the house select committee to investigate the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol will hold its first public hearing. before that happens, on the house floor this morning, members will take up new gun legislation focused on red flag laws a day after the house passed a broad package of gun restrictions and hear testimony from survivors and families of the young victims of last month's elementary school shooting. we will begin hearing from you about either topic. give us a call if you want to hear about the hearing tonight or the gun law bills moving to the house. phone lines split by party. republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents, (202) 748-8002, and you can send us a text at (202) 748-8003. if you do, please include your name and where you are from. catch up with us on social media, on twitter, @c-span2 bj, and on facebook -- the houses in a 9:00 a.m. eastern. this is how they describe the proceedings tonight. they are working with a former abc news executive. all the networks say they will air the proceedings live. not since trump's impeachment, they write, has a singular event captivated capitol hill in such an all-encompassing manner. adam schiff, member of the committee, this is his preview -- we will show how close we came to losing our democracy and why it it is at risk. and what we must do to protect our democracy now. adam schiff, that was yesterday afternoon in his series of tweets. republican liz cheney, one of the two that are part of the january 6 committee, this was her tweet about tonight's select committee hearing, saying this is a moral test for the republican party because of the threat we face and now there are too many in my party who are failing it. the former republican conference chair liz cheney in her tweet this week. the current republican conference chair, elise stephanie of new york, had this to say about -- [video clip] >> praying the nations will focus on the partisan witchhunt instead of the pocketbooks. the january 6 committee secretly hired the former president of abc to produce this shameless show, the same producer that covered of victims of jeffrey epstein. this further solidifies what we have known from day one. this is a smear campaign against president donald trump, republican members of congress, and trump voters across this country. it is unconstitutional, illegitimate, not put together according to the rules of the house and not about finding out why nancy pelosi left the capitol so ill prepared that day. host: elise stefanik tonight. expected to be a half dozen or maybe seven hearings. we do know there will be a second hearing monday night, but tonight's we know for sure start that it :00 p.m. eastern -- starts at 8:00 p.m. eastern we will have several cameras covering it gavel-to-gavel. ending can watch online at c-span.org -- and you can watch online at c-span.org. the house comes in at 9:00 a.m. eastern today dealing with morgan legislation. it is a serious of red flag laws the house will be voting on today. yesterday, they passed a package of gun restrictions. it was the protecting our kids act that was passed yesterday in the house. that seeks to raise the purchasing age of semiautomatic weapons from 18 to 21, outlaws high-capacity magazines, outlaws bump stocks, regulates the storage of firearms. in addition, the law has a series of other provisions, including cracking down on gun trafficking and straw purchases and subject to ghost gun purchases to background checks and other requirements. that is the protecting our kids act. that passed yesterday. not expected to pass the senate to overcome the filibuster as the washington times notes in its headline today in their coverage. the senate negotiations are about a less ambitious package, negotiators i more money for school security and -- saying that one guy that voted for his wife was proof that donald trump did win the presidency. the start of the iron pipeline, to quote rudy giuliani, i have seen him complain about florida being the iron pipeline, and one other thing if you don't mind. -- there's a lot more to these situations that c-span lets on. host: the legislation moving through the house, republican jim jordan on the house floor yesterday previewing some of the arguments against those read blogs since yesterday. [video clip] >> tomorrow they are bringing the so-called red flag law to the floor. someone who doesn't like you can file a complaint. within 24 hours, there is a hearing you are not allowed to be at. they can take away your second amendment liberty. that is the bill they are going to pass tomorrow. frankly, this shouldn't surprise us. for 18 months, democrats have assaulted the first amendment. it shouldn't surprise us now that they are coming after the second. host: ohio republican jim jordan yesterday on the house floor. democrats making their impassioned arguments on the house floor for more gun restrictions, among them, speaker nancy pelosi. [video clip] >> even more communities have been hit by gun violence. americans watched in horror as shootings unfolded. as the data shows, the challenge of gun violence goes much further than these mass killings. every night on our streets, americans are being killed, and every day, our nation loses americans to suicides and accidents. this is a tragic daily massacre that rarely makes the headlines or the evening news but it is there. so here we are for the children. when those who were advocating for gun violence or perpetrating it went into the classroom, they crossed a line. it was terrible the gun violence that we have in our country, but that they would go into newtown and shoot children barely out of diapers, and again, now, in texas, these beautiful children in elementary school, and everything that happened in between, it was an assault on the culture of our country that our children would not be able to go to school without fear or concern about their safety. our children are, as president kennedy said, our greatest resource and best hope for the future. they are our precious treasure. and everything we do is for the children. for the children we must stop this gun violence in our country and restore their confidence and their safety wherever they may be. host: need to see pelosi on the house floor yesterday beginning her remarks referencing the number of mass shootings in this country, the washington post using the gun violence archive as their source of statistics. there have been 250 mass shootings so far this year. 256 people killed in mass shootings, another 1010 injured through the end of may. back to your phone calls. ivanka, milwaukee, wisconsin, democrat. good morning. caller: i'm calling because i'm concerned about the january 6 hearings. it is important that we take our democracy seriously. our democracy is the backbone of every other right we have. if we don't have democracy, we don't have to worry about gas prices, gun laws, voting laws, abortion rights. all that would disappear if we don't have a democracy. i am concerned about our democracy. everybody should be concerned. if you are not, maybe you need to go to another country, but this is the foundation of our freedoms, so we need to find out who was part of it, if there were lawmakers involved. we need to have names. we need to find out where they are from and they need to be expelled from congress and from the senate if they were -- had anything to do with the planning and carrying out of the insurrection because you cannot have people who want to tear down your government. host: oliver is next in falls church, virginia. independent, good morning. caller: good morning. i am 68 years old. i have lived in the washington, d.c. metropolitan area all my life. i was born in alexandria, virginia, and i have never seen our country so torn apart. what i attribute that torn apart to is donald trump. donald trump, i really believe, for a man who reached the heights that he has, he has continued to try to tear this country apart and make americans hate other americans. i will tell you, even though i'm a little disappointed with some of the things in the biden administration, if black people don't vote for joe biden and support democrats, we are -- black people in this country will be in trouble. donald trump is here to destroy this country with the support of russia. the american people have to wake up. host: that's all of her falls church, virginia. this is randall in idaho. good morning. caller: a few points. the community looking -- the committee looking at this january 6 so-called insurrection i find totally one-sided. there are two so-called republicans that are on it, total rino's, not even part of republican committees, and i find that you bring up 250 people have died in mass shootings. that is terrible. absolutely terrible. it shouldn't happen but i think we have to get to the root of why this is. i am in my mid-50's and over here in idaho, having rifles in the back of your pickups as kids was no problem. we never had any of these issues. now we have issues of fenton lowell -- of fentanyl, hundreds of thousands of people dying from drugs coming into this country over borders that are out of control. why is our current government complicating mass immigration and allowing these drugs to come into the country? we have a mental health problem in this country. we don't have a gun problem. triggers do not pull themselves. this is ridiculous. this is just another grab for democrats to attempt to control the people more and more and more because they are scared of the ability for the citizens to stand up for themselves. host: that's randall out of idaho. your next -- you are next. caller: i watched as police and all the questioning on the program before. i will say something about a january 6 committee tonight. i don't see how any american that believes in god and the 10 commandments. right now, i am a democrat. i was an independent until trump came in office. he said before -- what before we voted on the presidency that he was going to lose. he was going to lose. he was going to lose. he was setting it up so he could do this because he did feel like he was going to lose. i will tell you i have been sick from listening to his filthy mouth. host: are you planning to watch tonight? caller: yes, because i know -- i have watched tv on all channels, even fonts. ever since he came into office, before, i watched all of it. host: let me ask you. you talk about -- caller: i am very interested in politics. my father was. i am not a goody two shoes but i am a christian and i do not believe in talking down to people and putting people down and being two-faced about i like you when you like me and i don't like you when you don't and that is the way trump is. and i'm sorry. he deserves to be punished for this insurrection. host: anne in north carolina this morning. plenty of members previewing tonight's event and we have covered them throughout the week. plenty of political action groups getting involved as well. one of those, the republican political accountability project. this was an ad they put out this week. [video clip] >> president trump told in the election was stolen. the -- he told them to go and fight. when it was under attack, why did it take him 187 minutes to respond? january 6 committee beginning thursday, june 9 at 8:00 p.m. now it is time to learn the truth. host: that ad from the republican accountability project. 8:00 p.m. eastern tonight. you can watch on c-span on our mobile video app, c-span now, and c-span.org. the second hearing set for monday at 10:00 a.m. eastern, also on c-span. we are expecting seven hearings by the end of the month. the dates have yet to be formally set by the committee but we know the first two. we will cover the first tonight on c-span. jerry, detroit, michigan, your next. caller: good morning and greetings yet again from motown. i have a feeling regarding the january 6 committee hearings that you will be hearing a lot of white republicans tried to downplay -- republicans try to downplay and whitewash what happened by trying to create what i think are. equivalency's -- equivalencies between the attack on the capitol and the black lives matter movement. i'm sure you have heard them. they claim that somehow attacking me capitol is the same as -- attacking the capitol is the same as vandalizing a walgreens but they cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that those committing the violence were members of black lives matter. were they wearing blm t-shirts, blm molotov cocktails, where they armed with blm weapons? you'll also be hearing from white people like that randall guy from idaho i think -- host: i am not sure the caller said what race he was. caller: you can tell by the voice that he was a white man. host: next, an independent in virginia, good morning. caller: i am a truck driver and to get a license you have to be tested for drugs and alcohol and continuously tested for this kind of stuff. and now in america, there are too many drugs everywhere. somebody out of their mind or not in the right mind to own a gun and go purchase a gun, you know, i think this is what the problem is, and, you know, there should be a license to get a gun and you should be tested regularly, yearly, to make sure that you are not using illegal drugs, because if you go out of your mind, then, you know, you could do some crazy stuff and i believe this is what we need, you know. to drive an 18 wheeler, you know, you need a license and you go through all this just to make sure that the public is safe. so the same thing should happen with guns. you should get a license and you should be tested regularly and made sure that you are in the right mind to own a weapon that can kill people. host: to phoenix, arizona, this is christian, a republican. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to get some facts straight, ok? number one, we are not a democracy. we are not a democracy. we are a republic with a republican form of government, article four, section four. i don't care how many times republicans say it on that day is tonight -- that dais tonight. we are a republican form of government. all this talk about insurrections in treason and -- insurrections and treason and mutiny. the justice department has not charged a single person with insurrection. you can go to justice.gov and look at the indictments for yourself. and the last time i checked, just because their party affiliation -- the party -- the party affiliation of the protesters was republican doesn't mean that warrants an insurrection. how many times have the democrats interrupted directional procedure -- interrupted congressional procedure? nobody calls it an insurrection when they interrupt a congressional hearing. then finally, the whole reason why we are going to have this whole theatrical -- you could call it a ceremony, is because the democrats cannot frame this particular argument the correct way because of all the things that have happened after january 6 and because of the fact that they accomplished distracting the country from being able to object to the presidential electors. under more than -- over more than half of the country is still under this illusion that it was an insurrection when it was not. host: a few of the op-ed's out about tonight's hearings. here is one from the president of citizens united, former deputy campaign manager for former president trump. the headline of his op-ed in the washington times. "january 6, americans have graver concerns. to name a few, inflation, baby formula, crime and the border crisis." one more from the op-ed pages of the new york times. jacob bacharach is the writer of this piece. he said "the capitol ride hearings may well be a dud. even if they manage to drag a few million eyeballs away from the streaming platforms for a few evenings with some measure of spectacle and some promise of comeuppance for minor and expendable figures in the trump world, the effect is likely to be nominal. the democratic party has not shown itself capable of transcendent political showmanship and the televised hearing as a genre has been in decline for a long time. democrats, liberals generally and a few anti-trump republicans have been burned before from the breathless report of robert muller to two impeachment hearings to a steady drip of disclosures out of president trump's circle. do not expect must-see tv." diane out of ohio, you are next. diane, are you with us? lawrence, massachusetts, this is james, a republican. good morning. caller: i believe i called on the democrat line. host: james is a democrat. back in order. caller: there are a few things that bother me with the contradictions. they want to raise the age from 18 to 21. the problem i have with that in massachusetts is they also want to lower the voting age to 16 in massachusetts and they are propagandizing and indoctrinating our children to the transgenderism and everything going on with that in kindergarten, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to me with this age thing. the other thing bothering me was that on august 21, 2021, the fbi came out with a report that said there was no insurrection and you guys haven't mentioned that once and i was wondering, with all the reading that you do finding articles, if you could find that, because it kind of bothers me that we are getting half the story here and we cannot make any judgments on it, so i want to thank you for your time and i appreciate it and i will hear your comments offline. host: you are calling on the line for democrats. it seems like there're a few aspects of the democratic platform they are working on that you disagree with. what makes you a democrat? we lost james. greg, mechanicsburg, pennsylvania, republican. caller: why would you ask that question of the last caller? host: just interested -- caller: maybe he's a person who called on the democrat line and has a different opinion. do you think there is something wrong with that? host: no, it is interesting. i do that a lot when people call on one line and disagree with the party platform. caller: i cannot remember you ever doing that to a republican who went democrat on the call. host: i promise you i have done that, but what do you want to talk about, greg? caller: i don't think so. let me go to january 6. i am 73, almost 74. i have been watching c-span for a long time. no one has mentioned the arrest of the person who admitted he wanted to kill justice kavanaugh. so my question to you, mr. mcardle, is, if it had been sotomayor or ketanji jackson brown or kagan, would that have been the topic? host: likely will be on with the new book about the supreme court and -- mike lee will be on with a new book about the supreme court and certainly we will talk about it with him. it is in the news. "man showed up with gun and kavanaugh's home." give us your thoughts about it. i think we lost the color. tammy, good morning. caller: is that sullivan guy going to be? what else? let's see? host: we don't have the full witness list. tonight, it is expected just to be opening statements from the heads of the committee. we have been promised there will be witnesses over the course of these seven hearings over the next few weeks, but i don't have a list for you now. caller: [indiscernible] are you telling me he's going to be there? host: i don't know who will be testifying right now. caller: this is the second thing i have to say. i am calling on all trumpsters, all patriots, to boycott c-span, abc. do not watch this soap opera. it is a freaking soap opera and justice is coming. it is coming, democrats. it is coming. host: going back to that man arrested outside of justice brett kavanaugh's home yesterday with weapons, including a gun into knife. the senate majority leader -- minority leader, mitch mcconnell, taking the floor the morning after that incident was ordered to call on -- was reported to call on congress to do more to protect justices of the supreme court. [video clip] >> this is exactly the kind event that many feared a terrible breach of the court's rules and norms could fuel. this is exactly the kind of event many worry the unhinged, reckless apocalyptic rhetoric toward the court going back months, especially in recent weeks, could make more likely. this is exactly why the senate passed legislation very shortly after the leak to enhance the police protection for justices and their families. this is common sense, noncontroversial legislation. it passed in this chamber unanimously, but house democrats have spent weeks blocking the measure that passed here unanimously related to security for supreme court justices. the house's democrats have refused to take it up. now, look, that needs to change and right now. host: senate minority leader mitch mcconnell yesterday on the senate floor. from the washington times reporting, the man arrested, nicholas john rothkey of california, arrived with a nine millimeter, a knife, tools including a crowbar. it is reported he was upset with a recent leak draft opinion showing the court is poised to overrule roe v. wade. that according to the detectives and police in that incident. more about that coming up in half an hour. raymond in denver, colorado, good morning. you are next. independent. caller: good morning, america. we are a republic but we spend wars spreading democracy, so my question to my republican friends, what happens if yellowstone goes away to all of our bickering amongst each other and not reaching out to help our fellow americans? so i would say that the republicans are drinking the kool-aid and when mitch mcconnell and all the republicans got up a day after january 6 to say how bad it was and now they are changing their minds, tells us how hypocrites and hypocrisy we are. host: brandy, millington, michigan, good morning. your next. caller: good morning, john. i would like to start by thanking you and all the other great men and women it takes to do this -- to bring us this program. you are doing the nation's service. the january 6 hearing as i think the most important thing we have got to save our democracy. inflation, gas and all that other will look minor if we don't have any voting rights or anyway way to address her grievances. there's a lot of things that republicans have done that i don't agree with. mitch mcconnell packing supreme court. but i do believe the supreme court needs to be protected. all people need to be protected. we cannot divide the country. it is already divided, i understand, but if you do not have democracy to start with, we won't have programs like this. they just won't be allowed. i have got to say that above -- host: talking about the supreme court. there have been calls to expand the supreme court, democrats calling on joe biden to expand the size of the supreme court. what do you think of those calls? caller: right now, no, unfortunately i cannot agree with that because that doesn't make it any better than what mr. mcconnell pulled when we had elections and he put a supreme court justice in. as much as i would like to see that it doesn't solve anything either. we have to work with what we've got and go back to being able to disagree without becoming a war-torn nation, is my feeling. host: brandy, you may want to stick around. senator mike lee, his book coming out this week, saving nine. he will be joining us at 8:00 a.m. eastern at the top of the hour. helen, long beach, california, good morning. you are next. caller: i have a problem with the january 6 hearings because they remind me of the house of un-american activities committee hearings held in the 1950's by the republicans to weed out insurrectionists, communists, as threats to american stability. they did this to a woman and aman, a -- and a man, a husband and wife, julius and ethel rosenberg, who were innocent, but it sent a message that you do not challenge power. this hearing started with democrats, pelosi calling this an insurrection, and over time, they had to reduce it down to a riot, so i'm feeling uncomfortable and i will bring in the issue of dr. peter navarro, who was arrested, put in handcuffs and leg irons because he failed to appear in court. that is a misdemeanor, and he was treated like a felon. this is him being summoned to give evidence on the january 6 events because he was on from's -- he was in trump's cabinet. the bottom line is they want to intimidate people and this is a propaganda tool. host: if you want to watch it tonight without commentary or interruption gavel-to-gavel, you can watch it here, c-span.org and you can download the free c-span now video app. john, clifton park, new york, good morning. you are next, an independent. caller: this is very simple. this hearing tonight, everyone, whether you are a democrat or a republican, has a preformed opinion. no one has heard a single word of the public findings -- public word of the findings of this committee. they should be going into this with an open mind, essentially i compare this to the same situation as the woman who walked out of a town hall meeting years ago, where she turned around. she had formed a certain opinion beforehand before hearing anything the former congressman had to say and she walked out stating the fact that, well, i thought this occurred because of the fact that, you know, i primarily listen to conservative radio. host: that gets to the question, do you think there's many minds left to be changed in this country about january 6? do you think there's people who don't have a formed opinion one way or the other about the events of that day? caller: i think they're very few, to be honest with you, john, because essentially, it is an attitude. if you listen to this, i agree with the beginning premise of one of your prior independent callers, where he was saying americans have to learn how to cope with each other, have to learn how to live together, but then he continued on demonizing republicans, and that wasn't right in my opinion. i agree with what he said about americans have to learn. host: chaired by ben thompson, democrat from -- from mississippi, liz cheney and adam kinzinger the republicans on the committee. the other democrats on the committee, adam schiff of california, pete angular of california, stephanie murphy of california and jamie raskin of california. expecting to hear from bennie thompson and liz cheney tonight in their opening statements for this hearing, but expecting to hear more from those other members in the hearings to come. in silver spring, maryland, democratic caller, good morning. caller: what i wanted to say is that the most important thing about these hearings is the big lie. i think this committee will have a difficult time. as long as half the country believes trump won the election, than all of this is moot because they will continue to believe that. so in my mind, it is difficult to prove a negative, that something was not done, but i think that is going to be the crux of it. so i just would ask my republican friends, people like helen, on two or three calls earlier, because she seems like someone who will watch and she's keeping her mind open, what if you are wrong? what if the election was not stolen? what if trump lied about that? that means that biden is the president. that means that this was an insurrection, that this was an attempt to overthrow an election in the government -- and a government. that is all we are asking of you. imagine that it was not stolen. host: it is 7:45. a two hour washington journal today, in this first hour, talking about two issues, the first of those the beginning of those january 6 hearings tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern, but another issue, the house passing a package of gun restrictions yesterday and expected to take up another set of gun rules today on the so-called red flag laws. the vote yesterday coming after testimony from both family members of those who lost their lives in that elementary school shooting in uvalde, texas and one of the survivors of that shooting. this is fourth-grade grade uvalde survivor mia serino, 11 years old. [video clip] >> they were watching a movie. go hide and then we went to hide behind the teacher's desk and then he shot the little window and then he went to the other classroom and then he went -- there's a door between our classrooms and he went through their and shot my teacher and killed my teacher because they shot her in the head, and then he shot some of my classmates. he shot my friend and i thought he was going to come back to the room so i put it all over me. >> why did you think to put that over yourself? >> to stay quiet. >> why did you call 911? >> i told her that we needed help. >> if there is something that you want different about that day, what would it be? >> [indiscernible] >> [indiscernible] host: 11-year-old mia serino in testimony presented before the house oversight and reform committee yesterday on capitol hill. one follow-up op-ed about that testimony and what she told lawmakers in that clip. robin given in today's washington post. the headline of her piece, "a child's heartbreaking drug. her voice trailed off until she stopped speaking altogether. she shrugged, a gesture that was tragically simple and yet so complicated because it raises the question why? the country has no answer to the question why the weight of its -- white has allowed the weight of its fears and -- why it has allowed the weight of its fears and problems to rest on the shoulders of children." if you skip to the back page of the washington post, one notable op-ed from senator bob cayson, democrat from pennsylvania. "i changed my mind on guns and i should not be the only one," saying that when he came to the senate, he had a firm belief in support of pennsylvania's deep-rooted hunting culture and thought that meant he should not support restrictions on gun sales or increased legislation. then, he writes "sandy hook happened and i will never forget the shock and horror of knowing that 26 families would never see their children again, so i changed my mind and now it is time for my colleagues in the senate to do the same." for more of senator bob casey's op-ed, it is in today's washington post. in mississippi, good morning. caller: good morning, john. why have we changed subjects? i thought we were talking about january 6. host: we are doing both here, gina. if you want to talk january 6, go ahead. caller: i do agree that the gun age should be raised to 21 and i also agree that the voting age should be raised to 21 because no 16-year-old child can have the ability to vote. it is insane. but getting back to january 6, i want to ask unc spam why you haven't had dinesh desousa on? you have all these other democrats on, trump haters. you don't want to have dinesh desousa on, who might give some actual facts to the democrats. and as for the lady who called before you showed the sad clip, i agree with her. you know, if somebody could -- both sides need to be shown here. it is going to be a total farce because all 12 members on that panel are trump haters, so how could it possibly even come close to being fair? host: that is gina in mississippi. 10 members on the panel, two republicans, eight democrats, and all -- and we always appreciate recommendations for guests. independent in louisiana, good morning. caller: i think a lot of this is political. not some of it. used -- you show the pictures of these attacks again and again but nothing is coming out that trump requested the national guard from nancy pelosi and she refused. that would have been done -- if that would have been done, we wouldn't even be talking about january 6. plus the fact that the fbi knew days in advance that there would be problems. nothing was done except, well, we want to make sure that this doesn't happen again. you keep showing these clips but nothing is brought out about the request from donald trump to have the national guard, 10,000 national guard troops. that would have ended the supposed insurrection to begin with. host: it is nine members on the committee, seven democrats, two publicans. the committee subpoenaing nearly 100 people with connections to events surrounding the attack on the capitol, and tonight, it is opening testimony from the chair and cochair of the committee, and then we will see who gets called and what evidence gets presented in the half-dozen hearings to follow. this is louise out of north carolina, a democrat, good morning. caller: good morning, john. i just wanted to say the lady that called and told people to boycott the different networks to find out the truth don't want to know the truth. that is the wrong thing to say, but not listening and find out what actually happened. if it was the white house being attacked, i would be just as upset about that. that is the -- the capitol is the heart of our government and for someone to say we don't want to hear it is crazy. they have got to realize trump did lose. it was not just the democrats but the lincoln project, which is republicans that went against trump. so they need to stop the lie. host: from the tar heel state to the grand canyon state, this is greg, good morning. caller: good morning. merriam-webster defines a republic as a representative form of democracy, so basically, this is not a piece of fruit, it is a peach. it is a ridiculous argument. host: that is greg. this is brian out of nebraska, independent. good morning. caller: hi, john. i just want to comment on firearms. i grew up able to go hunting and fishing in western nebraska, but i am completely against assault rifles. we need to stop the sale of assault rifles to the public. it is -- these guns are so dangerous. i mean, all these mass shootings. i think it is ok to have pistols and hunting rifles, but assault rifles should be stopped and no longer sold to the public. host: thank you for the call from nebraska. it was president biden who went on jimmy kimmel live last night. the jimmy kimmel show airing part of that interview. it was a longer interview that you can find on your website. but jimmy kimmel last resident biden about -- jimmy kimmel asked president biden about gun control. here is some of what the president had to say. [video clip] >> we should make the demand. here is what has to happen. all of you folks, and i'm not being facetious when i say the republicans here as well, you have got to make sure this becomes a voting issue. it has to be one of those issues where you decide your position on the issue, the senator or candidate for house or senate, on what we will do with assault weapons, having 300 rounds in a magazine. i mean, what you sound those things will determine how i will vote for you. it should be one of those issues. >> it is our fault that people -- our fault. people in the house and congress can take responsibility but it is our fault because we need to stop this. >> well, we did last time. >> can't you issue an executive order? trump passed those out like halloween candy. >> i have issued executive orders within the power of the presidency to be able to deal with these -- everything having to do with guns, gun ownership, all the things that are within my power, but what i do not want to do, and i'm not being facetious, i do not want to ambulate -- to emulate trump's abuse of the constitution and constitutional authority. i often get asked, if the republicans do not play it square, why do you? if we do the same thing they do, our democracy would literally be in jeopardy. host: president biden on jimmy kimmel live last night. back to your phone calls. two things we have been talking about, the january 6 hearings and the house passing that series of gun bills and passing more today when they come in at 9:00 a.m. eastern, and of course, we will have gavel-to-gavel coverage when they do come in. this is chris in wisconsin, a republican, good morning. caller: morning. thank you for taking my call. bills, bills, laws, laws, they passed them, they passed them. truthfully, i am 80 years old. they don't do anything with them. case in point, kavanaugh. now, for some reason, there's a lot out there, they tell me -- i'm not a lawyer, i don't know -- that says you cannot protest in front of a judge's house. nobody is doing anything to those people so why don't they arrest them? if there's a law, why don't they arrest them? they are going to pass another law. what good does it do? i'm going to be 80 years old in november -- october, actually, and this year, i will vote out every incumbent i can, and i wish everyone else in the world listening to me would do the same because these people are not doing their job. thank you. host: before you go, clearance, is there any law that's been passed in your lifetime that has made any difference in your life? you think of one -- can? you think of one caller: i really don't know because the laws that they pass. it seems like they pass the laws but i never see them really enacted to where it affects me, so i don't really know. host: that's clarence in wisconsin. this is monique here in washington, d.c. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. to take you back to the gentleman who just called, laws do work. someone was killed at the age of 19 and she was pregnant, and i live in washington, d.c., and they caught the guy who killed my sister, but because they didn't have evidence that he did it, he did end up getting time for carrying the gun, 25 years. he's home now. he did his 25. this was 25 years ago. and gun laws do work. so i just think we need to have a more open mind because there are a lot of families who are suffering due to gun violence and when you have witnesses who are scared to come forward and a prosecution team to carry out those laws and i'm thankful they found a solution to my sister's murder. guest: host: monique witnesses who are scared to come forward and then you have a prosecution team who have to carry out those laws. i am thankful that they did find a solution to my sister's murder. host: thank you for sharing your story sorry for your loss. stick around an hour to go this morning and in that hour of next we will be joined by republican senator mike lee who argues against adding seats to the supreme court. coming up senator john larson of connecticut to talk to us about january 6 committee. we will be right back. after months of closed-door investigations the house january 6 committee is said to go public tune in as committee members find out what happened and why on the assault of the capital. water live coverage on c-span now and are free mobile video app anytime online at c-span.org. c-span your unfiltered view of government. but tv every sunday on c-span two. teachers leaving authors disgusting their latest nonfiction books. former house majority leader take army talks about his book leader or he gives a behind-the-scenes account of his account on his time in the house in the 90's. political consultant no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues c-span is america's network unfiltered, word for word if it happens here or anywhere america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. washington journal continues the eyes is turn to the supreme court we are joined by senator mike lee a veteran now of four supreme court nominations in the author of the book saving nine. before we get to saving nine, i wanted to get your reaction to the man arrested outside of brett kavanaugh's house yesterday. he had a knife on him, he had a gun on him. your reaction to that incident. guest: there are real problems with showing up at the home of the supreme court justice to protest what you anticipate might be the outcome of a case to try to influence the outcome of the case. this particular instance he appears he showed up to influence the outcome of a case in a way that is unthinkably bad. i am grateful that they caught him, but we have to get serious about the fact that this is prohibited. this is a federal criminal offense. host: showing up to protest or having a weapon? guest: showing up to protest at the home of the supreme court justice is in itself a criminal offense. doing so to carry out an execution is unthinkably bad. i hope and expect to hear condemnation from republicans and democrats alike and from the white house and the president himself. condemnation of people showing up at supreme court justices at all. host: is there a similar code to members of congress. is it illegal to go to a member's house to stand on the sidewalk outside their house and protest? guest: to my knowledge there is not a federal law that is similar to 1507 with respect to members of congress. when you show up to the home of a public official to try to influence the public official to try to protest, i do think that is inappropriate. i think that should be unlawful. when you show up to protest at the home of a private person because that private person is a public official you are sending one signal regardless of what else you are saying. you are saying we know where you sleep. that is a threat of physical violence. in this day and age, i think there is a time and place and manner of issue in the place for protesting should not be where someone sleeps. host: on saving nine, why is nine the magical number for the supreme court. guest: there is nothing magical about the number nine. there is nothing mandated by the constitution about the number nine and yet, that is the number that we arrived at by 1869. it was five for a while, it was six and then back to five it went up to seven. we got to eight and then it got up as high as 10. in 1869 it has been at nine and it was at that point we realized as a country, it is probably better not to over politicize the supreme court is what inevitably happens when we tinker with the number. i would support a constitutional amendment changing the number. this is one of these instances where it is not unconstitutional to increase the supreme court but it is fundamentally and severely anti-constitutional. it would be destabilizing to the judiciary. host: several of your colleagues actively colleagues to expand the supreme court. elizabeth warren, republicans rammed through extremist candidates. and that is just the tip of the iceberg. this radical court open floodgates for corporations to spend unlimited sums of money to buy our elections. it started with big businesses to bust unions. it gutted one of the most important civil laws of our time. the voting rights act. this is not a court that represents the will of the people. we can't take this lying down. the only real solution is to expand the supreme court. the constitution gives the authority to congress to expand the supreme court. the congress has done this seven times before. it is the only way to rebalance the supreme court after the republican stole to seats and undermine the legitimacy of the court. host: part of a youtube video she put out last year. your response. guest: there is a lot to unpack there. she refers to the republicans haven't stolen power and she said the word stole or steel twice. i am not sure what she is referring to there. there is nothing about the manner in which republicans nominated anyone that stole anything by confirming donald trump nominees to the supreme court. she may not like that it happened that way. she may not like that republicans held the majority in 2016 when republicans chose not to confirm merrick garland to the supreme court. she may not like the fact that republicans confirmed amy coney barrett in 2020. those were all legitimate exercises of power. it is significant there that she denigrates and delegitimize is and tries to cast aspersions at the supreme court itself. that is particularly dangerous. she is talking about the supreme court as if it were a political institution. this runs like a political attack ad. the supreme court is not a political body. i explained what the supreme court is and importantly what it is not. it is not fair -- it is important that it resolves disputes. i vehemently, respectfully disagree with it. it is dangerous to speak of the supreme court in these terms. i have tried to remember that we owe a duty of respect to the independence of the judiciary even when we disagree with them. the supreme court of the united states is the greatest institution of its kind anywhere in the world. i say that as one who strongly disagrees with its rulings. it is not a bad entity that sometimes makes good decisions. it is a remarkable institution being run by mortals that are fallible. it is important to differentiate these two. host: your book comes out soon. to talk about it republicans call (202) 748-8000, democrats (202) 748-8001 independents (202) 748-8001. your opinions on the bipartisan talks on gun laws. guest: i will say this, every time there is a mass shooting in this country many laws have been debated, dozens of laws have been violated. it is an unwise thing and potentially fraught with peril if when dozens of laws have been violated we rapidly conclude that what is needed or what will stop at the next time around is yet another law. government exists for the purpose of exerting force. you don't want to punish the law-abiding for the crimes of those who are bent on lawless behavior. i also think it is important to look both short-term and long-term on how to respond to it. in the long term we have to look at the isolation and despair at the younger man who reacts with such horrible violent behavior. at why it is that the social isolation and the decay of their social collection whether it is through their families, their neighborhoods, communities. whether it is through facebook groups, how they become isolated. in the near term, i think it is helpful that we look at patterns we see developing with these events. very often these younger men have looked at things on social media signaling what they want to do. very often they are craving attention, notoriety and fame knowing that they may die in the event and tend do so. social media companies can somehow discern what kind of toothbrush they will buy before they are even thinking about buying a toothbrush. they post things often outlining their plans, sometimes detailed plans of what they are going to do. sometimes it might be something along the lines of expressing admiration for killers or a desire to engage in a mass killing event. social media companies should be reporting that and they should do it voluntarily and if they won't, we will make them. host: first we have mike out of ohio, you are on with senator mike lee. caller: thank you for c-span. i am all for nine supreme court justices. i would be fine with eight. we had eight for one full year after scalia passed away. why is it that after in september, you didn't nominate one. you know what the solution is, july the first, august the first of the presidential year. the one in office gets to make the choice. if it is after that date, wait till after the election. you should never have eight, for one full year, you should make an appointment. guest: i don't agree with your assessment of forcing the assessment that the quick congress should be made to appoint anyone. you have to remember that under our constitutional system the president nominates and the senate confirms. we had a senate and power that chose not to nominate merrick garland who was obama's nominee. that was the prerogative of the senate to confirm or not confirm. i don't believe that is something the log can or should compel a senate that doesn't want to confirm a particular nominee that it has no obligation t host: this is kathy, a republican. caller: high senator lee. i hope and pray that y'all take back the house and the senate. we are all upset. the timid crowds are destroying everything. -- the democrats are destroying everything. people need to see it. he stole the election. it's too bad they can't go in there and take them out of the white house. host: kathy, thanks for your call. guest: i have great concern with what president biden is doing. he has made so many things worse for the american people. in utah, the average family is spending $751 every month and increase in monthly household expenses. this is a predictable, foreseeable result of failed policy that president biden continues coy staying upon the american -- foisting upon the american people. the fact that american moms and dads can even get baby formula. there is no baby formula shortage in canada, mexico. there is no baby formula shortage in asia or in europe. it is only here in the united states. why is that? that is the case because this is not a natural shortage. there is no inability on the part of the u.s. economy to produce baby formula. this is entirely of government creation. i have introduced a bill that would remedy this problem and it would do so by fixing three problems that the government has created. number one, we have put in place protectionist areas -- barriers. problem number two, we have label requirements that could be imported lawfully. the labeling requirements prohibit the sale of certain european formulas that would otherwise be lawfully for sale but for minor differences in the way these things are labeled. problem number three is the fact that through the wic program, they issue vouchers and they issue limitations on what those vouchers can be used for. my formula act would fix this problem and suspend all of those limitations for six months and would bring americans very quick and very effective relief from the formula crisis. you are right to be concerned about president biden's failed policies. i hope and pray republicans will sweep through and gain healthy majorities in the house and senate. host: would you agree with her assessment that he is an illegitimate president? guest: know the electoral votes were opened and counted. the election that matters is the electoral college. i did not see the movie 2000 mules. that movie does raise significant questions as to what happened in that election. i would love to get the president's response and his explanation to why certain things happen. but it is important to point out, there is a difference between the possibility that some cheating may have occurred and whether or not he is the legitimate president. the president of the united states is chosen by the electoral college. the opening an accounting of electoral votes resulted in a clear victory for joe biden. that doesn't mean that bad things didn't happen along the way. host: to alabama, michael, a democrat. caller: i am a longtime listener , a veteran. i have a couple things. first of all, i have lost confidence in the supreme court. i think you are correct in the nine. the fact that anyone sitting on the supreme court. i don't care who put on their has gotten their less with 60 votes. putting someone on that court and that is the problem i have. you have to get 60 votes. who looks at things from the far end on the worse side. you didn't give people a chance. but when you don't give them a vote, you didn't even try to move forward on that. guest: thanks for calling in. thanks with agreeing with me that nine justices is the appropriate number. as to your point about the 60 vote threshold. being required for presidential nominees. it was in the senate, all presidential nominees were required to have a 60 vote closure standard. to get to simple passage you first have to bring debate to a close. breaking debate to a close take 60 votes. they were all subject to that standard up until november of 2013 when harry reid, i was in the senate when it happened. they removed the filibuster. everyone understood at the time that once you knew the filibuster as to presidential nominees there was no principled distinction between supreme court and other nominees. that is the kind of change that does not get undone. it does not get ignored. as for not holding a vote on merrick garland. the senate's job is to review and to decide whether to confirm. we decided not to confirm eric garland. it was a mentor you to me whether we do so by a vote or whether we decided to not schedule a vote. we opted for the latter strategy. we knew we were not going to confirm him. i understand you disagree but i do disagree. host: do you think we are going to see confirmation votes where a justice get 60 or more votes again. all the eventual justices received less than 55 votes? guest: the short answer is no, not in the foreseeable future. i described in chapter one of saving nine, we shouldn't view the supreme court as a a political body. it has taken certain political matters as a political debate. regardless of how one feels about abortion, religiously, morally or as a matter of public policy there is no grounding in the constitution for roe v. wade. it was a power grab for seven out of nine supreme court justices and 1973. it was dead wrong in that instance. traditional activism doesn't always occur in the form of liberals. in 1905 there was a prominent case called lochner v. new york where five supreme court justices in a five to four ruling sees power by invalidating a minimum wage law. it rooted in the constitution. not coincidentally using the same basic doctrine which was later used in 1973 to bring the abortion issue beyond political debate. it took the supreme court 32 years to undo that bad precedent resulting from conservative activism. i talk about this at some length in chapter three of "saving nine." it is wrong when conservatives do it it is wrong when liberals do it. when supreme court justices take political matters and resolve them in the court on basis that are not constitutional we produce things which no nominees are likely not to get 60 votes. host: from kyle in truth or consequences nevada, republican. caller: good morning, 1905 supreme court justice, senator lee is going to correct me on this, i paid attention to this because of the vaccine mandates. the antitrust movement, you guys are huge forces in this. i was thinking it is for sterilizations under the same premise. i love the spirit of mike lee, i really do. my question is, how much does bureaucracy get in the way, number nine, number seven, number 12 what does it matter if we are not acting in good faith? guest: the number of justices on the supreme court, as i explained in "saving nine," when we tinker with the size of the supreme court for political reasons it interferes with the ability of the supreme court to be a neutral arbiter of what the law says. the minute we lose that, the structure of our constitution gives way. the last time this was attempted was a 1937. as i described in chapters four and five, franklin d roosevelt, also a democrat and a hero and idol of our current president, got tired of the supreme court disagreeing with him, he tried to threaten them by pushing a bill in congress that would've given him power to expand the court to 15 justices. that proposal failed legislative but i got the court sufficiently scared and convinced one supreme court justice owen roberts, to flip his vote in an important case. you can read about it and chapter five, that case for reasons i explained in the book, ended up influencing the way we do business in the federal government ever since then and not in a good way. it has a lot to do with why we are $31 trillion in debt. it is why the american economy struggles under $2 trillion of compliance costs. that is what happened the last time someone tried to pack the court. host:" the book is saving nine. senator mike lee back again. up next we are joined by senator john larson and we talk about the january 6 committee hearing. we will be right back. >> after months of closed-door investigations. the house january 6 committee is said to go public. tune ns committee members interview key members on the assaults of the u.s. capitol. watch tonight live tonight on our free mobile lab or any time at c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> american history tv saturdays on c-span2. recording the people and events that tell the american story. join us at 8:00 a.m. eastern. from purdue university as historian and author's across the nation discuss the past, present, and future of democracy. with an array of topics like energy politics, presidential skin levels, redlining. talks about the epa's origin in the environmental politics and policies of the 1970's. explore the american story watch american history tv saturday on c-span2 and find the full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. c-span brings you an unfiltered view of government. our news land -- newsletter from the halls of congress to daily press briefings to remarks on the president. scan the qr code on the bottom to sign up for this email is stand up to date to everything happening in washington each day. subscribe today using the qr code. washington journal continues. host: we welcome back a 12 term member of congress and leading voice for gun log reform. how optimistic are you that this congress will put a new law bill on the president's desk to sign into law? guest: i am confident that the house of representatives will do. that is at the heart of this discussion and i think every body has to unmask what is really going on here. where in the constitution that you need 60 votes to pass a bill? where in the constitution doesn't say that a filibuster is part of the process? in either case it is simply because the closer votes has been used as a tool by both parties but what is his lead to his greatest threat to our democratic process. just in this last year and a half there are over 400 bills that are sitting in the united states senate that have never been taken up for a vote. of course, everyone is struggling with the gun violence and punctuated yesterday by the threat on justice kavanaugh's life but certainly uvalde and pulmonary from newtown, connecticut. why is it that the united states senate doesn't vote, the reason we are not taking that up because we don't have 60 vote. i think this is the issue that we need to focus in on. why hasn't congress done anything? implying that both chambers are not acting. you know that as we did yesterday, passing gun legislation is common sense legislation. it passed the house and it was bipartisan and i believe that the senate takes a vote and people know what the vote is, meaning that people are able to hold their elected officials accountable. that is what our founding fathers intended. people will know where you stand on this issue. the gun issue is such that you are standing on principle. let the public know where you stand on this issue. this is far more of a threat to our democracy then what transpired on january 6, but what transpires in terms of the threats on international terrorism, russia, china or global pandemic. if the united states congress, if this democratic republic that is designed with two houses, a system of checks and balances and people are asked to vote. we have sworn an allegiance to the constitution. there is a rule that says we don't have to vote on any issue unless there are 60 votes. over 400 bills have not been taken up. including a gun bill, voting rights acts, prescription drugs, universal background checks on guns. you can go down the list. these are not insignificant legislation. over 400 bills that are not taken up. host: we have 20 minutes until the house comes in and the house taking up that red flag bill today. we would like the viewers to take out the conversation. guest: that house will take it up today but will it be taken up in the senate? host: (202) 748-8000 for republicans, (202) 748-8001 for democrats and (202) 748-8002 four independents. host: will be focusing on the hearing for the january six committee. how many people are left out there that don't have a formed opinion one way or the other on what did or did not happen on january 6. he was left to convince? guest: i think that is a great question and i wish i had a great answer for that. i do think there is widespread interest. as you pointed out, this will not be carried out on fox news which will be holding an alternative concept of what actually transpired and they are convinced that nothing really transpired other than over enthusiastic tourists that got out of hand. of course that was the fault of congress and not anything that president trump had anything remotely to do with. that is all the more reason for why we need to vote on these issues. the very bipartisan bill that passed the house with 252 members voting for it and most notably even minority leader mccarthy saying, we need to get to the bottom of this we need to find out what happened, we need to find out what transpired. senator mcconnell on that day stepping forward and recognizing what the threat wasn't saying we have to step up but then when it came to a nonpartisan study of the issue, there was no vote in the united states senate. how many people in america know that? that is why the committee's findings and that is nonpartisan in terms of the courageous actions of liz cheney and adam kinzinger, i think it will be of great interest to the american public and i think a number of people will turn in. people who have formed their views already, i don't know that this will convince them but certainly the american people deserve to see and hear the testimony under oath and also the number of people who are actually involved in that day in their words coming forward and testifying so the public is to see that. host: larry and missouri, a republican. caller: you know both of my senators from illinois and they are both democrats. i have called both of their offices. i bought c-span's book to get a hold of my senators. there is no reply from their offices. i have never heard a democrat explain what an assault weapon is. i have a 45 caliber and i am 75. if you want to describe an assault weapon. you are describing both of mine. the second question is, it is not the republicans fault and it is not the dimmer kranz fault you don't have fault -- democrats fault. host: we are running a little short on time. let me get his opinion on this. guest: thank you for the call and let me also add that jason crow from new jersey are both military and trained in assault weapons believe that we ought to go back to the ban on assault weapons and they grew up knowing how to hunt while also recognizing that there are two distinct reasons for those guns. an assault weapon as a weapon of war. to have the access that people have to that doesn't seem to be consistent with a weapon that you would use for hunting. both of them have guns, both of them store them. it would seem to me that that would be a common sense practice. no one is coming to take your assault weapons away. they ought to be banned and especially prevented from 18-year-olds getting a hold of them. it doesn't make a lot of sense. both of them talked about the extensive training from their families but also specifically in the military. with regards to what you had to say about the votes, clearly people have to vote. i don't disagree with you. in terms of the cloture vote, the democrats and harry reid, it was used as a tool just like mitch mcconnell, i think the american people are fed up. how can a democratic republic exist if there is not a vote taken on the issue. if you ever see a vote taken you think that your government and the system is broken. over 400 bills, 70% of them bipartisan are sitting there now. and yes, you are correct. that happened when democrats were able to use cloture to vote . that is probably the biggest threat to our democracy and the wing that needs to change so that people can hold their elected representatives accountable as you suggest you wanted to do in the case of talking about the definition of assault weapons. host: this is bill, and independent. caller: good morning. i used to be a journalist in washington dc. during the obama and biden administration, homeland security were tracking extremist. that office was disbanded. i am just wondering if our government has any tracking group tracking far left and right groups? there was a collar from the louisiana who said watch out democrats in a menacing way. our political discourse has become extremely dangerous and the government doesn't seem to be tracking anything. host: were they a part of your coverage area when you were a journalist? caller: yes. host: where did you go when you are trying to track them? caller: i would go to a hearing and talk to the fbi and the cia and talk with the governmental agencies that are responsible. guest: he may have more knowledge specifically covering homeland security. i'm not familiar specifically. there should be the ability to track and be concerned about domestic terrorism and all of its antecedents. i do believe that the government is doing that and by the government i mean the fbi and the cia and homeland security. the extent of which i can't comment. but to your point, to get the answer there would be a hearing and usually a hearing or a briefing that would perhaps be classified for obvious reasons. host: before you get off the line, do you have one or two suggestions? caller: there needs to be some sort of bipartisan group. the fact that obama and biden caved to political pressure disbanded the homeland security group to track extremists is very concerning. host: congressman larson, a topic that you are interested in is social security as the chair of the social security committee for the ways and means committee. guest: let me commend chairman mean who is a social security recipient himself. being raised by his grandmother and stepping forward. we are marking up a bill, as you know, congress has not enhanced social security and more than 51 years. the cost of a gallon of milk was $.72 in 1971. richard nixon was a president of the united states. a lot has transpired and a lot of people know that. in the midst of the pandemic the group hit the hardest, people over the age of 65. a close of one million died. who were the people most impacted by inflation? the war in ukraine, supply chain issues, the elderly. a people on a fixed income, with 10,000 baby boomers becoming eligible for social security, there is a need for congress to act. i spoke with nancy pelosi the other day, we need a comprehensive bill that will live people who are close to poverty. 3 million people who have paid in all their life who are below poverty simply because congress is not taken any action. they have not taken any action of 51 years to enhance the program that is the nation's most effective insurance program. the number one and type poverty program for the elderly. the number one anti-poverty program for children as well. the number one disabled poverty program for disabled veterans. the committee on ways and means will be marking up a bill shortly. it will pass the house i am sure. i hope with bipartisan support. it is supported bipartisanly across-the-board by the american people. we only have to go back as far as 2008, 2009 when people saw their 401(k) become a 101 k. during that time social security never missed a payment. that is why it is so important. i commend president biden for this. social security needs to be enhanced, protected. we need to bring up to speed the benefits that have not been enhanced since 1971. host: this is john from missouri, and independent. caller: good morning mr. larson. i have a question. in ways and means, do you have the authority to propose a bible back program which would alleviate the republican cries where we could buy back the guns and send them to ukraine as a weapons package. guest: you sound way to common sense with your proposal. i don't think that is a bad idea at all. i think that needs to take place. there is a lot of common sense around this. especially with the profusion of guns in our society here. more so than any other civilized country in the world. a buyback provision would make an awful lot of common sense. it would not fall under the ways and means jurisdictions. but that does not mean that people in ways and means would be supportive. i would also add that it is very common sense and straightforward which is something that i appreciate and thank you. i think that is a good idea. people in my district have spoken about this as well. that is what they talk. common sense solutions. host: from illinois, this is teresa, a republican. caller: good morning. i would like to ask representative larson about the formation of this january 6 committee. would you consider a kangaroo court where we have the opposition who is not allowed to have any witnesses, any attorneys. just the offense, would you consider that a kangaroo court? guest: which you consider the fact that 252 members of the house voted for a bill to do a nonpartisan study of what transpired on january the sixth? it passed the house of representatives with 200 52 votes. it has never been taken up by the united states senate's and killed under a coach or vote. should there be no study and no looking into what transpired on january 6 or should you make it as bipartisan as you can? i commend liz cheney for being able to come forward. she has been an awful lot on the line to do so because of her belief in her country. oddly enough a belief that january 6 held by kevin mccarthy and mitch mcconnell as well. kevin mccarthy said he wanted to get to the bottom of this. i think the important thing is for people to listen a watch and observe as john asked the question earlier, do you think it will change people's minds? i don't know but i do think people from the standpoint of curiosity and looking at the process and judging for themselves. how this process has come forward and what does it actually reveal in terms of what transpired on january 6 and what was behind it. host: we have about two minutes or so before they come in. in florida, daniel. caller: good morning congressman. it seems that we can meet this in the bud, the gun problems. i understand the constitution is concrete. the amendments are not. can we not revamp the second amendment with both parties working on it. guest: of course we could. first of all, you have to be able to vote on that. this is something i hope more americans become aware of and should be calling on for that to transpire and that is the issue any time you are talking about looking at the constitution but tear point, it can be amended. the first step of that, it would require the united states senate voting. i don't think many people are aware of the fact that there are 400 bills there they haven't taken up including the january 6 study bill that was passed bipartisanly in the house of representatives. that is the threat to democracy and our republic that the house and senate don't work the way our founders intended. not many people have been to a conference committee because they have been on the miss bills coming from there. host: we appreciate your time. gavel-to-gavel coverage of the january 6 committee. democrat from connecticut john larson. >> the house will be in order. the speakers room, june 9, 2022. nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the prayer will be offered by chaplainld you pray with me. holy god, we humble ourselves and pray to you, yielding our wills to yours and giving ourselves over to your authority. we pray that you would be merciful in your discipline. search our hearts and melt all hardness that