| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford examined Revolutionary War leadership at an event held at George Washington's Mount Vernon. | |
| Then at 12 noon Eastern, watch documentary filmmakers Ken Burns and Sarah Botstein as they join C-SPAN's Washington Journal to discuss their upcoming PBS series, The American Revolution. | ||
| At 5 p.m. Eastern, take a tour of the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C., where we look at the lunar lander that touched down on the moon, Charles Lindbergh's plane that flew across the Atlantic, and the X-15 flown by Neil Armstrong. | ||
| And at 8 p.m. Eastern, on Lectures and History, a discussion on the U.S. and the Arab-Israel peace process with Trinity College professor James Stoker, looking at the history of the U.S. negotiating ends to Israeli-Arab conflicts, including the 1967 Six-Day War, the 1973 Yom Kippur War, and the 2023 Israel-Hamas War. | ||
| 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. | ||
| Monday, but for the next 25 minutes, we'll be joined by Maryland Democratic Congressman Johnny Olszewski. | ||
| He joins us now via Zoom. | ||
| Congressman, you were in the chamber late last night for that vote to reopen the government. | ||
| You voted against that legislation. | ||
| Why? | ||
| Yeah, John, good morning. | ||
| I voted against that legislation because of what it does and doesn't do. | ||
| And while I'm really happy to see that our hardworking federal workers are going to be paid and that services are restored, this is a bill that does nothing to address the absolutely crushing cost of health care that Americans are now seeing as they go to enroll with their Affordable Care Act subsidies expiring. | ||
| We're talking about a $4,700 tax increase for the average family of four in Maryland. | ||
| That is devastating for a working family. | ||
| The legislation also does nothing to stop President Trump from taking money away from the funds that were just appropriated, as he's done time and time again, $9 billion in public broadcasting and foreign aid, $9 billion more through green energy projects in Democratic-led states and Democratic-led districts. | ||
| He's explicitly threatened the Key Bridge in Baltimore to take back that funding. | ||
| But what this legislation does do is it enables outright corruption. | ||
| It allows for million-dollar checks to go to U.S. senators who had phones legally subpoenaed, their phone records legally subpoenaed, and all they have to do is file a claim. | ||
| It is outright corruption and it's disgusting. | ||
| It's why Americans hate politics. | ||
| It's what's wrong with this Congress. | ||
| And it made it a very easy no vote for all of those reasons. | ||
| We could have made this a bipartisan bill that addressed those concerns and reopened the government. | ||
| But instead, extreme Republicans chose not to work with us to do just that. | ||
| If it does and doesn't do all those things that you just said, was this all worth it? | ||
| Would a longer shutdown have changed anything? | ||
| Well, it's hard to prove the counterfactual, right? | ||
| So what I can say is I think Democrats were absolutely right to point out the fact that Republicans were completely unwilling to do anything about extending the subsidies that are so critical to keep health care affordable. | ||
| Now we have to have a conversation about the underlying issues that are driving up health care costs in this country. | ||
| And I welcome that conversation. | ||
| But we can't allow families in America to take on thousands of dollars of debt, thousands of dollars of new tax increases, while we're spending a trillion dollars to bail out the most wealthy in this country, to give extended tax breaks permanently to billionaires in America. | ||
| We found $40 billion, or I should say the president found $40 billion to bail out his buddy in Argentina, but he couldn't be bothered to use that money to give a two-year extension, the same cost for those subsidies here. | ||
| So I think we were right to raise that issue. | ||
| I think we were right to raise the issue about the president unilaterally making these cuts to what were bipartisan budgets, let's remember. | ||
| So, you know, if we don't have those protections against the cuts, this deal isn't worth the paper it's written on. | ||
| And then to have the president sign off and to have members of Congress sign off on this corruption. | ||
| I mean, with corruption, usually you have at least some bribe or some quid pro quo. | ||
| This is Congress explicitly saying only U.S. senators can get a million dollar check for things that are happening thousands of times across this country, legal subpoenas that are signed off by a grand jury. | ||
| I mean, it is like the most disgusting thing we could possibly see. | ||
| So, yes, I do think it was worth raising the issue. | ||
| Whether it would have changed things or not, I can't say because we're reopening. | ||
| But I think that the work of raising these issues were critically important. | ||
| What happens on January 30th of 2026? | ||
| Do we just get to do this all over again? | ||
| We should get back in the room now so that we're not doing this all over again. | ||
| And we should do it in a bipartisan way. | ||
| You know, I went to the rules committee to offer an amendment that would have stopped the president from these pocket rescissions and from unilaterally making cuts, restoring the 60-vote threshold in the Senate to make cuts. | ||
| If it's a bipartisan deal to fund the government, it should be a bipartisan deal to make cuts. | ||
| And on both my amendments in the rules committee and for amendments that would have gutted that corruption provision, for amendments that would have given a one-year or two-year extension to the subsidies, not only did Republicans not consider them, they couldn't be bothered to be in the room. | ||
| There was only Chair Fox was the only member of the Rules Committee of the Republican Party who even bothered to have the conversation, who bothered to listen. | ||
| So I'm trying to be a new member who comes in good faith to offer amendments to make legislation bipartisan. | ||
| And it's really disappointing that those who are leading this Congress can't even be bothered to have the conversation, can't have the decency to be present as we're having that discussion and that dialogue. | ||
| It's really corrosive. | ||
| It's not productive. | ||
| And I'm going to keep pushing. | ||
| I'm going to keep trying because I wanted to be supportive of legislation that would have reopened the government, protected our budget prerogatives, and taken care of the health care imperative. | ||
| I think that that would have passed with an overwhelmingly bipartisan margin. | ||
| I'm going to keep pushing for that, but it's going to take work based on my experience in the rules committee this week. | ||
| Congressman Johnny Olszewski with us, Democrat of Maryland. | ||
| Phone lines are open for you to call in. | ||
| Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, as usual. | ||
| We do have that line for federal workers in this segment as well. | ||
| Would also like to hear from you. | ||
| As folks are calling in, Congressman, I know you're in the House. | ||
| I know you're a newer member. | ||
| But do you think that Chuck Schumer's time as the leader of Democrats in the Senate is drawing to a close? | ||
| That's a decision that Democrats in the Senate are going to have to make. | ||
| What I can tell you is that the legislation that we were asked to support was extremely disappointing for all the reasons we just discussed, the lack of action on the ACA subsidies. | ||
| And Speaker Johnson wouldn't even promise a vote, which is all that the senators got on that deal for the lack of protections against cuts and rescissions on the funding we just provided and for the corruption provisions that were added for U.S. senators. | ||
| I'm proud of our House leadership and the way in which we stood strong and pushed back against this really partisan effort to fund the government. | ||
| And that will be a question that I think that senators will have to answer in the days ahead. | ||
| We'll let you answer some questions from viewers. | ||
| We'll start on the line for Republicans. | ||
| This is Joseph out of the Garden State. | ||
| You're on with Congressman Johnny Olszewski. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hey, hey, how are you? | |
| I'm good. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So, how are you doing? | |
| I'm just listening to the congressman. | ||
| I just got a couple things to say, and then I'll hang up. | ||
| I'll listen to you, all right? | ||
| Just don't cut me off, all right? | ||
| I just, the first thing is, you guys shut down the government because you wanted to give money or you wanted to have hospitals give money to help out illegal aliens. | ||
| I'm a grandson of an immigrant. | ||
| I had no problem with legal immigration. | ||
| But you're telling me if somebody has to go to an emergency room and there's a law that you can't tell them to make them leave, if some illegal alien has a heart attack or was in the hospital for 10 days and then they just tell him go home after that, no, they're going to have follow-ups and they're going to have visits. | ||
| That's healthcare. | ||
| And that's what you guys wanted to give instead of helping Americans and vets. | ||
| That's one thing. | ||
| And the other thing about bailing out Argentina, all these Democrats in the neighborhood that I live, they got Ukrainian flags, and we've been giving them money every day for the last three years. | ||
| I know they're fighting the war. | ||
| But if Argentina goes and then the bailout, we made money on that. | ||
| There was a currency swap, and I think we made money on that. | ||
| But if Argentina goes, if we didn't help them out, I don't know if Democrats know geography. | ||
| They're a lot closer than Ukraine is. | ||
| And Argentina could have gone the way Venezuela did. | ||
| Got your points, Joseph. | ||
| Those two points, Congressman. | ||
| Yeah, Joseph, thanks for the question. | ||
| I actually appreciate the opportunity to clarify the record here a little bit. | ||
| First of all, I think you reinforce the point. | ||
| If we can send money to foreign governments, and I do support helping Ukraine in its fight against Russia here, we can and should find the money to support Americans who are going to be faced with crushing increases to their health care costs. | ||
| And even Americans who are lucky enough to have private insurance are going to see increases as well, not just those on the ACA. | ||
| I would say that actually Argentina, unfortunately, the taxpayers are not going to get a windfall. | ||
| This is being financed by hedge funds, and we don't have a whole lot of transparency as to who's going to benefit. | ||
| But this is a lot of money that's going to go because of the backing of the United States to these private hedge funds, many of whom I believe have supported the president, but we don't know. | ||
| Again, let's get the clarity and the transparency on that. | ||
| To your question about health care, actually, you know, just reinforcing the point that normally under any circumstances, those who are undocumented are not eligible for Medicaid or for ACA subsidies. | ||
| They do not receive that at all. | ||
| If there are those who are receiving it, it is in violation of the law. | ||
| It's fraud. | ||
| And there and in any other circumstance, that fraud should be prosecuted. | ||
| However, there is a piece of legislation that says anyone who goes to the hospital may not be denied service. | ||
| You might be interested to know that it was President Ronald Reagan, a Republican, who championed and signed that legislation into law many decades ago. | ||
| And so even if we end these subsidies for American citizens, and that's who it would benefit only, we're going to still have that law be in place that was signed by President Reagan moving forward. | ||
| Antoinette out of Pennsylvania, Democrat. | ||
| Good morning. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes, good morning. | |
| As a black American here, I see an underlying blessing that happened with this shutdown. | ||
| The shutdown, let's look at the weather. | ||
| I was admiring your backdrop this morning. | ||
| All of those hues of colors of leaves blend right in with your studio. | ||
| And that's why I had to call in because anyone who's really thinking, because of this shutdown and the planes and all that fuel in the air was not up there as usual, I walked outside, it's brisk, I can breathe. | ||
| How about we try going that way and break the monotony of all the corruption and all that kind of stuff we're talking? | ||
| And maybe, just maybe, we can let our children see an actual clean winter. | ||
| We're getting what we used to have. | ||
| I'm in my 60s. | ||
| By this time, I see snowflakes. | ||
| How about we keep the shut down somewhat and let that fuel not be up in the got your point, Antoinette, Congressman Olszewski, on the environmental impacts of the government shutdown? | ||
| Well, I'll leave that to the scientists to measure that. | ||
| I will say to her point about tackling corruption, I mentioned the provision that was in the law that reopened the government about giving senators a million-dollar payout. | ||
| This is where we need to be tackled. | ||
| I mean, again, this is why Americans hate Congress. | ||
| This is why there's distrust in government. | ||
| We should be, and now that we're reopened, we should be tackling things like banning stock trades. | ||
| We should make sure that we're not becoming self-enriched is why I don't trade individual stocks. | ||
| I don't have family members who are doing that. | ||
| We should not be using the privileges and benefits of our office to get money. | ||
| And we certainly shouldn't be legalizing corruption by writing into law, giving ourselves retroactively with no ability to oppose it by the government million-dollar checks. | ||
| I think this is why, again, Marylanders, for me and Americans across this country, are fed up with that kind of politics. | ||
| And I think we can, we should, we must tackle the corruption and the self-dealing that's far too prevalent in Congress. | ||
| And Congressman, you've used million-dollar checks a couple of times now. | ||
| My understanding of the legislation that allows the members to sue the government for the investigations into their phone records. | ||
| I thought it was a $500,000 payout was the top. | ||
| I just wonder where you got the million-dollar number from. | ||
| $500,000 payout payable for $500,000 both when a federal grand jury issues a subpoena and then another $500,000 when a judge actually issues the order. | ||
| So it hits for both of those things. | ||
| And that is per phone line. | ||
| So if there were a campaign phone line and a private phone line, that's $2 million. | ||
| And that's the floor. | ||
| And senators have already said they're going to sue for more than that and that they won't settle for that million dollar payday, that self-enrichment. | ||
| So absolutely, the million dollars is the minimum that U.S. senators and a few represent many representatives now are complicit in that corruption, voted to give sitting members to enrich themselves while in office, to give themselves without any ability for the government to protest that minimum. | ||
| I mean, again, we're still reading through it because it was tucked in and snuck in as a last minute provision that I think a lot of senators didn't even know about. | ||
| But the fact that the House allowed that to stay in, that we didn't take that provision out and say to the Senate, we won't accept your self-dealing, is everything that's wrong with politics. | ||
| Are your six fellow Democrats who supported this legislation in the House complicit in that corruption as well? | ||
| Anyone who voted for this legislation has some complicity in the corruption that this legislation stands for. | ||
| Absolutely. | ||
| Have you had a chance to talk to any of those members, Henry Quayar, Don Davis, Tom Swasey, Adam Gray, Jared Golden, Marie Gluzenkamp Perez? | ||
| Have you chatted with any of them since the vote? | ||
| Not since the vote. | ||
| We all left town afterwards. | ||
| Look, I respect my colleagues and I respect my Republican colleagues. | ||
| This is not a personal issue for me. | ||
| This is about why Americans are disgusted with politics and politicians because we had an ability to take that provision out. | ||
| And the rules committee in particular should have done that. | ||
| But again, as I said earlier, they couldn't be bothered to be in the room. | ||
| And that forced members to either vote for or against the legislation. | ||
| I think that was enough of a reason for me. | ||
| And I would have hoped for other members to say no. | ||
| But there's also the provisions about the health care and the lack of preventing the president from taking back funds. | ||
| It's just wrong. | ||
| It's just wrong. | ||
| And other members can explain why they supported that or why they were willing to support that provision. | ||
| But for me, I just can't in good conscience say that it's worth supporting. | ||
| I think it's wrong. | ||
| And I think it makes this Congress complicit in corruption. | ||
| Just about 10 minutes left with Congressman Johnny Olszewski of Maryland. | ||
| Joyce is in Georgia. | ||
| Republican, good morning. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good morning. | |
| Yes. | ||
| President Trump's going to be your president for the next three years. | ||
| Are you going to fight him on everything? | ||
| The big, beautiful bill that had no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, do you really think the billionaires are the ones that are making tips and overtime? | ||
| I just can't believe that you fight him on every single issue. | ||
| And you don't, you're not caring about the American people. | ||
| If ACA is so wonderful, then why is the Congress own it? | ||
| ACA destroyed the insurance companies. | ||
| And it is not wonderful. | ||
| And no one who has an income can afford it. | ||
| But they were penalized for not having insurance. | ||
| My son paid $600, I think it was a year until President Trump's first term for not having the insurance because he couldn't afford it for him and his wife. | ||
| That's Joyce in Georgia. | ||
| Yeah, Joyce, I actually am glad you asked that question because I am not fighting the president at every turn. | ||
| And as I mentioned earlier, I was trying to find a way and literally showed up and offered amendments to try to make the reopening legislation bipartisan, overwhelmingly so, and it would have been. | ||
| But as relates to the big ugly bill, as I call it, I actually supported the provisions that would have ended tax on tips. | ||
| You'd be interested to know that Republicans in Congress, though, capped the amount that people are excluded from in terms of no tax on tips while not excluding the tax breaks that are going to billionaires and the most wealthy in this country. | ||
| I would have supported the provisions that provide relief on Social Security. | ||
| I mean, the Senate passed the no tax on tip legislation through unanimous consent, which means all 100 senators supported that. | ||
| So there are provisions that would have passed and we could have, again, showed the American people that there are ways to be bipartisan. | ||
| But that legislation also was the largest wealth transfer by taking away food benefits and health care from millions of Americans to fund that tax break for the ultra-wealthy. | ||
| It was one of the largest increases in the deficit in our country's history. | ||
| And so there are so many reasons that that legislation was problematic. | ||
| But I will say I support President Trump's efforts and I actually have applauded him as a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the peace deal in the Middle East. | ||
| So there are places where if the president is right or if there are parts of legislation that we agree on, I'm going to be there and be supportive. | ||
| But I also have an obligation to you and to all Americans to make sure that hardworking Americans are not being fleeced by this president, who are not being fleeced by this Republican majority. | ||
| We need to get back to that bipartisanship. | ||
| And, you know, if the president is self-enriching through his cryptocurrency scheme, if he is taking foreign jets and wasting taxpayer money, if he's choosing to bail out his buddy in Argentina versus taking care of health care for you and your family, yes, I'm going to stand up and push back against that. | ||
| But when there are those circumstances, I have, I can, and I will continue to be a partner in that work with the president. | ||
| Congressman, you're in Maryland. | ||
| How many federal workers are in your district? | ||
| Just a little bit more than 22,000. | ||
| For those 22,000 who were furloughed and not receiving a paycheck, when are they going to get paid? | ||
| Do you know how long this process is going to take? | ||
| I don't have that information immediately in front of me. | ||
| The answer is it can't happen soon enough. | ||
| I mean, these are individuals who have been used as political pawns in the same way that the president used hungry children and hungry Americans as political pawns. | ||
| There was $5 billion set aside to help continue the SNAP benefits across this country. | ||
| And rather than claim victory when a court says, yes, Mr. President, you can use those SNAP contingency funds to feed hungry Americans, his administration continued to appeal that. | ||
| So we can't pay our federal employees fast enough. | ||
| I want to thank them for their service to this country. | ||
| I'm sorry that so many of your colleagues have been fired by this administration. | ||
| They tried to fire more of them during the shutdown. | ||
| Fortunately, there was a provision that undid those firings in the legislation, and that prevents future firings moving forward under this CR. | ||
| But I'm really, we got to get back to, again, not just bipartisanship, but decency and caring for those people who are caring for our country. | ||
| And it was about a couple thousand firings or so that were impacted during the shutdown and then were the subject of this legislation. | ||
| And there's no more firings according to this legislation until just January 30th when this CR runs out, correct? | ||
| That's right. | ||
| But it does nothing for the 25,000 Marylanders who were fired already or let go or forced out. | ||
| And so while it's a step forward in this legislation through the end of the year, we've already seen our services and our agencies decimated across this country. | ||
| And that impact has been felt profoundly here in my home state. | ||
| Try to get you just a couple more calls in the five minutes we have left. | ||
| This is Willie Little Rock, Democrat. | ||
| Good morning. | ||
| Marylanders who were fired already or were let go. | ||
| Willie, I'll tell you what, I've got to let you go because you've got to turn down your television while you listen on your phone. | ||
| It's just easier to talk that way. | ||
| This is Linda in Iowa, Republican. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Go ahead. | |
| Yes, good morning. | ||
| I was a Democrat for over 35 years. | ||
| And is your new catchword fleece? | ||
| I heard you say that. | ||
| Could you please stop with the hate? | ||
| Love will always trump hate. | ||
| You say you want to work with President Trump. | ||
| Well, maybe you need to quit that fleece word and do a little more working with the president. | ||
| He loves this country just like we do. | ||
| And we are overcrowded with illegal immigrants. | ||
| They have to go back. | ||
| You need to stop stopping him from getting this country safe. | ||
| Linda, got your point. | ||
| Congressman. | ||
| Yeah, Linda, we need more love. | ||
| I mean, I am proud to be a Christian, and Jesus taught us to love our neighbors as ourselves, that we should feed the hungry, help the homeless. | ||
| And, you know, I respect the president, the office of the presidency. | ||
| And if there's any opportunity to work with President Trump, I will do that. | ||
| But any effort to take away food from hungry children and veterans and seniors, efforts to take away health care or drive up costs, as I said earlier, by thousands of dollars on Americans or almost $5,000 for the average family in Maryland is just not acceptable to me. | ||
| That's not expressing that love. | ||
| And I think that we can get back to that. | ||
| I, again, welcome the chance to sit down with the president, any of my Republican colleagues to, in good faith, find a way forward. | ||
| And again, I think that there were good faith amendments offered, even in this most recent shutdown conversation about taking out those corruption provisions that I don't think anyone would agree is right. | ||
| There were good faith efforts by me to take out or to add in protections against taking out funding and targeting a district specifically because it's led by a Democrat or a Republican. | ||
| And there were provisions that would have extended your health care and the health care of your neighbors. | ||
| So again, I think we can get back to loving our neighbors as ourselves. | ||
| We can do things for this country, but it's going to require all of us to sit down and find that way forward. | ||
| So I welcome that. | ||
| I truly welcome that conversation. | ||
| If ever extended an invitation from the president, Mr. President, if you're listening right now, would love to talk to you about the places we can work together to move this country ahead. | ||
| But I just think there are some fundamental differences in how we view that path forward. | ||
| But talking actually is the best way to try to find that common ground. | ||
| Last call from Amanda in Colorado, Independent. | ||
| You're on with Congressman and Congressman Olszzewski. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hi, Congressman. | |
| Good morning. | ||
| I'm glad that you brought up the merits of legislation because I would like to discuss the merits of the ACA legislation. | ||
| And the reality is, and the fact is, is that premiums were not this high before ACA ever existed. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And that's by design. | |
| It's hindered competition in the insurance space. | ||
| And now this legislation, by design, has forced Americans to rely on the nanny state of government. | ||
| And I would like your response to that, please. | ||
| Give you the final two minutes, Congressman. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| We have to get to work to making health care more affordable and accessible for Americans. | ||
| And the costs have spiraled far too much out of control. | ||
| And whether that is looking at PBM reforms, which I believe that Democrats and Republicans were working on until the majority recently pulled that back, looking at executive compensation, there are all sorts of places where we can and should make medicine more affordable, make healthcare more affordable, and just do more for the American people. | ||
| So I welcome that opportunity. | ||
| Obviously, we can't do that before January without some stopgap measure to keep health care affordable as it currently is. | ||
| But you're absolutely right. | ||
| We need to be reforming healthcare in a much more comprehensive way. | ||
| As a new member, I welcome that opportunity and that dialogue. | ||
| But again, I just can't in good conscience say we're going to place a nearly $5,000 tax increase on the average family of four in Maryland, similar increases we're seeing across this country, while we're also then signing off on billions of dollars for foreign countries, a trillion dollars that goes towards the wealthiest. | ||
| I just think that this country is better than that. | ||
| And that if we actually put our heads down and did the work together, we could find those solutions, both in the short term and in the long term. | ||
| Congressman, we'll have to end it there. | ||
| But we hope you join us again down the road and appreciate your time after a late night on the floor of the House last night. | ||
| Congressman Johnny Olszewski of Maryland, Democrat from Maryland, 2nd District. | ||
| Thanks so much. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
C-SPAN's Washington Journal, our live forum, inviting you to discuss the latest issues in government, politics, and public policy. | |
| From Washington, D.C. to across the country. | ||
| And coming up Friday morning, we'll talk with Erica York of the Tax Foundation about tariff rebate checks, an idea being considered by President Trump. | ||
| And the Consumer Federation of America's Sharon Cornelison discusses President Trump's proposal for a 50-year mortgage and housing affordability. | ||
| C-SPAN's Washington Journal. | ||
| Join the conversation live at 7 Eastern Friday morning on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, or online at c-SPAN.org. | ||
| Friday, we'll bring you a conference on the destruction and human toll in Gaza from the Israel-Hamas war. | ||
| Experts and advocates will also examine U.S. policy in the region and humanitarian efforts, as well as the path forward for Palestinians. | ||
| Hosted by the Jerusalem Fund, you can see it live at 9:15 a.m. Eastern on C-SPAN 2. | ||
| Also, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, and online at c-SPAN.org. | ||
| Friday on C-SPAN's Ceasefire, at a time when finding common ground matters most in Washington. | ||
| Former Alabama Democratic Senator Doug Jones and former Ohio Republican Congressman Steve Stivers come together for a bipartisan dialogue on the shutdown and top issues facing the country. | ||
| They join host Dasha Burns. | ||
| Bridging the Divide in American Politics. | ||
| Watch Ceasefire Friday at 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. Eastern and Pacific only on C-SPAN. | ||
| American History TV Saturday is on C-SPAN 2, exploring the people and events that tell the American story. | ||
| This weekend, as the nation celebrates the 250th anniversary of its founding, join American History TV for our new series, America 250, and discover the ideas and defining moments of the American story. | ||
| This week at 11 a.m. Eastern, documentary filmmaker Ken Burns, author Rick Atkinson, and retired Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford examine Revolutionary War leadership at an event held at George Washington's Mount Vernon. | ||
| Then at 12 noon Eastern, watch documentary filmmakers Ken Burns and Sarah Botstein as they join C-SPAN's Washington Journal to discuss their upcoming PBS series, The American Revolution. | ||
| At 5 p.m. Eastern, take a tour of the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C., where we look at the lunar lander that touched down on the moon, Charles Lindbergh's plane that flew across the Atlantic, and the X-15 flown by Neil Armstrong. | ||
| And at 8 p.m. Eastern on Lectures and History, a discussion on the U.S. and the Arab-Israel peace process with Trinity College professor James Stoker, looking at the history of the U.S. negotiating ends to Israeli-Arab conflicts, including the 1967 Six-Day War, the 1973 Yom Kippur War, and the 2023 Israel-Hamas War. | ||
| 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 1 p.m. Eastern, we'll visit the 2025 Brooklyn Book Festival, where authors gather to discuss American democracy, brain science, big tech, motherhood, and more. | ||
| And then at 7 p.m. Eastern, it's America's Book Club from the Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington, D.C., author David Graham joins host David Rubinstein to talk about his books, including Killers of the Flower Moon and The Wager. | ||
| And at 8.15 p.m. Eastern, New Republic contributing editor Osida Nuevu argues in his book, The Right of the People, Democracy and the Case for a New America Founding, that the Declaration of Independence's 250th anniversary is the time to reconsider how we define our democracy. | ||
| Watch Book TV every Sunday on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org. |