"washington journal" continues. host: joshua >> former senior director from the obama national security council and director at the institute for advocacy at georgetown law explain what the institute does. >> thanks for the invitation we are dedicated to using the power of the court to defend o nstitutional rights and values with high impact litigation with the separation of powers and protecting freedom of speech battling immigration policies we want - - policies that we feel. >> with the impeachment inquiry it has been noncooperation the white house

says it denies the president's constitutional right to due process is there such a thing as due process when it comes to impeachment quick. >> there is but not what the white house says so the best encapsulation is probably the memo the white house counsel released publicly earlier this month that memo has set a couple of things first it confuses the phases of impeachment that happens in the house the charges being brought then it continues in the senate that is more of a trial there may be certain rights that attach that the memo from the counsel's office

says you need to mix those up so to assume that legal conclusion the president has done no wrong and says because the ukraine phone calls and evything else the president has done this is inherently illegitimate and then the white house will not cooperate but then that is against the constitution that allows the congress to do its responsibility. >>host: in that process the chief justice overseas that trial. during the indictment side on the house, who gets to decide what is fair or proper in that process quick. >> really the house does. they are given a lot of the way my text in history and tradition to figure out how it was to determine if the articles of impeachment should be referred to the senate. right now we have a couple of things inquiries made of

officials today the top diplomat to ukraine testifies in a closed session on the hill talking about ukraine related matter to have those conversations in a way that if this will elicit what they need for those articles of impeachment where does executive privilege and and the right to conduct this investigation begin quick. >> executive privilege is real that protects certain conversations and communications between the president of the united states and high-level s advisors but it is not absolute and there are various ways famously in the

context of watergate the supreme court found any claim made by nixon yielded to the criminal inquiry. there's also an interesting set of facts in the current context that can be waived if the conversation i have had is privileged but that means i would waive whatever right i would have and of course many of the topics the house isto interested in the president tweets and talks about at great length. we saw that in the bizarre cabinet meeting yesterday. even the claims of privilege can yield to pursue impeachment inquiries and can esbe waived to talk about them. >>host: a conversation about the inquiry joshua is our guest in this 30 minutes.

talk about the need for a vote on the house floor with the impeachment inquiry is that necessary quick. >> it is not necessary but that the trump white house and republicans on the hill are holding up that they claim the house is doing they point to the practice there has been a clear and formal vote to open the peach man inquiry but there's nothing in the constitution that says it's required in fact it gives the prerogative to consider how to

pursue impeachment inquiry and by its ownen rules did what it has needed to do its authorized to go ahead and do the work we have seen them do asking questions and calling subpoenas and to gather the information. >> if impeachment is a political process why not take that step as an abundance of the effort to be fair quick. >> it's a political question more than legal. legally it's not required. political i assume the calculation is made to the pros and the cons of taking vote and that political sensibility has been to avoid it but legally that's exactly what is happening to pursue the impeachment

inquiry. >>host: pennsylvania republican good morning. >>caller: good morning. i would like to know they are talking about impeachment. what about the governors and the mayors and the judges of the sanctuary cities? why are they not being brought up in impeachment? they are breakingey the laws. >> impeachment is a process that is reserved for certain federal officials brca1 president suggest certain members of congress should be impeached that's not something the constitution makes available but it does make it available for judges but the biggest question is why are people interested? because people feel there has beenr improprieties that the founders worried about putting that process into the u.s.

constitution hamilton was one of the most vocal advocates of a strong presidency also of a robust impeachment process to ensure the strong president hamilton that didn't use the private office for game that the allegation of what trump has done with the ukraine and what the house is exploring right no now. >>host: with your work in the obama administration you are involved in litigation efforts. >> we are honored to represent the us housee of representatives in one piece of litigation that's connected to the conversation today of the impeachmentgi inquiry that was filed against don mcgann the former white housedo counsel to enforce that congressional subpoena. >> why did you get involved? >> this is within our mandate

this is where that partisanship we see a dialogue on the hill or in the white house does not stop legal arguments from being made or heard so that we still get a fair shake that we work in the state courts as well and this is within our mandate. >> there has been an extensive briefing they can find it on my twitter feed and we will be in court next week in the district of dc arguing that case. >> georgia lying go ahead good morning democratic line. >>caller: i have a question about the subpoenas you were

talking about that a few minutes ago does congress not have a right to arrest these people? there are 15 people that completely ignore those congressionalio subpoenas. >> that's a great question. in general there are three ways the house in these circumstances to enforce the subpoenase one is to go to the court and with that mcgann case is a leading example of the house doing exactly that right now. there are two other ways one is to refer to the us justice department for criminal gavestigation for noncompliance that the same us justice department that is resisting the impeachment

inquiry and that by constitutional design has to report to donald trump so that's a nonstarter in a practical matter snow people are exploring with the caller suggest the inherent contempt r d there are a number of instances in which congress has gone out and detained somebody whether at the capital or a holding place under this inherent authority to uphold that authority is not clear that current supreme court would give as much as you might imagine because you can see that authority being abused congress as a political body h especially if there was judicial review that have the

potential review but i share the caller'se ca concerns they want documents it is not voluntary or optional. >> so who does the arresting? the capital police force charged with patrolling the congressional offices and library of congress quick. >> yes. that is the police force the congress has at itsth disposal and that would be remarkable to see that piece of government to go p out and arrest somebody then detained them i suspect they would quickly go to court then the courts are arguing about thein legitimacy. >>caller: good morning. i was a republican i just cannot understand why the

facts no longer matter. my question is the litmus test basically all the guests that come on i have a simple question do you think the president has ever lied or willingly deceived the american people on any issu issue? >> i do think so just yesterday when the president referred to the phony emoluments clause of the constitution what he was suggesting there was not the emoluments clause but that's not true. there are two domestic and foreign from somebody enriching themselvesby by holding public office and it

should not be used for personal gains makes it very difficult to have a conversation. >>host: here is a question from the viewer from the text. >> are we in a constitutional crisis? >> in fact trump said he would not be recommended to the justice department against hillary clinton for the e-mail system. so that is on both sides.

we could be sidling up to that phrase it's one thing to disagree on policy in another of law but the white house counsel thatt says this will be resisted because we disagree conclusion whether the president engaged in wrongdoing therefore we will not allow them to show the documents they subpoenaed that stops the government from playing their role and then it was like a constitutional crisi crisis. >>host: to the committees investigatingit kansas city missouri go-ahead democratic line.as >>caller: good morning.

so what happened with the campaign with milania and all that? but he does things that disrupts the country and acts like he can get away with it. >>host: do you have a question about the impeachment inquiry process quick. >>caller: the senate should

act on that. >>host: you want to talk about the senate quick. >> first the house has to continue the process which if any articles of impeachment they want to refer to the senate that was a sense that would happen relatively quickly but for the sake of public education so the public can understand why so now i guess we will see that play out not just in the house for the testimony occurring today but as people talk through what the house is uncovered. >> of how the process has worked with high profile testimony today we won't see it it is behind closed doors but the head of the top us

diplomat testifies today after this takes place members will come out and we will hear what was said behind closed doors. or there will be anonymous statements with knowledge of what was said. was at a good way to conduct the process and communicate with the american people? >> it does have its downsides so with this closed-dooror approach it does make sense they are trying to avoid political spectacle instead of engaging in a genuine investigation that they have elicited testimony they are actually learning things. >> but it also has a strange feel behind closed doors to signal it's not public that is

a systematic way about those pieces can be made public rather than having those individual members come out and share what is appropriate. >>host: bill taylor expected on capitol hill if we can get a shot of him outside that briefing and deposition room. >>caller: thank you for taking me of 79 years old i think the democrats use all these talking points with the impeachment and the news media

to brainwash everybody to say trump is a bad president they never report on what he has done. i'm more of an independent to the right a little bit. and i cannot understand how the news media does not report the good things. as far as the impeachment goes it should be out in the open for us the only reasons they are not doing it and the house is because they don't want to be subpoenaed by republicans. >> i do think there are pieces to feel that regardless of impeachment standards to violate public trust.

and the callf with ukraine that too many of our minds does something that appears at least improper and seems to want a foreign leader in exchange for the provision off defense from the us to dig up dirt on the leading political rifle that why you hear inviting for an election interference if you think that violates the law in particular in election law trying to elicit from a foreigner related to a us election and there are others who may think that reaches the impeachment standard. but that call memorandum is out in the open. i encourage all americans to read that in the oath of the oval office.

>>host: does every committee have the power to subpoena or just judiciary? mimic committees generally do have the power to issue a subpoena we have seen them issue that right now you see judiciaries at the center of this impeachment context but also the intelligence committe committee, foreign affairs committee to play a role they are broader than impeachment to conduct oversight generally and also has the role do we need new laws intr the country that are deemed inappropriate? so in the job as a house in the senate. >>host: they are issuing subpoenas in this process. with chairman cummings will be

buried in baltimore on thursday and lie in state later this week i believe sthursday morning. republican line from louisiana. >>caller: i have a question i was going to ask. if they tried to get the democratic nomination to be the no opponent. is he really in opponent. >> so whether biden is the opponent. >> he is a opponent. he has been leading the race

but the point is for trump to dig up dirt in exchange for us defense on any political opponent whether number one that is an abuse of power that hasn't been done for personal gain. and of course many have that missile system in question was very much but that is what should motivate a president not trying to boost their stature. >>host: so now i will finish about elijah cummings lying in repose on thursday and the funeral is scheduled for friday.

>>caller: good morning. how many things does he have to do to be impeached? let me just say something. he said he didn't do nothing. but then he did send people over here. what more does he need to be impeached? is all thewh way up obama is behind. >>host: so what does it take to be impeached? mimic so there is a point the phone call we have been talking about wasn't just a bad call or bad day or if you miss spoken words because there is a lot of context to that that goes all the way back to when donald trump was not the president but as a candidate to say rush if you are listening look at those

missing hillary e-mails. since then there has been a clear trajectory of the president welcoming foreigners who are eagerhi to metal in us elections with our democracy that should be sacred for alld americans and especially the president of the united states. so in the view of many of us in which the president appears and instead invite selection interfere in his. >> wisconsin good morning. >>caller: good morning. why do the democrats have behind door testimony when

they should be sharing everything with the public. i want everything to be transparent across the board. ith watch stuff every day in the country is divided hiding things behind doors is not as healthy debate. >> there are pieces that this are not all behind closed doors and then what they think is the behavior but it's also important to remember the stages of the impeachment process. if you think of the grand jury it does meet inti secret but then the trial follows from

there then that happens out in the open it was in the early days of c-span president clinton with these proceedings i remember watching them on tv to understand american policy so there is a piece of this that will be very much in the open right now the house is exercising its prerogative to gather information. and one that is accomplished in quiet session. >>host: this is a text from wisconsin asking if you have been in contact with the committee about the process. >> no. i have not. the only role that i have onplayed as mentioned as part of the legal team helping the house on behalf of the judiciary committee to enforce the subpoena served on don mcgann.

as cocounsel with the general house for constitutional advocacy and protection i'm honored to represent the house in a couple of matters and this is the most relevant to the conversationas today. >>host: you can read more about the institutes work. maria new jersey independent good morning. >>caller: good morning. it seems to me any agreement of aid has conditions you could call that a quid pro quo. i wish you would comment on that take care provision of article one that the president has the duty to see that the laws are enforced. and the second point that the

magentleman said before nobody will be the eventual candidate. he is right. and this is the biggest point to become a parliamentary system . . . . >> guest: thank you for the questions. let me start with the first one the idiot there can be conditions based onet u.s. foren assistance, foreign military aid and equipment given to another

government and thatt is true but the question is are those conditions to the benefit of the united states of america or are these conditions to the benefit of [inaudible] and at times very much to the benefit of the united states to impose conditions. we share intelligence if they share it back. we train soldiers if y company steps up counterterrorist t activity. that is not what appears to be happening in that ukraine memorandum which i urge folks to read for themselves. instead the something that is not of value to the u.s. but to donald trump and he appears to be soliciting from ukraine's head of state. he is asking for dirt on a clinical opponent, someone he thanks he might stand against as trump runs for reelection in 2020. in general rooting out genuine

interruption maybe in the interest of the united states but picking up dirt on and up american family seems to benefit just donald trump and that is where the concern is.co >> host: would you finish with your thoughts on whether we are becoming a parliamentary system? >> guest: we do seem to have found our way into separate camps and that is unfortunate and honestly there has been a trend in that direction that proceeds donald trump campaign in time as president but escalated during that and i hope it isur not only we find our way back to our constitutional ordee or rule of law but finally back to where the facts are shared and policies and politics get debated in similar premises and ultimately we come together to tackle. serious challenges that have nothing to do with donald trump.

>> host: joshua's executive director of institute for constitutional advocacy and protection at georgetown university law school. he appreciate your time. >> thank you for the invitation. spaceman. >> c-span's washington journal lied with news on policy issues that affect you and coming up wednesday morning a preview of facebook ceo mark sucker berg's testimony on capitol hill with washington post technology reporter. filmmaker michael moore joins us to discuss the impeachment inquiry in campaign 2020 including his endorsement of senator bernie sanders. tennessee will begin to harassment tim burgess talks about the trump impeachment inquiry and u.s. relations with syria. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal journal lied at 7:00 a.m. eastern. join the discussion. >> tonight on c-span2 we hear from trump administration officials about access to affordable housing. that is followed by house judiciary hearing