		But first, coming up, more of your phone calls will be an open forum.
		Any public policy or political issue on your mind, we want to hear from you on that.
		There are the lines on your screen.
		Start dialing in.
unidentified		Sunday night on C-SPAN's Q&A.
		Wall Street Journal columnist Jason Riley, author of The Affirmative Action Myth, argues that the racial preference policies of the 1960s and 70s have had an overall negative impact on the success of black Americans.
		There are racial differences in America, in our society, cultural differences, ethnic differences.
		But when it comes to public policy and how the government treats us, treats the population.
jason riley ▲ ● ▼		No, it should not be picking winners and losers based on race or treating people differently based on race.
unidentified		It's been a disaster.
jason riley ▲ ● ▼		Whether the effort was under Jim Crow to elevate whites or the effort was under racial preferences to elevate non-whites, it's been a disaster.
unidentified		You know, people like to say that diversity is our strength in America, but I disagree.
jason riley ▲ ● ▼		Our real strength in this country has been to overcome our racial and ethnic differences and focus on what unites us as a country.
unidentified		That has been the strength of America.
		Jason Riley with his book, The Affirmative Action Myth, Sunday night at 8 Eastern on C-SPAN's Q ⁇ A. You can listen to Q&A and all of our podcasts on our free C-SPAN Now app.
		In a nation divided, a rare moment of unity, this fall, C-SPAN presents Ceasefire, where the shouting stops and the conversation begins in a town where partisan fighting prevails.
		One table, two leaders, one goal, to find common ground.
		This fall, Ceasefire, on the network that doesn't take sides, only on C-SPAN.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		Rick Atkinson has just published the second volume of his American Revolution trilogy.
		The book is called The Fate of the Day and covers years 1777 through 1780 of the American Revolution.
		His initial 800-page volume focused on years 1775 to 1777.
		First volume was titled The British Are Coming.
		The first book in the trilogy was published in 2019.
		Mr. Atkinson won the George Washington Prize for this beginning look at the revolution.
		His second book in the trilogy covers the middle years.
		Stationed in Paris, Benjamin Franklin was wooing the French.
		In Pennsylvania, George Washington was pleading with Congress to deliver the money, men, and material he needed to continue the fight.
		This volume is time to coincide with the 250th anniversary of the beginning of the American Revolution.
unidentified		Author Rick Atkinson with his book, The Fate of the Day, The War for America, Fort Ticonderoga to Charleston, 1777 to 1780.
		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.
		Washington Journal continues.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We are an open forum this morning here on the Washington Journal until the top of the hour.
		So any public policy or political issue on your mind, we want to hear from you.
		We'll go to Scott, who's in Laurel, Maryland, a Republican.
		Scott, good morning.
		We're an open forum.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		Longtime listener.
		Love the program.
		I called in a few minutes ago and I was specifically wanting to talk about the topic with Sean Spicer.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, well, go ahead and share your thoughts.
unidentified		Yeah, for the people who called in and say that the media is kind of even, I just want to remind everybody that, because I mean, I watch a lot of news.
		I switch back and forth all the stations a lot.
		But if you really think about it, you have NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC.
		You have Stephen Colbert, 1130, Jimmy Phelan, Jimmy Kimmo, CNN, and Saturday Night Live on Saturdays, all bashing the president on a regular continual basis.
		And then, yes, you have Fox.
		So you have 13 of them against one.
		And the people call in and say that the media is fair, and Fox is this, and Fox is that.
		So having said all that, I just want to remind everybody that all of those shows, including Fox, all they are are shows.
		And I really don't think they do the country any justice whatsoever because all they're doing is really dividing the country.
		And if you listen to them every night, they will tell you straight out: we have a wonderful show tonight.
		And that's all they are shows.
		But they're doing damage to the country, including Fox and the 13 of the others.
		And I just don't like any of them.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		That's all I have to say.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Scott, who's a Republican in Laura, Maryland, with his thoughts.
		Bradley, Covington, Georgia, Democratic caller.
		Hi, Bradley.
unidentified		Yes.
		I also, too, wanted to speak with John Spicer.
		But yeah, what I would say is: well, first I've got to address the last caller.
		I watched a lot of this too.
		And there is bias on all these shows, true.
		But you cannot compare Rachel Maddow to Sean Pannady.
		Like, they're not the same.
		Like, we're basically just trying to get facts.
		And if the NBC or ABC or any of these people lie, they have to pay, they can't do that.
		Okay, on to Sean Spicer.
		Besides Kellyanne Conway and the president, he is like he is a professional spinner.
		I don't want to say liar, but that man has been lying since he first came out on the White House when he said that the crowd was the biggest crowd ever.
		And then he said something about Donald Trump's prescription, prescription pill bill or something.
		That is nothing.
		Like everything Sean Spicer said was a lie.
		Like everything he said, and he's going to be upset because TikTok may be a danger.
		Iran may be a danger.
		But Donald Trump, he's going to flip on you too.
		I promise you.
		He's going to get a plane from Qatar.
		And now he's not going to represent Israel as much as he wants to or should.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Bradley in Georgia.
		I'm going to go on to Stephen, who's in Quincy, Illinois, an independent.
		We're an open forum.
		Stephen, go ahead.
unidentified		Good morning, Greta.
		I'm going to talk about Paul Walt Zach.
		He was a Florida businessman who stole $3.4 million from his employees.
		What he did was, when he deducted the employee's share of their social security obligation, instead of sending it to the Social Security Administration, he kept the money in order to buy a $2 million yacht, expensive cars, and a variety of other things.
		He got caught and prosecuted by the federal government.
		Upon conviction, he was sentenced to a year and a half in prison and ordered to pay restitution.
		Lo and behold, Walt Zach's mother went to a greet and meet to meet Donald Trump at Mar-Lago and gave Trump $1 million.
		Trump then pardoned Walt Zach.
		He got released from prison and now doesn't have to make the restitution.
		He gets to keep his yacht, his expensive cars, and everything else.
		The Social Security's out $3.4 million.
		And Walt Zach's employees don't get the credit for their Social Security when they retire for the years that they worked for Walt Zach.
		So there you go, people.
		Donald Trump, a million dollars richer, and the Social Security Administration, $3.4 million poor.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Stephen in Quincy, Illinois.
		We are an open forum.
		Any public policy or political issue is on the table.
		Let me show you what the president just posted on Truth Social here this morning.
		Two weeks ago, China was in grave economic danger, he writes.
		The very high tariffs I sent made it virtually impossible for China to trade into the United States marketplace, which is by far number one in the world.
		We went, in effect, cold turkey with China, and it was devastating for them.
		Many factories closed, and there was, to put it mildly, civil unrest.
		I saw what was happening and didn't like it for them, not for us.
		I made a fast deal with China in order to save them from what I thought was going to be a very bad situation.
		I didn't want to see that happen.
		Because of this deal, everything quickly stabilized, and China got back to business as usual.
		Everybody was happy, he says.
		The bad news is that China, perhaps not surprisingly to some, has totally violated its agreement with the U.S., with us.
		So much for being Mr. Nice Guy is what the president is writing this morning.
		We were talking earlier about the president's trade and tariffs agenda.
		Now, related to the topic of China, at the State Department briefing yesterday, the spokesperson, Tammy Bruce, was asked about a new policy toward China that would revoke the visas of Chinese students.
		Here's what she had to say.
unidentified		There are 277,000 Chinese students in the United States.
unidentified		I mean, should all of them feel that they're at some risk of having their visas revoked?
tammy bruce ▲ ● ▼		I think everyone who's here on a visa has to recognize, certainly is what they've seen over the last few months, that America takes their visa seriously, that vetting is not a one-time process, it's continuing, and that when things, if things happen, if you get arrested, if there's some kind of an issue, it's probably going to be seen at some point.
tammy bruce ▲ ● ▼		But I do think that with this particular dynamic, it's clear that there's an interest in making sure that those who are here from China on a visa understand that we are taking our national security seriously and we are looking at their visas.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		And if everything's fine, terrific.
tammy bruce ▲ ● ▼		But that will be a vetting that certainly continues and is important clearly to the administration.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce from the briefing this week.
		Cynthia in Youngstown, Ohio, Democratic caller.
		Cynthia, good morning to you.
		What's on your mind?
unidentified		Good morning.
		There's one little thing Americans need to think about when they're supporting these radical right policies like censorship, book banning, creating hate and suspicion of people from other cultures.
		You know, what really makes us the greatest country in the world is not money or wealth or power.
		It's freedom.
		You can't put a value on freedom.
		It's been paid for with blood.
		The number one tactic that this whole Trump and a MAGA movement, it's the bully pulpit.
		Calling names, shaming reporters, shaming a reporter who asks a reasonable question like about accepting a gift from Qatar that's a multi-billion dollar by the time they get done making it security.
		They're going to have to completely redo that whole plane and it's going to cost billions of dollars to make sure it's secure.
		And Trump will say to a reporter who asks a reasonable question, you're a nasty person.
		That's a nasty question.
		And he'll shame and degrade the reporters for doing their job.
		And, you know, calling far-right pundits and giving them jobs.
		Important jobs like Hedgehog.
		He's overseeing our military.
		He was from Fox News.
		So tell me there's the equivalent of that on the left, where a president has taken a radical, you know, far-left person who's in the media and give them a position like that.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And Cynthia in Ohio, Democratic caller.
		Let me go to Frank, who's in California, Republican.
unidentified		Yes, I would like to say that I am very proud to be an American.
		I'm very proud that I voted for Donald Trump.
		I like the way he fixed the border.
		I like the way he's sending these people back.
		But you don't hear the Democrat talk about that one in Georgia, where that guy from Venezuela raped her and killed her.
		And they don't talk about the mother that they killed that had five children.
		You don't hear talk like that, do you, by the Democrats, huh?
		They're so out of touch.
		And I'm glad I'm not.
		I grew up being a Democrat in Brooklyn.
		They used to stand for something.
		When Trump ran, I switched over to be a Republican.
		Thank God I'm a Republican.
		We represent freedom, values, and the American flag.
		And I like what Trump's doing.
		And I don't ever want to go back to New York.
		It's not safe right now.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Frank, I'll leave it there.
		Frank, happy with the job performance by President Trump in his second term.
		We were showing you President Trump holding up the tariffs that other countries have on us back in the beginning of April.
		That event was the so-called Liberation Day, wherein he announced those sweeping tariffs.
		The International Trade Court this week ruling that he does not have the authority to do sweeping tariffs against other countries, that he is limited by the role of Congress needs, the role of Congress needs to play in tariff policy, and that the act that the administration is using does not actually give him this authority.
		Now, that ruling by the International Trade Court is halted by an appeals court while they take a look at this case.
		We were talking about this earlier this morning, and you can certainly give us your thoughts here this morning in Open Forum on the president's trade and tariff agenda as well.
		Petra in Bruton, Alabama, Democratic caller, good morning to you.
		What do you want to talk about?
unidentified		Good morning.
		I would like to talk about the chaos in this country.
		You know, as a trans person, as a trans woman, you know, we, you know, we want to advocate, right?
		They would talk about that they were anti-trans children, even though, you know, as a child, I was trans.
		You know, so then they came after, they're coming after adults.
		So then, you know, I wanted to go, you know, we warned everybody about that.
		We warned everybody about the fact that, you know, currently Trump has made over 40% of his wealth since he has become president this term.
		He has gone on Twitter.
		I follow him on Twitter.
		I follow my true social.
		I follow him through the crypto meetings on Twitter.
		I followed him through his true social things.
		The stock market manipulation, the stock traders on Twitter are not flipping out because they are personally being affected by the huge manipulation of the amount of money that these people are trading, even they're out of the money.
		You know, I was talking to a stock trader the other day.
		One minute, two weeks ago, Friday closing bill, somebody out of the money traded a half a million dollars worth of stock, which would never been heard of.
		And unless you have this $30,000 stock program, you're never going to see it.
		So you have to be like a professional stock trader.
		And he was talking about, like, look, I can't even do this.
		So then, you know, we're going on, you know, and we're looking at the purse strings.
		Know, Congress has been over tariffs.
		Congress themselves are responsible for tariffs, not the president of the United States, you know.
		And they're, you know, people are talking about freedoms.
		We're not free.
		You know, we're following the same path as my family did in 1930s Germany.
		I'm going to be straight honest.
		You know, I heard from my great-grandfather about the 1930s Germany and how they follow this propaganda.
		You know, it's the immigrants, it's the minorities, it's the black people.
		You know, it's always done.
		But here's the fact.
		If you go into Texas, there is about 20 to 1 that a pastor is sexually assaulting a child versus a trans person or a drag queen.
		20 to 1.
		But nobody wants to talk about the fact that we have an epidemic of sexual assault in this nation by white men, to be honest.
		If you check with the FBI statistics, you know, we need to start facing facts here, facts or feelings.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Petra there in Alabama.
		Coming up on the C-SPAN networks today, we have a UN Security Council debate over the Russia-Ukraine conflict that will start at 10 a.m. Eastern Time right here on C-SPAN, online at c-span.org, or you can download our free video mobile app, C-SPAN now.
		And then at 1:30 this afternoon, the president's going to hold a news conference with Elon Musk.
		It's his last day working for the government.
		And they will hold a news conference in the Oval Office 1:30 p.m. Eastern Time.
		Again, here on C-SPAN, C-SPANNOW or online at c-span.org.
		And then we said this earlier, the president's having an announcement on steel in this country.
		He's traveling to Pennsylvania to make this announcement.
		It's 5 p.m. Eastern Time.
		And again, you'll be able to watch it on C-SPAN, C-SPANNOW or C-SPAN.org.
		That's what's coming up on the C-SPAN networks.
		You can learn more if you go to c-span.org.
		We'll go to Brad in Boyd, Texas, Republican.
		Hi, Brad.
unidentified		Good morning, everybody.
		I hope I'm not cut off, but I like to talk about immigration.
		We're letting in a lot of people that hate us.
		We got a lot of people that are already here that hate us.
		The Muslims have called for a caliphate in our country.
		They hate trans people.
		They would kill them if they were living in Muslim countries.
		It is pretty rough out here, especially in the state of Texas with all the Muslims invading us.
		Please stop them from coming over here.
		We need to report all of them.
		Thank you.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Those are Brad's thoughts in Texas.
		Isaiah in Kansas City, Missouri, Democratic caller.
unidentified		Yes.
		What I'd like to say is that, you know, when I would listen to the program and people call in and say that, you know, that they were bashing the president.
		Well, you know, if you're telling the truth about something, that's not bashing, that's not bashing anybody.
		And it's a fact that he is a convicted felon.
		He got 34 counts.
		It's a fact that he had to, he paid a lady for sexual abuse that he, you know, that he did, that he had to pay for.
		So I would just like to make that announcement is that that's not bashing nobody.
		If you call in telling the truth about somebody, the truth is the truth.
		Wow, thank you.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Got it, Isaiah.
		Linda, Branchville, South Carolina, Independent.
		Hi, Linda.
unidentified		Good morning.
		How are you?
		Good morning.
		Yes, good morning.
		I'm just, C-SPAN, I'm so glad that you had the open forum and give these people opportunity, America, the opportunity to open up and speak their mind.
		It tells the truth about how divisive this country is with a lot of people.
		I'm an independent, like I said, and I believe in just being fair, being fair.
		This country needs to come together, and Congress needs to work together to bring this country better.
		I've never seen so much divisiveness in my 62 years on this earth.
		I've never seen so much divisiveness so far in this country like I've seen now.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Lynda, I'm going to jump in because we want to bring you to Iowa.
		Senator Joni Ernst is holding a town hall.
		Members of Congress are back in their districts after the Memorial Day weekend.
		She's asked here about this tax and spending bill by Republicans approved by the House.
		It's now going to go before the Senate.
joni ernst ▲ ● ▼		are not receiving benefits.
unidentified		Next up is Randall Harlow.
joni ernst ▲ ● ▼		Randall.
unidentified		Thank you.
		My question pertains to the so-called Big Beautiful Bill.
		And as I'm sure you are aware, but apparently many of the representatives were not aware at the time, nestled within the thousand pages of this bill was a small clause which, for the first time in our nation's history, in fact, effectively prohibits the federal courts from enforcing contempt orders.
		And this is a provision which lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have stated would represent a catastrophic unraveling of the checks and balances and balance of powers that our nation's founders have enshrined in our Constitution.
		And if you look around the room, we have Iowans who are Democrats, Republicans, and represent a different variety of views on the slashing of benefits and ballooning debt in this bill.
		But one thing I dare say that everyone in this room probably agrees on is the sanctanctity of our Constitution.
joni ernst ▲ ● ▼		I think we all do agree with that.
unidentified		Thank you.
		So, ma'am, my question for you today is: will you pledge to us, our constituents who you serve, that you will not vote for this bill or any other bill that contains this poisonous provision?
		Okay, and thank you for clarifying.
joni ernst ▲ ● ▼		So, one thing that I will explain, because we have a lot of subject matter experts here in the room, is that the House has written one version of a bill.
		The Senate is taking up our own version of the bill.
		The two will be married together at some point, and we hope that that is by July 4th, and we can get that behind us, work on the farm bill and other appropriations bills.
		But for those of you that do follow the Senate and the process that we go through, is that there is a rule called the Bird Rule.
		Silence.
		So, the Byrd Rule states that anything that goes into our package in the Senate, it can't be policy.
		It can't be policy.
		It has to be focused on mandatory spending.
		I don't know anything about that provision that talks about mandatory spending or revenues.
		Okay, so a lot of what has been wrapped up into the House bill will be flushed out in what we call the bird bath in the Senate.
		We go through this every time we go through spending packages in the Senate.
		So, we'll go through the bird bath, and we're not the ones that make that decision, folks.
		Again, if you follow Senate procedures, it's nonpartisan parliamentarians that make that decision.
		They are not appointed by us, nonpartisan parliamentarians, and be strict about this as well.
		So, I don't see any argument that could ever be made that this affects mandatory spending or revenues.
		I just don't see that.
		I don't see it getting into the Senate bill.
unidentified		Next up is Harrison Cass.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Joni Ernst, the senator from Iowa Republican, holding a town hall this morning at a high school in Iowa.
		And you can watch our live coverage over on C-SPAN2 or online at c-span.org.
		We've covered a few town halls that have occurred over this past week as lawmakers are not in Washington.
		They are back in their home districts in their home states talking to their constituents after this Memorial Day weekend.
		And you can find our coverage if you go to c-span.org.
		We're at an open forum here.
		Randall's next in Washington, D.C. Democratic caller, what's on your mind?
unidentified		Well, what's on my mind is the rise of conspiratorists and the rise of fringe thinking.
		I mean, like every time the president turns around, he's trying to put forth a novel idea.
		At one time, libertarians and John Burke Society people were thought of as weirdos.
		Even going back to 64, they were kind of laughed at.
		And now these people have a voice really strongly in the Republican Party.
		I mean, like, the terrible thing about RFK, he's one of those fringe voices that have found a home in a Republican administration, even though what he's saying is considered very fringe.
		But somehow, you know, the worst thing you can have in this country, like Donald Trump, RFK, what they have in common is that they're looking for validation.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Randall, I'll jump in.
		I have some economic news to share.
		The Fed's go-to inflation gauge slows in April alongside a drop in consumer spending.
		Axios is reporting the Federal Reserve favored inflation indicator cooled in April, though consumers pulled back sharply on their spending.
		According to the Commerce Department statistics released this morning, Why It Matters, price pressures were mild, but consumers were notably cautious as President Trump implemented some of the steepest tariffs to date.
		And by the numbers, the personal consumption expenditures price index, closely tracked by the Fed, increased 2.1% last month compared to the 2.3% increase in March.
		We'll go to Sherry, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, Republican.
		Sherry, we're in open forum.
		You're our last call.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Okay.
		Yes, ma'am.
		I'm wanting to say something about the 14th Amendment that everybody, I don't know why they can't seem to understand this one part.
		And if you read it, it says, if you are born in the United States of America, you become a U.S. citizen.
		Right.
		But nowhere does it say if you are born in the United States of America, you become a U.S. citizen and your whole entire family does as well.
		So if you're not a U.S. citizen, you should not be even having children in the United States.
		I think they are to deport everyone that is not a U.S. citizen, whether they done bad or they done good.
		They don't belong here and we're tired of paying for them.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Sherry, there in South Carolina, Republican caller.
		We're going to take a break.
		When we come back, we'll switch gears.
		We'll be joined by NAAC President and CEO Derek Johnson on the fifth anniversary of the killing of George Floyd and reaction to President Trump's policies so far.
		Stay with us.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		In a nation divided, a rare moment of unity.
		This fall, C-SPAN presents Ceasefire, where the shouting stops and the conversation begins in a town where partisan fighting prevails.
		One table, two leaders, one goal, to find common ground.
		This fall, Ceasefire, on the network that doesn't take sides, only on C-SPAN.
		American History TV, Saturdays on C-SPAN 2, exploring the people and events that tell the American story.
		This weekend, at 6:45 p.m. Eastern, Columbia University presents the Bancroft Prize to the 2025 winners Kathleen Duvall, author of Native Nations, and James Tijani for his book, A Machine to Move Ocean and Earth.
		And at 7.30 p.m. Eastern, American History TV tours the International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C. Historian and curator Andrew Hammond highlights espionage tools and artifacts from the museum's collection, including a letter from George Washington about a Revolutionary War spy ring.
		Then at 8 p.m. Eastern on Lectures in History, George Mason University's John Turner teaches a class on the history of Islam and Judaism in America.
		At 9.30 p.m. Eastern on the presidency, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, author of The Pardon, examines the origins and politics of the president's right to pardon using Gerald Ford's 1974 pardon of his predecessor Richard Nixon as a case study.
		Exploring the American story.
		Watch American History TV Saturdays on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org slash history.
		If you ever miss any of C-SPAN's coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org.
		Videos of key hearings, debates, and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights.
		These points of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos.
		This timeline tool makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in Washington.
		Scroll through and spend a few minutes on C-SPAN's points of interest.
		Washington Journal continues.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Joining us this morning from Jackson, Mississippi is Derek Johnson, the president and CEO of the NAACP.
		Mr. Johnson, thank you for your time.
		Let's begin with this week marking the five-year, the five years since the police killing of George Floyd and the outrage that's followed that.
		As you think about the past five years, what are your reflections?
unidentified		First of all, good morning.
		The past five years have been missed opportunities.
		The United States is hard to really embrace the fact that every life is important.
		This nation citizens should be treated with dignity and human beings should be entitled to due process.
		The missed opportunity included passes of federal legislation, the George Foreman Police Reform Act.
		It is an act that actually will hold rogue officers accountable, keep people safe, and build confidence in our law enforcement agencies across the country.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		A headline this morning to share with our viewers, USA Today DOJ abandons police reform settlements over deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Your reaction.
unidentified		It is really, really unfortunate that the DLJ have shifted so radically.
		No one in any community, regardless of one's identity, should be confronted with police officers who are not good actors.
		Many of the consent orders were put in place because of individual actions or the culture of policing for certain agencies.
		So when you find individuals who are not operating within the guardrails of the law, but sworn to uphold and protect the law, then there has to be accountability.
		There has to be a checks and balance.
		And the Department of Justice, they served that role for decades.
		And for this administration to drop those consent orders, to stall investigations, it only put more people at risk.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		The Assistant Attorney General put out this statement.
		These lawsuits, which were filed at the last minute by the Biden administration after President Donald Trump's reelection, accused Louisville and Minneapolis of widespread patterns of unconstitutional policing practices by wrongly equating statistical disparities with intentional discrimination and heavily relying on flawed methodologies and incomplete data.
		They also sought to subject the Louisville and Minneapolis police departments to sweeping consent decrees that went far beyond the Biden administration's accusations of unconstitutional conduct.
		How do you respond?
unidentified		Well, it is unfortunate that this administration will make wild accusations after a thorough investigation was conducted after the death of Breonna Taylor, after there were findings of factual issues with the policing in that community as it was in many communities across the country.
		Facts matter.
		People's lives have been destroyed.
		People's lives have been taken because you have individuals who are rogue officers.
		It's not an indictment of law enforcement writ large.
		It's not an indictment of majority police officers.
		But when you do have individuals who cause harm, if there is a culture of operating outside of the bounds of law, the Department of Justice should be charged to ensure there's accountability that law enforcement officers who are sworn to uphold and protect are actually doing so, that cultures that go counter to that should be broken and people are kept safe, both police officers and citizens.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We'll take our viewers, questions and comments as well here this morning with NAACP's president and CEO Derek Johnson.
		Mr. Johnson, I also want to get your reaction to the Trump executive orders on policing.
		They include legal help for accused officers, expanded training and more pay for officers, tougher penalties for crimes against officers, more investment in security and capacity of prisons, a review of police reform agreements.
		This is what led to the latest action abandoning Minneapolis and those and Louisville agreements that we were just talking about.
		More military grade equipment and resources for local law enforcement, more money to collect crime data and prosecution of local and state officials and Homeland Security agents as enforcers.
		Mr. Johnson, your reaction to those.
unidentified		It was unfortunate.
		Citizens are not the enemy.
		We are.
		We make up this democracy.
		And we should chart a course where law enforcement agencies are actually keeping people safe, respecting human dignity and life.
		And there is a partnership with community and law enforcement agencies.
		And what this executive order is doing is creating an us versus them reality.
		And that's unfortunate.
		No other leading nation in the country that I'm aware of creates such tension between community and law enforcement agencies.
		It is coming directly from the White House.
		It is an unfortunate executive order.
		It is a part of a lot of executive orders that's creating distraction or distorting what really's taking place in an effort to redefine the role of government and take individuals' rights, liberties, and benefits.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We'll go to our first call here.
		Robert is joining us from Massachusetts, Democratic Caller.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, my brother.
		Glad to see you.
		I love the NAACP.
		I spent many years with the NAACP.
		I'm going to, well, Donald Trump is going to take away the college fund, the Negro College Fund, away from the black colleges.
		That's one thing and what he's going to do next.
		And also, all the good work that you do, Al Sharpton and Reverend Barbara, I just believe they're taking away from the NAACP.
		We all need to be one as a people.
		I know you know both of them, brothers, very, very well, but everything that happened in the 1960s is going to happen this other.
		And that, I grew up in the 1960s.
		When you talk about George Floyd, when I was a young man, I lived in New York.
		I was a Black Panther.
		I was in the Black Panther movement.
		And they killed Fred Hampton.
		The police broke into that house and shot Fred Hampton in his bed.
		And then we had, let's not forget about Freddie Gregg, Mr. Tillman.
		Let's not forget about Neb Eva.
		So everything happened in the 1960s will happen.
		We had Kent State with the National Guard came and shot them students.
dennis in north carolina ▲ ● ▼		Donald Trump is going to go, if them students protest, he's going to go and send the National Guard on them young students.
unidentified		That's what I'm worried about.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Robert.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Mr. Johnson.
unidentified		Thank you.
		Thank you.
		You know, I'll start by saying social justice isn't a competition.
		For many of us, our sole role is to ensure equal protection under the laws afforded to every citizen.
		And the Constitution is respected as the governing document of this nation.
		And we work and fight hard to ensure those protections are in place, not just for one or two communities, it's for all citizens.
		And about UNCF, UNCF is a collection of private, historically black colleges and universities.
		That's different from the state schools.
		But what we're witnessing across the board, whether it's historically black college or Ivy League school, is an attack on education, private and public.
		It is a demeaning of the intellectual class, something we really need in this global economy.
		We need more critical thinkers.
		We need more people prepared to participate in a global economy and not less.
		And unfortunately, this administration is seeking to dummy down the American people across the board.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Moses is next in Lakeland, Minnesota.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Independent caller.
unidentified		And she's saying, Good morning, America.
		With all due respect, sir, this segment was on the fifth anniversary of George Floyd's killing.
		Is that correct?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We're talking about, we talked about that.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We're also talking about policing in this country.
unidentified		All right.
dominic michael tripi ▲ ● ▼		So, Let me, did you, sir, have you ever seen the documentary by Liz Collins, The Fall of Minneapolis?
unidentified		I have not.
dominic michael tripi ▲ ● ▼		Okay, you should check that out because I was born in Minneapolis and I really thought it was a beautiful city until they destroyed it and where people were thrown in jail and people like Kamala Harris helped bail out the people who are putting $2 billion worth of damage to everybody's businesses.
unidentified		And what you'll find out in that documentary is that he basically died of an overdose.
		He ate the crack or whatever it was, the meth that he was selling on the street after ripping off a local retail store with counterfeit money.
		So, I mean, there's two sides to every story.
		I mean, everybody should be treated the same and be colorblind and policing and all that.
		But, you know, there are facts, there are truths, and you don't celebrate crime.
		So that's just something I wanted to say.
		Thank you.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Derek Johnson?
unidentified		First, we're not here to relitigate a case that's already been to trial.
		A jury found those officers guilty.
		Secondly, many of us witnessed the tape, the video live of George Floyd being put in a chokehold and killed by those officers.
		You can't redo facts.
		You can't remake history, particularly for the millions of people, actually tens of millions of people around the globe who witnessed that horrific day.
		If Mr. Floyd has some other chemical dependencies, that's unfortunate.
		If Minneapolis overtime, there's quality of life in some areas reduced because of economic standards and other things, that's unfortunate.
		But we cannot relitigate what's already been in front of a jury, a trial.
		We have a legal system.
		The facts were heard and the outcome was rendered.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Mr. Johnson, you said at the top that the George Floyd Act that followed his death was a missed opportunity.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		In what way?
unidentified		Well, one, you know, we believe that law enforcement officers across the country, by and large, are really good people who are dedicating their lives, themselves and their lives to protect all of us.
		But if you have individuals who are rogue officers who are operating outside of the standards that should be in place, then there should be a national database of police misconduct.
		So when an officer is terminated from an agency, that officer for misconduct, that person couldn't go the next week and go to another agency and do the same thing to that community.
		There should be uniform standards across the board.
		If in the medical profession, you have doctors who have to meet annually standards, lawyers have to meet annually standards.
		Law enforcement officers should also have to meet annual standards.
		There are many pieces to that piece of legislation.
		That's not about race or gender.
		It's about ensuring that we have individuals who dedicate their lives not corrupted by rogue officers.
		And when rogue officers are identified, those individuals are put into a database so they can no longer terrorize communities regardless of ethnic makeup of the community.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Why was it stalled?
unidentified		I won't say stalled.
		It hasn't passed.
		You know, many reasons why it hasn't passed like any other piece of legislation.
		I would just say it's a missed opportunity.
		It didn't pass the Senate.
		A version of the bill did pass the House.
		And I hope at some point policymakers in D.C. recognize that we should increase the standard for law enforcement, provide the necessary training, ensure that rogue officers are not hopping from agency to agency to protect American people.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Since the killing of George Floyd, what have states done on a local level?
unidentified		Well, it varies.
		Local agencies have adjusted some of their policies.
		Some states adopted policies to strengthen standards and to protect citizens.
		Many agencies now have cameras that officers automatically turn on when they are in pursuit, both in the car and on their body.
		And body cams and car cams have revealed that we have to ensure that there is a level of accountability across the board.
		Yes, officers will make mistakes.
		Yes, citizens can cause harm and make mistakes.
		But at the end of the day, transparency is our best weapon.
		And the body cams and the car camps have actually helped many individuals, both officers and citizens, to be safe when they're encountering one another.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We'll go to Houston, Texas.
		Mike is watching there.
		Republican caller.
unidentified		Good morning.
		You know, I had called the program when Steve Phillips was a guest on a similar type of topic some six months ago.
		And I told him, I said, you know, and I was sincere about it.
		I said, Steve, why don't you talk about black fathers?
		I think it's so essential that a person's first experience in life with governance is in the home.
		They experience how a husband and father or mom and dad interact and negotiate and deal with problems and the police and out in public and just holding the door for people coming into the grocery store.
		These things are things that people learn when they're young.
		And for some reason, for some reason, we want to hold up George Floyd, who doesn't have a history of stability and of decency, quite frankly, in those kinds of social settings.
		And I don't understand why this is not a priority for the NAACP.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		To me, Jack Brewer, Mike, I'm going to have, I'll jump in and have Derek Johnson respond to you.
unidentified		All right.
		Well, thank you, Mike.
		I am a black father.
		All of my friends are male who grew up are black fathers, and we are with our families, close to our families, raising our kids, and actually supporting others.
		But this discussion is about public policy, not individual behaviors.
		And what we have seen in this country across racial lines is the erosion of a two-family parent, especially in the white community.
		But this isn't about individual behaviors.
		What we're talking about here is public policy.
		What can we do with a public policy lens to ensure we have top-rated law officers, agencies, to protect and serve communities in ways in which when citizens and officers are encountering one another, everyone can be assured that it is a transaction that's fair, that's above board, and within the bounds of law.
		That's what this conversation is about.
		It's not upholding someone's behavior.
		It is about the public policy guardrails that's in place to ensure officers and agencies are protected and serving and not causing harm.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		James in Mobile, Alabama, Independent.
		Good morning.
		You're on the air with Derek Johnson.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I have a question to Mr. Johnson.
		If he could talk about what's going on in the state of Alabama, where the NAACP has had a lawsuit against the state about SB1, which is a terrible law.
		And I wish he could elaborate on that.
		All right.
		Please explain what is SB1.
		I have members in 50 states, so I don't know which one.
		It's a law, it was a law that was passed in 2024 by Governor Kay Ivey, and it deals with ballot harvesting and submitting an SP ballot.
		Yeah, we will continue to litigate to ensure elections are fair, that citizens who are eligible to cast an effective ballot, meaning they can cast a ballot and will be counted.
		And it's transparent.
		And anytime there are laws adopted by any state to impede one's ability to pass an effective ballot or bar access to voting, we will litigate.
		We're not seeking to advantage whether a person is affiliated with any political party.
		We're nonpartisans, but we fight to ensure that equal protection under the law is afforded to all citizens and access to the ballot box is a guaranteed right that every citizen should be insured to exercise.
		And that's why we filed a lawsuit in Alabama and several other states when we see a policy is being adopted that would impede one's right to vote.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Mr. Johnson, can you give us some details of action by states on voter laws that concern the NAACP?
unidentified		Well, I mean, it's far-ranging is whether lawsuits that we have been in and won successfully in Alabama and other states of Mississippi most recently around redistricting, drawing up political boundaries that would limit access and or PAC,
		stack, or crack district laws that have been adopted to reverse existing laws where individuals who need assistance in reading a ballot because of various reasons, elderly, now they're being prevented from doing so.
		We file lawsuits in jurisdictions where officials who were not connected to the election process was in the polling place causing intimidations, mis and disinformation.
		So to ensure people understand their right to vote and how to navigate the voting process.
		It's far-ranging depending on the state or the region of the country.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We'll go to Selena, who's in Rochester, New York, Democratic Caller.
unidentified		Good morning, Mr. Johnson, and thank you for taking my comment and then any comments that you have.
		I'm calling this morning because I want to ask you if you are aware that at least some white men in the United States of America are advancing the lie or the delusion or the racism that Chauvin did not kill George Florets.
		And the other comment question is, are you aware of or are you hearing that those kind of people are seeking a pardon from Donald Trump or probably going to seek a pardon for Gary Chauvin because in their view, Chauvin did not kill George Flores.
		Thank you and I'll take your comment off of the air.
		Thank you.
		Yes, it has been wildly, you know, widely stated that the president is seeking to pardon Chauvin.
		However, he was also convicted of state crimes.
		And so even if the president pardoned him for federal crimes, he still will have to serve his term for the state crime conviction.
		There was a trial of his peers in the state.
		In that trial, he was found guilty.
		There are many, like the caller earlier, who are seeking to really relitigate outside of the court the facts of the matter.
		Like anyone else convicted of a crime, he has the right to appeal.
		He has a due process that he can go through to show his prove his innocence.
		However, the reality is we witness on live video what took place.
		It's very difficult to change what we see.
		It is the old saying, Who are you going to believe?
		Your lying eyes or me?
		Our eyes didn't lie.
		We've seen what we've seen.
		It was inhumane treatment of an individual, regardless of his station in life, his medical history, his chemical dependency, his identity.
		We witness on live video the taking of an individual's life without due process.
		As a civilized nation, none of us should stand idly by and second guess what we witness on live video.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Clearwater, Florida.
		Misty is an independent there.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Morning.
		My question is: this with medical, with giving a thing with AI right now is in a database.
		You can quickly find out what medicines everybody has.
		What is so hard with us doing the same thing with law enforcement?
		Why can't we have a database where if you did something inappropriate, it is filed and it is across the board where we all can access it?
		What is so wrong with that?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Misty.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Derek Johnson.
unidentified		My question: Exactly.
		We must pass the George Flora Police Reforming Act.
		A nationwide database of police misconduct is sensible policy.
		Why wouldn't the American people or policymakers want to ensure those who have been sworn to uphold and protect us in every community across this country?
		We have individuals who have not caused harm in other jurisdictions.
		What we have found are individuals who are leaving an law enforcement agency for misconduct.
		Some of the misconduct is directly related to mental health issues.
		Some of the misconduct is uncontrollable behavior.
		And so we should be able to account for that.
		There is no other profession that I can think of that you can cause harm, bodily harm, and sometimes death, and yet still keep your license and go to another agency only to do the same.
		There was a 12-year-old playing cops and robbers in a park.
		And as a result, a law enforcement officer who had a track record at other agencies in close proximity killed a 12-year-old child playing cops and robbers because he did not and still does not have the mental capacity to be a law enforcement officer.
		What is so wrong with that?
		I say nothing.
		It's sensible public policy.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Beverly in Ohio, Democratic caller, we'll go to you next.
unidentified		Hello, Mr. Johnson.
		Morning.
		Hello.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Yes, Beverly, he can hear you.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Question or comment, please.
unidentified		Comment.
		I am very, I am very, very upset with President Trump's spending bill, his big, beautiful bill.
		It's a big, ugly bill, and he is doing everything to destroy our country.
		I want him to rescind all his orders, and I'm so glad that Musk is gone.
		And I support the NAACP.
		You are wonderful, marvelous, fabulous, and I agree with you on everything.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Beverly, I'll jump in.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Derek Johnson, your final thoughts here this morning.
unidentified		You know, what we are witnessing is a shock and awe to our system.
		There were so many things, a flurry of executive orders to distract and distort what's really taking place.
		You use one's identity, race, or gender, or orientation to distract people and get them up in arms.
		But the real harm that we are witnessing right now is a radical redesign of government.
		You know, very soon, many people, if this big, beautiful bill, as they call it, passed, veterans who served our country with honor across racial and gender lines, they're going to be denied their benefits.
		It's going to be more difficult for them to access health care.
		Individuals who've paid into a system to ensure they had a safety net and retirement, we call Social Security, is going to be put in jeopardy.
		And many people are seeking to put it into the private market.
		You have individuals whose loved ones are currently in the nursing home.
		Based on this bill, it would cut over $800 billion out of Medicaid.
		With that cut, it is the primary resource to put our loved ones in nursing homes, parents and grandparents.
		And what's going to happen when Medicaid is cut and they have nowhere to go, or many families will have to take them in and care for them.
		There are so many things that this bill would do, all in the effort to give more breaks to the most wealthiest individuals and corporations on the globe, not only in this country, on the globe.
		It is a radical redesign of government, and people will spend more time distracting us to fight us against us, as opposed to recognizing we're being distracted, the messages are being distorted, so they can take the benefits that we've paid into, that we've earned, and as citizens, we deserve.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Derek Johnson, the president and CEO of the NAACP, thank you for the conversation this morning.
unidentified		Thank you.
unidentified		Have a great morning.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We'll take a short break.
		When we come back, we'll return to our question that we asked at the top of today's Washington Journal.
		Do you support President Trump's tariffs and trade agenda?
		There are the lines on your screen.
		Start dialing in.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		American History TV, Saturdays on C-SPAN 2, exploring the people and events that tell the American story.
		This weekend, at 6.45 p.m. Eastern, Columbia University presents the Bancroft Prize to the 2025 winners Kathleen Duvall, author of Native Nations, and James Tijani for his book, A Machine to Move Ocean and Earth.
		And at 7.30 p.m. Eastern, American History TV tours the International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C. Historian and curator Andrew Hammond highlights espionage tools and artifacts from the museum's collection, including a letter from George Washington about a Revolutionary War spy ring.
		Then at 8 p.m. Eastern on Lectures and History, George Mason University's John Turner teaches a class on the history of Islam and Judaism in America.
		At 9:30 p.m. Eastern on the presidency, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, author of The Pardon, examines the origins and politics of the president's right to pardon using Gerald Ford's 1974 pardon of his predecessor Richard Nixon as a case study.
		Exploring the American story.
		Watch American History TV Saturdays on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org slash history.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		Rick Atkinson has just published the second volume of his American Revolution trilogy.
		The book is called The Fate of the Day and covers years 1777 through 1780 of the American Revolution.
		His initial 800-page volume focused on years 1775 to 1777.
		First volume was titled The British Are Coming.
		The first book in the trilogy was published in 2019.
		Mr. Atkinson won the George Washington Prize for this beginning look at the revolution.
		His second book in the trilogy covers the middle years.
		Stationed in Paris, Benjamin Franklin was wooing the French.
		In Pennsylvania, George Washington was pleading with Congress to deliver the money, men, and material he needed to continue the fight.
		This volume is time to coincide with the 250th anniversary of the beginning of the American Revolution.
unidentified		Author Rick Atkinson with his book, The Fate of the Day: The War for America, Fort Ticonderoga to Charleston, 1777 to 1780.
		On this episode of Book Notes Plus with our host, Brian Lamb.
		BookNotes Plus is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
		Washington Journal continues.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We are asking you whether or not you support President Trump's tariffs and trade agenda following two courts ruling against the Trump administration and the sweeping tariffs put in place at the beginning of April as part of the president's Liberation Day.
		There are the lines on your screen.
		Start dialing in.
		We want to hear from you and your thoughts about the president's actions on tariffs and trade.
		One of the courts was the International Trade Court ruling against the administration, saying that the president does not have broad powers to institute sweeping tariffs.
		Now, a appeals court has put the trade courts ruling on hold while they take a look at this case.
		It includes the tariffs against China that were once at 145%.
		The president backed them down to 30%, the cross-the-board tariffs of 10%, and the tariffs on Canada and Mexico parted this ruling.
		The president this morning on trade with China wrote this on Truth Social.
		Two weeks ago, China was in grave economic danger.
		The very high tariffs I set made it virtually impossible for China to trade into the United States marketplace, which is by far number one in the world.
		We went in effect cold turkey with China.
		It was devastating for them, he says.
		He said that he changed his mind on those devastating tariffs because it was hurting China, not the United States.
		The bad news, he goes on to say, is that China, perhaps not surprisingly to some, has totally violated its agreement with us.
		So much for being Mr. Nice Guy, that from President Trump today.
		Peter Navarro, who is the president's trade advisor, outside of the White House yesterday, just minutes after the appeals court reinstated the president's tariffs.
		For now, this is what he had to say to reporters.
unidentified		The tariffs remain in place.
		The court told us, they didn't all but tell us, they told us, go do it another way.
		So you can assume that even if we lose, we will do it another way.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		And I can assure the American people that the Trump tariff agenda is alive, well, healthy, and will be implemented to protect you, to save your jobs and your factories, and to stop shipping foreign wealth, our wealth, into foreign hands.
karoline leavitt ▲ ● ▼		So you are working on a plan B right?
unidentified		Of course.
		There's no plan B.
		It's Plan A.
		Okay?
		Plan A encompasses all strategic options.
		And when we move forward, we had a full view of what the battlefield looks like.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		We are not naive about rogue justices in the judiciary and Democrats filing lawsuits.
unidentified		This has got to stop, by the way.
peter navarro ▲ ● ▼		This weaponization of the judiciary to stop President Trump from doing what he promised the American people.
unidentified		This has got to stop.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Peter Navarro talking to reporters at the White House yesterday, he says that the administration will pivot now.
		He doesn't say it's Plan B, it's Plan A, but the Wall Street Journal this morning in their front page says the White House devises Plan B on trade policy.
		First, the administration is considering a stopgap effort to impose tariffs on swaths of the global economy under a never-before-used provision of the Trade Act of 1974, which includes language allowing for tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days to address trade imbalances with other countries.
		That would then buy time for Trump to devise individualized tariffs for each major trading partner under a different provision of the same law.
		Do you support President Trump's tariffs and trade agenda?
		A recent poll conducted by Marquette Law School found that 63% disapprove of President Trump's job handling of tariffs.
		37% approved.
		We'll go to Jamie, who's in Garden City, Missouri.
		Republican, you're up first.
		Jamie, what do you think of the president's tariffs and trade agenda?
unidentified		I say we let him do it.
		Everybody, just like when he took office in 2016, 2017, everybody fought him tooth and nail, tried to impeach him over a bogus, deal dossier, and all that.
		He pulled through.
		The economy was good.
		Everything looked good.
		Everybody was fine.
		And now that he's back in office, it seems like every single thing this president tries to do, the media, the newspapers, the Democrats seem to fight him every step of the way instead of working and seeing, hey, this might really be a good idea for America.
		This may really help us be able to afford groceries eventually, bring prices down.
		It seems like he's constantly, even when he was running for president, everybody just fights him tooth and nail.
		And I've never seen anything like it.
		I don't understand it.
		What is this?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Jamie, her thoughts there.
		Mary, an Emporia Virginia Democratic caller.
		Mary, what do you think?
unidentified		I told it, go against it.
		Number one, he's a Republican president, yes, but he wants to be the king and the father of this nation.
		And he is not our father.
		We have one father, our earthly father, and our father, which is in heaven.
		His mind is not set right.
		I have taken up psychology classes, and this man is really in a very beautiful state of mind, of psycho.
		Need help, and the only person that can help him right now is ABBA, ABBA, ABBA Father, who would only.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, that was Mary there and her thoughts this morning.
		We're asking whether or not you support President Trump's tariffs and trade agenda.
		The Washington Times front page this morning rules rulings add more uncertainty to trade.
		Court disrupt the Trump's attempt to reshape global policy using tariffs.
		And they write: the trade court ruled that the 1970s-era law Mr. Trump was using the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, doesn't give the president the expansive powers he is claiming to, quote, impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country in the world.
		Let's hear from Paul in West Virginia, Independent.
		Hi, Paul.
unidentified		Hi, good morning, Greta.
		Longtime listener of C-SPAN Radio.
		I do not agree with Trump's tariffs, although I do understand and I think it's a good thing that he wants to bring back manufacturing to America.
		I just don't think he's going about it in the right way.
		And I'm no economic expert, so I'm not sure what exactly the right way would be.
		But I think the whole raising tariffs to this unusually high level is not the right way to do it.
		And to give you an example, I'm a blue-collar worker and I'm a field technician.
		And my company this year made the decision not to give any of our workers a raise directly due to the tariffs that Trump put in place.
		They're saying that, you know, because, and Richard, that's just the 10% base tariffs.
		So I'm not a huge fan of that, to say the least.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		So, Paul, how has that impacted you?
		Knowing that you're not going to get a raise then, how have you changed your lifestyle?
unidentified		Well, you know, it's really, it's just I might have to look for a different job, first of all, you know, just to keep up with the inflation, you know, because that what little raise I get each year, you know, will keep me, you know, at the company.
		But it'll be tough, you know, because I have a child on the way, you know, first one.
		So I have to really start thinking that, you know, it'll be tough.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Well, congratulations, Paul, to you.
		And just some numbers, inflation numbers that came out, Paul, that you might be interested in because you're talking about that raise keeps you equal to inflation.
		This is from Axios.
		The Fed's go-to inflation gauge slows in April.
		And from Axios was reporting, the Federal Reserve favored inflation indicator cooled in April, though consumers pulled back sharply on their spending.
		Why it matters?
		Price pressures were mild, but consumers were notably cautious as President Trump implemented some of the steepest tariffs to date.
		So more to come on that.
		We'll see how the Federal Reserve reacts to these latest data numbers as well.
		Eddie in Peora, Illinois, Democratic Caller.
		Hi, Eddie.
unidentified		Good morning, Greta.
		Good morning.
		I disagree with the tariff.
		If you look at the history of the United States, now China is the best and second best economy in the world, next to the United States.
		China opened up their country 40 to 50 years ago for businesses to come into China.
		China is getting ahead of America with the new technology.
		If America invests in new technology with their workers instead of the corporations, the companies moving their business overseas.
		My company went to Mexico to build engines.
		My company went to Wright the Work State to break the union.
		So we've been in a downhill progression.
		to dismantle American workers.
		So I'm saying the tariff is just a camouflage of what's really going on.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Eddie.
		Front page of USA Today, court tangles up Trump's tariffs.
		The Court of International Trade ruled on May 28th that Trump didn't have the authority under the legislation and emergency he cited April 2nd to impose the tariffs on imports.
		After an uproar, Trump paused most of the tariffs for 90 days to hammer out trade deals with specific countries.
		Now, the International Court of Trade ruled against these specific tariffs that are in place against countries like China, all the goods, the 30% tariff that is currently in place down from 145%.
		They also ruled that the tariffs against Mexico for most goods at 25% is illegal, as well as the 25% on most goods for Canada and the 10% baseline tariffs on all countries.
		The court ruling, the International Trade Court ruling, all of those are illegal.
		And as we said, the appeals court put a pause on the ruling by the trade court until they can take a look at it.
		We heard from the Canadian Prime Minister Mark Kearney reacting to the Trade Court's ruling.
		Here's what he had to say.
mark carney ▲ ● ▼		Speaker, the government welcomes yesterday's decision by the U.S. Court of International Trade, which is consistent with Canada's long-standing position that the U.S. IEPA tariffs were unlawful as well as unjustified.
		That said, we recognize that our trading relationship with the United States is still profoundly and adversely threatened and affected by similarly unjustified 232 tariffs against steel, aluminum, and the auto sector, as well as continuing threats of tariffs against other strategic sectors, including lumber, semiconductors, and pharmaceuticals.
		It therefore remains the top priority of Canada's new government to establish a new economic and security relationship with the United States and to strengthen our collaboration with reliable trading partners and allies around the world.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		The Canadian Prime Minister on the International Trade Court's decision, now that decision on hold while an appeals court looks at it.
		You heard the Canadian Prime Minister mention steel and the trading of steel with the United States.
		The President is expected to make an announcement on a steel deal at 5 p.m. Eastern Time in Pennsylvania.
		We'll have live coverage here on C-SPAN.
		Our free video mobile app, C-SPANNOW, or online at c-span.org.
		Now, who brought this case to the International Trade Court?
		Wall Street Journal this morning with details on that.
		The U.S. Court of International Trade sided with 12 states and a handful of small business owners in a ruling that Trump didn't have the authority to impose those sweeping tariffs.
		These states, which all have Democratic attorneys general, included a basic argument to justify the suit.
		The levies will lift prices for things they buy.
		The story goes on to talk about the state of Oregon, Delaware, New York, and others, the small businesses that filed this suit.
		John in New York, Independent, we're talking about the president's trade and tariff agenda.
		You support it or not?
unidentified		Yeah, I support it.
		He's the president of the United States.
		I don't know how it's going to work out.
		I think it's going to take time to let it see how it develops.
		But, you know, he's a pretty smart guy.
		He's, you know, pretty good business guy.
		And I don't know too much about how to run something at that level, the country of the United States.
		But the one thing that bothers me is the legislature with all these judges that are just appointed by wherever, in some small town or some small county, and they're interfering with anything he wants to do.
		But they were never, he was elected president by what, 74, I don't know, 70 million Americans.
		And the other thing, too, that bothers me is you have a stack of newspapers every morning on your desk, and you highlight everything with your pen and circle it and highlight it.
		And is there anything?
		Can you find one little sentence in there that has something good to say about our president, the president of the United States?
		You never do.
		You always can, everything is a condemnation of his policies, what he's doing, how bad this is, how bad that is.
		Just, I mean, I'd like to see, prove me wrong, is there one publication that you can put on your desk and say something positive about what's going on in our country by the administration or policy that endorsing?
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		John, I don't know if you watched today.
		We had Sean Spicer on, who was defending the president.
		We've played sound from the White House advisors, Peter Navarro, who's his trade advisor, talking about this.
		Kevin Hassett talking about the economy, played sound from the president himself.
		They all defending the administration's trade and agenda policy.
		And I will just share this with you from the Wall Street Journal.
		Both sides of the argument.
		So economists agree that tariffs raise consumer prices and harm economic growth.
		The Trump administration has argued that the levies will generate hundreds of billions of dollars a year in revenue and boost domestic manufacturing, ultimately benefiting the economy.
		We're asking you this morning: what do you think?
		Do you agree with the economists that it hurts consumers, or do you agree with the administration that this will generate hundreds of billions of dollars a year in revenue and boost domestic manufacturing?
		And they say, bring jobs, more jobs to America.
		Let's go to Mike in Orland Park, Illinois, Republican.
		Mike, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I got to say kudos to the last caller.
		I definitely support the tariffs.
		I think people have to have a lot more patience.
		This doesn't happen in one night just because you put a tariff on it.
		Last thing I'd like to say is I'm in my 70s, and I can remember a time I grew up in Chicago.
		My family's there for a couple hundred years.
		I can remember a time when you could quit a job in the summertime to go hang out at the beach, and in the fall, you could find another job to replace it.
		Those jobs, all those factories that we used to have, are gone.
		They built homes in there so that they can't even bring the factories back into the city anymore.
		So the number one thing is America cut its own throat when they started trying to build up foreign countries rather than our own by sending the jobs to those countries instead of keeping them here for Americans.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		We need to.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Mike in Illinois, Republican caller.
		We'll go to Belinda in Blackshare, Georgia.
		Democratic caller, you're next.
unidentified		Hello.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		We're listening, Belinda, the President's Trade and Tariffs Agenda.
unidentified		I do not agree with it.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Okay, tell us why.
unidentified		Because I have watched politics with my dad since I was little.
		I'm 62, and I know there's no good to come from this.
		I'm sure it's going to put money in someone's pocket, but definitely not the people that need it most.
		I'm disabled already.
		I live below poverty level.
		I can't even hardly afford to feed myself.
		I get $900 a month and I can't even get food stamps.
		And now I have to worry is my medical and my disability going to be cut off because I've been disabled for 20 years and I can't work.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		I wish I could.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Belinda there in Black Shearer, Georgia.
		Democratic caller.
		What is the Court of International Trade?
		The New York Times this morning says the Court of International Trade is a New York-based federal court.
		It has nationwide jurisdiction over tariff and trade disputes.
		Currently, it has 14 judges appointed by six presidents.
		A single judge typically presides over a case, but a three-judge panel hears cases that raise constitutional questions or have significant implications, like the Trump tariff case.
		Congress created this court in 1980 as a successor to the U.S. Custom Court.
		It's based in New York because of the legacy of New York City as the busiest harbor for U.S. imports.
		It is an obscure court, and here's a quote from one specialist attorney says, most lawyers will get out of law school without knowing that it exists.
		Dagnia in Norman, Indiana, an independent, we'll hear from you.
		Do you support the President's trade and tariffs agenda?
unidentified		Well, specifically to the trade and tariff agenda, I have a master's degree in several subjects, and I personally have no way to form an independent opinion about whether these tariffs are any good or if they're as bad as the Democrats say.
		And I don't think that there's probably not even 2% of the people out there that have strong opinions that have any idea independently from what they hear on TV or in the media or reading the newspapers.
		So I don't think anybody really knows whether this is going to be good for us or not.
		But despite all that, Trump is our president.
		I have seen the Dems try to do everything to take him down.
		I've seen the Republicans push issues that I don't believe in either.
		But he is our president, and our country depends on him being successful.
		We need to support him rather than act out of our partisan little viewpoints that we really don't have the basis to make an informed opinion about.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Dania.
unidentified		That's all I have to say.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's listen to the White House press secretary yesterday, Caroline Lovett, during her briefing.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		She was asked about the back and forth on trade.
karoline leavitt ▲ ● ▼		The courts should have no role here.
		There is a troubling and dangerous trend of unelected judges inserting themselves into the presidential decision-making process.
		America cannot function if President Trump or any other president for that matter has their sensitive diplomatic or trade negotiations railroaded by activist judges.
		President Trump is in the process of rebalancing America's trading agreements with the entire world, bringing tens of billions of dollars in tariff revenues to our country, and finally ending the United States of America from being ripped off.
		These judges are threatening to undermine the credibility of the United States on the world stage.
		The administration has already filed an emergency motion for a stay pending appeal and an immediate administrative stay to strike down this egregious decision.
		But ultimately, the Supreme Court must put an end to this for the sake of our Constitution and our country.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Caroline Lovett from the podium at the White House yesterday during her briefing talking about this court's decision against the president's tariffs policies.
		Tammy Duckworth, who's a senator, Democratic senator, responding saying a federal court, including a judge Trump himself appointed, has spoken.
		Trump does not have the authority to set these outrageous tariffs that are sending costs skyrocketing and tanking retirement accounts.
		It's time for the wannabe tyrant to end these devastating trade wars now.
		And then you have this from Congresswoman Ayanna Presley, Ayana Presley saying, Donald Trump's chaotic tariffs haven't just wrecked our economy and harmed consumers.
		They're also illegal.
		We're fighting back in the courts and we're winning.
		Sam in San Jose, California, Republican.
		Sam, what do you say about the president's actions on trade?
unidentified		Good morning.
		First of all, first of all, he's right on spot.
		China is trying to make all the money they can to build their warships, all their army, and everything.
		And he hit them right in the belly with the pocketbook.
		Okay?
		People don't get it.
		Most of the people calling in here are not business people, the liberals and the Democrats.
		They're all, I feel this, I feel that.
		We're talking business here.
		If we went to war, where are you going to get your steel?
		You got one steel plant.
		You got one aluminum plant called Century.
		You got aluminum and a steel plant.
		That's it.
		How are you going to supply enough steel and aluminum to protect this country?
		Zero.
		You can't.
		Trump knows that.
		He knows also the medicine, the medical stuff has to come back here because you can't be ordering in medicine from China if you're at war.
		I don't mean just war with China, but war anywhere in the world.
		We got a powder keg in Ukraine.
		Okay?
		If something goes off in Ukraine and a World War III starts, where are you going to get the steel, the aluminum, the medicine?
		And not only that, he's the best friend the people have by shutting down the border and letting all these people come in and taking the jobs away from Americans.
		Sam, I'll even say that.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Sam, I'll jump in once you've moved on from trade just to note what you said about war and conflict in Ukraine and Russia.
		The UN Security Council is about to begin here at 10 a.m. Eastern Time or shortly after a debate that Russia has called for alleging threats to international peace and security by European countries.
		And we're going to look to have live coverage of that right here on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, our free video mobile app, and online at c-span.org.
		In the meantime, we'll continue with this conversation about the president's tariffs and trade agenda.
		Rudy, let's hear from you in Georgia, Democratic Collar.
unidentified		I don't support the tariffs because those increases are passed on to the consumer.
		I worked for Del Careman Division of General Motors for 29 years.
		There were 20,000 employees.
		And the reason those jobs left Anderson, Indiana is because they could bail them cheaper in at the time, Japan and Mexico.
		I came down here to Georgia to work for a company called Tecumseh.
		And that factory closed because the owner said that he could move jobs to China and have a factory full of college-educated engineers that work for a dollar an hour and didn't need any automation and did everything by hand.
		So if the prices are going to be passed on to consumers, it's a problem.
		I like tangerines.
		And the other day I went to a store to buy tangerines at Publix.
		It was $6.99 a bag.
		I counted them.
		That equated the 50 cents per tangerine, and they come from Florida.
		So it's a no-brainer that these tariffs were hurt.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Rudy in Georgia.
		Let's go to Charlotte in London, Kentucky, Republican.
		Charlotte, go ahead.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		I'd like to remind the American people that until 1913, the United States was fully funded by tariffs.
		It was the government that switched it over to the American people, and we had to pay for everything.
		The tariffs allow tax breaks for the American people because money is coming from the other side, and I don't believe the tariffs are even.
		And that's all I have to say this morning.
		Thank you very much.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		All right, Hawthorne, Arlington, Virginia, Republican.
greta brawner ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for accepting my call.
		I am not in favor of tariffs.
		I have an MBA, and I learned from graduate school that tariffs are no good.
		They only lead to trade wars.
		And you already know what's going on.
		The countries, all the other countries are against it.
		And what they're doing is they're also imposing tariffs.
		So it will only lead to trade wars.
		And the people who will suffer are us, the consumers, because all the prices will go up.
		You don't like inflation?
		This is not the way to treat inflation.
		They think Trump is intelligent.
		If he's intelligent, he doesn't show it.
		In the way he talks, all he says, if the person is, for him, what a great person he is.
		What a great guy he is.

▲