mitch mcconnell announcing deputy attorney rod rosen stein will brief all attorneys this week on the decision to fire f.b.i. director james comey. senate minority leader chuck schumer issued a statement saying in part, quote, i hope senators on both sides of the aisle will use the opportunity to seek the full truth regarding director comey's firing. to press the deputy attorney general to make way for a special prosecutor and assure the administration will make public any audio recordings between the president and the former director. house minority leader nancy pelosi has called on speaker paul ryan to also schedule a briefing with the deputy attorney general. she issued a statement saying the deputy attorney general should be, quote, accountable to the house as well as the enate. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's

cable television companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. continues. axiosnow, from headquarters in arlington, virginia, we are joined by axi os' founder. jim, thank you for joining us. guest: thank you. it is great to join you. we love c-span. host: we are glad to have you back on today. for viewers still learning about , give us an overview about who you are and why you got started. guest: axios is designed for people like your viewers. we try to produce journalism that matters in politics,

technology, health care, business, and today we are launching science. we hire experts in each category, and we try to offer what we view as essential reading. we try to help people navigate the blizzard of news that is every day in modern day. we want to try to direct you to the news that you should be thinking about. tot: what makes it different go read a story at axios? guest: two big things, one of our reportersthat are all experts in the topic. and as youse is one, go on your mobile phone and ipad, every single story is in

one, shareable screen. you can go deeper if you want, what if you do not then you will but if you do not, then you will still be caught up. most clashes and innovations will come from the collision of politics, technology, science, and business. for us as news consumers, it is going to be harder to stay sophisticated on all the cages happening around us. our goal is to earn your trust in their rating that for you every day. narrating that for you everyday. -- you saye axios that many now go on to make fake headlines and even fake news. how does the media defined fake news for us? most: if you go to

websites, summoning things are being done for business purposes. pop-up ads, banner ads, slow thingsmes, most of those were designed because that is what business needs to drive as much inventory as possible. if you are going to start from scratch and produce what you know is something the news consumer needs, then you would make it much easier to navigate. you would kill the annoying pop-up ads, and you would allow people to stay on that one platform, that one screen, and you would make it easy to share. so much of news consumption is through different ecosystems like snapchat, appleram, facebook, or news. it is just a different world now in terms of how people are getting their news. in terms of fake news, i described fake news as anything

that is not real. anything that is manufactured. some of it is maliciously done, and some of it is not. people sometimes use headlines that are tricks for clicks. you read these audacious headlines, and then the story does not really deliver. so, we are trying to earn the readers' trust by delivering content that matters and not playing games either for editorial or business reasons. news is certainly a term our viewers have heard a lot more of since the trump administration. you think that president trump has been good for journalism, the media business? guest: those are two different questions. as a business proposition, he probably has been for journalism and media, because there is more public interest in the journalism we are producing. in terms of is he is good for journalism, it is hard to argue

with a straight face that he is. he spends a lot of time talking ,bout clamping down on access journalists, media entities writing things that he does not like it while he has not really owed through with any of these things, rhetorically i do not like it, because i care a lot about newsgathering and information. you see it a little bit as a problem in the german and even the french elections which just took place. what concerns me is that there are so many people -- you probably hear from some of your callers -- people do not believe that there is a truth anymore. that a fact is a fact. people seem to just want things that validate their own position. to me, that is dangerous. if there is one thing i could do , if i could wave a magic want,

i would want people to understand that sometimes a fact is a fact, and that the world is a collocated place. if we could just settle on the fact that truth is a truth, and then if we could get our politicians to make better it would, then i think be a better outlook for my kids and people just getting onto facebook and bellyaching before getting back into their own little bubble, their own little alternative reality. axios.im, founder of we are not taking your calls. democrats, you can call in at 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. how many people are you hiring now? >> we have about 175 employees.

we started our business about 10 days before president donald trump took office. it has been an amazing run. , as the corere founders of the company, we did work at politico. we learned a lot about media, how people consume information about how political in disease consume -- people consume information, about how political enthusiasts consume information. the last 10 years, i consider myself more of a entrepreneur and business guy, because i care this thist creating models that can sustain journalism that viewers can trust. and that is hard. media is a tough business. if we can get it right, then i think that is a good thing. if we can get people news that

they can trust, that does not it, an ideological edge to then we can really educate readers. host: what sort of instruction you give your writers about writing in regards to the white house? have: people do not really soft opinions about donald trump. they either love him or hate him. very rarely do to hear that people are just ok with him. so, it is a very heated political environment to begin with. so we tell our employees that there is already enough noise and opinion, so let's try to explain what he is doing and why he is doing it. that to me is how we can be most useful. each and to axios every day, you'll find a lot of items that talk about what he is planning to do with energy policy, what he is trying to do

with his white house staff, and yes there is a lot of intrigue, but it is all through the lens of trying to explain him. that infuriate both sides. people often what you do pick a side and say he is either great or awful, but we are just trying to explain what we know he's doing. we are blessed to have some really wired employees who have awesome access to the white house, so we can give you that this ability. for those of you who do go to -- that visibility. for those of you who will maybe start going to axios, we hope that it really will kind of open your eyes. if we do that, we will be a successful media company. if we get pulled into the game of just tried to get clicks or pick a side, i already think the world is awash in that. host: our viewers, you know have

access to jim, cofounder of axios. first caller from texas good go ahead. -- from texas. go ahead. caller: good morning. i have been watching c-span for i think longer than your guest has. i have been following online media models for some time. i have watched how they have and changed. i saw when your company hit the air, and i started following them. through yourd website, and i do like your business model. but basically what you are saying is that you are going to do honest journalism, and i think that is a good concept. i like what i am seeing and hearing him up but i have a question for you -- and hearing, but i have a question for you. do you believe there is an overall liberal media bias? guest: oh, absolutely. there has been since forever.

i have worked at the wall street journal, the washington post, the lyrical -- politico, and now founding axios. so, i know that most i have worked with have been probably left of center. say outorters will not loud, but i have pretty good instincts on this stuff. i would say that is a reality. for most of my journalistic career, reporters have done a good job of compensating for their bias. in most content -- i have seen very few instances where i felt they were so incredibly biased. i would say that something changed in the last year with donald trump, particularly on twitter. you see reporters who are supposed to be distant from it and not have an ideological edge to their voice or journalism. now, they are popping off on twitter hour-by-hour in ways

that are clearly pro-hillary and anti-donald trump. part of this is because donald trump was so harsh on the media, but i do not like that. it is hard enough to keep your trust by try to keep our bias in check that we were born with have picked up over the years. once you start to voice that orr the air or on twitter facebook, then it is hard to keep that bond of trust with you, the viewer. strict twittera policy for reporters at axis -- axios? guest: there is. i do not want people popping off with their opinions on twitter. do i occasionally catch it? yes. do we reprimand them for it? yes. there is already enough noise. the world needs more intelligence and smart analysis. that is what we want our reporters and editors focused on.

it is easy to get pulled into the game of popping off and showing off in these different forums, but we want serious reporters who have real expertise on topics informing all of you. we wanto to the site, you to think this is smart and that we did not waste your time. that you walked away a smarter person and you want to come back to the website, if not then we do not have a business. host: david, an independent. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. thank you for your guest. i think this is a great topic. i have a question. opinion about how your groups on the different of people, like different

generations as far as how they are affected or influenced by fake news. it seems like the younger does not seem able to seemed able to-- distinguish between what is real and what is fake. i think that also applies to elderly people. in other words, the folks who -- iup with the internet am and 54 years old, and i remember when the internet started in computers started. -- started and computers started. the older generation, i find they have a problem understanding the difference. being internet savvy and understanding the difference between fake news. the younger generation, i think, does not have the worldly view. caller: a very good question.

we have someone who covers media trends. i will have her look at that. i have not seen any evidence that there is a difference in age based on how much you believe or fall into the trap of fake news. i think a lot of fake news that made its way around facebook before the election seemed to be spread by all age groups and demographics. so, i think it is a fair question. there is no doubt there was a lot of it. if you look at the top stories that credit on facebook before the election, a lot of them were fake. so, you cannot say it does not matter. it matters tremendously. old,u are under 40 years you did not grow up in a world where we had the new york times, wall street journal, three networks and maybe 60 minutes in your local paper. that was my life as a child.

now, there are about a thousand different sources. most people younger than me are getting their news to snapchat, snapchat,, twitter -- facebvook, twitter, or instagra. so, they do not really know how to distinguish the news they get what they getrom on cnn. so, there is a certain level of that needs to be there. so, we have gotten a lot of noise recently, and we have to sort through that. anyone watching this or reading axios, just be aware of the source of your content. ask if you can trust it. i think you will see the return of some viewers returning to specific forms, because they

want the safety of knowing they can trust the source. they are not going to go down the rabbit hole of the internet for something that is fake. axios, iviewers go to believe everything is currently free to the public. is there going to be paid content at some point? i'm a yes, for right now for forever, everything will remain free. that means it is all supported and- yes, for right now, probably for forever, everything will remain free. that means it is all supported by advertisement. when i put the business cap back have times, we want to both. we want to have both a free and paid version. when we talk about a paid version, we are talking about

something that is very high and and additive to what -- high end and additive to what we already have on axios. subscriptions, by that i mean you paying maybe $20 a month to subscribe to your local newspaper, that is a hard is this. few examplesy right now of people paying for sustained content in a big enough weight to support the type of journalism that we wants to do here. the type that the financial times does. cases, those are business expenses that people are writing off, so i do not think they are necessarily models that other people can replicate. this is probably more information than you needed on this topic, but we do think a lot about this, because we want to think about ways to create a

media company that can create good journalism. good journalism, by the way, is not cheap. you really have to hire people who have expertise, and you have to do everything it takes to get that information in its peers, trustedurest, best form. host: as viewers go through your site, they will see these launch partners. what is a launch partner? guest: these were people who were advertising with us when we launched. when we started, we did not have anyone, but right when we started we managed to get about 12 launch partners. now, we have about 30 companies that have advertised with us. if you want to advertise with us in which a big audience, we think we are a good place to go. and we do not discriminate on advertisers.

i am not in the game of discriminating against advertisers. as long as you straight -- stick to our code of ethics and a coat of decency, then i am not going to pick companies that i like or do not like. i think that is a dangerous road to go down for most media companies. caller fromxt virginia. go ahead. caller: hello. this is my first time listening, and i am enjoying the conversation. most of all, i am enjoying the philosophy and the manifesto you discussed earlier about shelling out the white noise. there is so much overwhelming news out there that is unsubstantiated and not being presented by someone who is a professional or expert in their field. so, i am excited to try out the website. two questions, how will you stay focused on adding that unbiased news and staying on touch -- in

touch with the experts and seeking out those experts so they can present the news as it should be, in its true form? with the actual website itself, how will you be able to tailor make the website, so for those of us who want to take a step further and have it a bit personalized, would you take a step forward with applications to personalize the news coming to you, see you can identify the topics that you most want to be aware of? guest: great question screwed right now, there is a drop-down menu, see you can select if you want to just look at news about science or politics. over time, we do want to be personalized. the beauty of technology is that you can create a great experience for the consumer where the website knows the topics you care most about an kind of washes away the things you do not care about. we do a lot of health care

coverage, and maybe you instead want to focus on science and politics. there is a way to create algorithms that will do that. we are going to make a big investment in doing that. in terms to your question about expertise, we have people who are considered having "a screw loose." that is, these are people who really care about the subject, and they are willing to talk about it for free. they know the people in the space, and they are enthusiastic about breaking the news and getting it to you. so, that initial screen is probably the most important one. i tell most reporters i have worked with in the past that this is probably not a good place for you, for a journalist who wants to be a generalist. this is for people who have a passion for a topic. if we can get that right on the front end, then the product you get will be what we want to deliver. that is essential news that

people -- news from people who know what they are talking about. host: our next caller on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. democrat.-year-old i am a roosevelt democrat, and i have been watching my democratic party, which i love, just that the dust. just hit the dust. they have gotten so liberal starting with truman. if roosevelt had lived another year, we would have won the korean war, but truman took all the fight out of us with his liberalism. that is why we did not win in kora. -- in korea. host: what do you think is happening today with the democratic party?

check withyou colleges, then you will see that 80% of the people going to college since the truman era are all liberals. up with the dark skin at what he didok with the country. host: i'm not sure where we are going with that. jim bender chaim, do you want -- jim, do you want to try and talk about the liberal -- the democratic party notice? nowadays? guest: well, when it came to the liberal coverage of donald trump's campaign, it is unlikely that the democratic party is going to win back a lot of the house. right now, you have a democratic party that is in disarray.

if you look at what happened to the democratic party during resident obama's -- president youa's eight year reign, saw big losses in the number of houses and governorships. so, you have a democratic party that is having its own identity crisis. can democrats accommodate moderate and liberal democrat civic can -- so that they can win swing districts? if they cannot do that, then they will not have the success they want to have in the midterm elections. we have no clue as to whether or not they can. it is so early, and they are really just starting to rebuild post-obama. i think it will be a year before we have real solid answers to that question. housemore about the white and politics coming up.

i do want to thank jim for his time and inviting us into axios this morning. it should be an interesting morning. guest: thank you. thank you to your viewers. host: we will be talking with justin swan soon. first, we have a caller on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. yesterday, i believe the host website. the axios it makes me concerned that it is connected to politico, so how can we trust libtards. host: keely, what news -- do youwhat news sites

read? it seems we lost kelly. we are talking with two members of axios this morning. robert in georgia on the line for democrats. good morning. have you checked out axios? caller: this is the first i have heard of them, so i will be sure to check them out. i wish your guest was still there. hopefully, you can give this question to the next person from axios. i do not buy newspapers anymore, and i get my news from the internet and television. like theparticularly content i have to choose from on television. i would be interested to know if axios would be able to give the

consumer a new story that went something like this -- here is the information on where you can get information from television. my problem is that i have to go , pay them a lot of money for 300 channels i do not watch. how can i get a package for 20 stations and pay the same thing or a little bit less? host: i think i understand your question. robert, what do you look for in a new media site? what will make you come back for the information that is there? what will make you trust it? caller: that is a difficult question. i would change the question slightly. i would like to know how we get other people to stop watching their one channel. have you get other people to stop watching only fox news or

only msnbc and go to a site that is not going to be labeled as liberal, but a website that people will understand. my sister does not like to watch the news, because she figures that only the news of the day is >> cc our parents watching nothing but fox news. she is frustrated. tothe general public going get something they can all relate to. >> those are good questions. we will be talking about this morning. the potomaccross river, we are joined by jonathan swan. he is a national political reporter. do you want to jump right into it? your story on democrats exploited the comey controversy?

you laid it out in a four step plan. lay out what democrats are thinking right now. jonathan: they are thinking may have donald trump in a particularly vulnerable situation. chuck schumer wants to use this as a leverage point to get the changes they want to be russia pro. the first demand that the democrats will make is that they want a special prosecutor appointed to see the investigation about the potential collusion between the russian government and the trump campaign. they are looking at these more republican-minded senators like lindsey graham. i'm not saying a whole lot of movement on the republican side that the democrats will make for a litmus test republican patriotism. that will be the argument they make.

them go further. they're calling for jeff sessions to recuse himself. i think what we will also see is they will be calling for james fbi directorrmer to testify in public at a congressional hearing. that is the sequence that we can expect. what we can expect from them is that they are going to obstruct the republican legislative as a demand.this >> do they james comey would testify in open hearing? >> i think it is likely. there was a fascinating interview last week. that this issaying

not based on any conversations he had with jim common sense he was fired, just by knowing coming so up. give aks that comey will account of his side of the story and he has this interesting way of describing -- describing james comey. is probably the only subtext was person in washington. the history of james comey is he makes decisions, you can agree with them or disagree with them that what he does is explain himself in public in a way that makes it more comfortable. he reveals a lot about his thought process, what went on and the decision-making that went behind his. -- it. this is the national political reporter for access democrats.

jonathan swan, the viewers are calling in. you mentioned lindsey graham on meet the press yesterday. we wanted to get your take on some of his comments. jonathan: i'll think president trump is the target or subject of any collusion with the russians. that is what i believe but this tweet has to be answered. i would advise the president not to tweet or comment about the investigation as we go forward. interferens didn't with our election. the president needs to back off and let the investigation go over. we need to call comey and get to the bottom of all of this. >> jonathan swan on the president's role and particularly his communication strategy and the last six or seven days. >> lindsey graham is reflecting views of a pretty substantial number of republican senators. they are fed up with hearing

that the president equivocates about whether the russians interfered with the election about whether that is an indisputable fact that is agreed upon by every part of the intelligence community. lindsey graham is sending a signal to the president that he could be -- it to be a major problem for him. if he doesn't stop intervening in this very delicate area. >> how do you describe the white house communication strategy in the past six days? and what you hear there in the white house briefing room. >> if you really want to know i left is like in there, because you said there were strategy. 98% of thatd was white house press shop learned about the james comey decision by looking up at the television.

had about an hour's notice. there was no strategy. there was no plan. the president doesn't care. he thinks they are incompetent the way they handled it. he thinks they had enough time and that they should be able to line of surrogates to go on air and defend him and put together a coherent argument. the president was trashing shawn spicer privately throughout the week. if hedn't be surprised lets one or both of them go at some point in the near -- near future. he is a national political reporter. good morning. ryan: jonathan, i have a big question i have been dying to bounce off of somebody like me

-- you. a lot of people are comparing the trump and nixon administrations. i'll think that does it any justice. i think it is a lot worse than that. letting it would do a much better service if we drew a parallel with the james buchanan administration. if you look at the trump administration's incompetence, it is astounding and taking into account the fact that foreign and state department are all but toothless and a presidential candidate that has a multibillion-dollar net worth, it can only be a house in environment. becky was be said about the buchanan administration. this may sound hyperbolic but with regard to the proslavery and the precipitation of the beil war, i know that may

kind of dark and morbid but there is a silver lining and this is what leads me to my question. do the 2 -- due to the corruption at the civil war, our country had a quantum leap forward. i'm really kind of excited and curious to see about what our quantum leap toward will be. i am nervous at the same time and also really curious to hear from you as candidly as a foreigner from an outside looking in. what do you think our quantum leap forward will be? jonathan: i think there are a few parts to this. only slightly are more than 100 days in. making sweeping historical comparisons.

i kind of want to see how this first year plays out. question that makes good points is the chaos internally. that has not been resolved. it has been fixed on the national security side with the introduction of h.r. mcmaster. they have a much more conventional decision-making process there. i think on the domestic side, it is clear that things are shambolic. then you have people who are concerned about donald trump getting rid of the fbi director which is obviously something that he is perfectly when his rights to do. concerns because this is an agency that is investigating the campaign that donald trump ran. and their potential collusion with the russians. i understand all of these concerns. i think it is hyperbolic to call that constitutional crisis.

i'll see what the constitutional element of that was. to your question about what the reaction to that is, i think we're seeing a pattern in the of presidential campaigns where you have a reaction to the last president. he said obama was the antidote to george w. bush. who was not big on detail, like to talk in a folksy way, almost anti-intellectual who shotyou had obama from the gut and the hip. obama who was reasoned and cool and intellectual. then you have donald trump. i wouldn't be surprised if we to someone who is a more conventional political figure. everyone is talking about oprah kanye and all of

these different celebrities. i wouldn't be surprised if we saw a much more conventional response to donald trump. >> that is 20 minutes left. national political reporter the sydney morning herald and australia. brian's way to talk to you in massachusetts. ryan: i don't see what the big deal is with russia putting that information out. really have for media news outlets now. they can put out with a want to put out. it is all a bunch of bs to keep the focus off of big tax cuts for the rich. the bottom-line comes down to the people calling congress and sending complaints about things.

they keep track of that and people are complaining about the news media being corrupt, all of the jobs going to mexico and china, the illegals are taking all of the jobs. there are millions of the people in the country that are on two-year work visas. the corporations are hiring them because they were cheaper. >> jonathan swan, can you pick up on the first part of that? that this is all a distraction? jonathan: i don't really buy that. let's unpack that. if they want to distract from -- i know i can tell you from my own reporting, he is highly agitated about the russia storyline. he finds it -- he gets enraged by it.

if we take that as the premise that donald trump wants to distract from that, firing comey has not changed that objective. it has turned a brighter spotlight on the russia probes. it was a distraction from the -- or something else, i missed the train of what this was supposed to be is traction from. i think it created probably the most acute political problem -- >> good morning mr. swan. thank you for the great work you do. my question i would like to ask -- i've been watching the intelligence hearings on and off -- often you hear the senator

say that we all agree this happened or we all agree on this, we all agreed that this person did such and such but i have never seen any proof or evidence and i realize there is a need to protect sources but i think at some point, the committee really have to show proof and evidence to the american people of what happened and what didn't happen. i don't see that occurring. i will be glad to let you answer after this. employing these three. in my opinion, they have great influence over our representatives in not only the united states but great britain and europe where they manage to get the europeans on secret ballots to admit -- that, hillaryo clinton etc. 15-25,000,000 from

the saudi's. john mccain also accepted money from the saudi's. the first question is they need to start proving evidence for the russian charges. swan: i think it is an active investigation and they are still investigating. it is not unusual that we don't 75% of ther even investigation. i think that if and when they come down with a verdict, we will see more but there will always be that moment of classified information that is withheld from the public. it is the way things are.

i'm not sure about the saudi part of it, i didn't follow with the question. terry: good morning, the only problem i have is that people have problems with the media. twice, your guest, this morning made non-sourced comments. i know you have to protect your sources, that is what news media does. donald trump is very upset with sean spicer. trashing him and letting him go. i think that is one reason why people get very upset with the media. they don't believe it anymore, that is never any source that you give. it sounds very bland and very

non-believable. that is basically my comment. this is an a really important question. let me do my best to answer it. i spend every waking minute talking to people in the white house. the bulk of my time is spent with white house officials. a lot of it is awfully record, allies with senior officials. we interview the president, we are blessed that we have very good access inside of the white house. one thing that i would tell you is that has not been a story that i've written in this administration so far that has been contested on the facts by the white house. that is all i can say to you. i can't name my sources if they haven't given me permission to.

way i can get information out to the public is if i give them anonymity. i take it very seriously. it is from somebody i trust, we trust, who you would know. i would get you to dwell on that, we did a report yesterday that had no names versus but were unimpeachable is sourced. it tells you about what donald trump is mulling in terms of his staff shakeup. i would point out that for the last 24 hours, we have seen silence from the white house in terms of a response and that is because it is 100% accurate. >> is there a litmus test that you use on giving somebody anonymity?

i don't see a name to it. >> yes, there are totally litmus tests we use. we have to be satisfied that the information is true. i don't think people at their word. i assume everyone is pushing their own agenda. that is about cross-referencing and establishing. persont test is is this trying to fight a fight and unfairly smeared someone? the example that i just referenced was that donald trump was venting about sean spicer. that is an important piece of information to come out.

it foreshadows what he may end with his communications team. uncontested levels for the white house. i think it is important to be out there in the public domain. >> in yonkers, new york. >> john, you are on with jonathan swan. john: i was wondering why the obama administration told trump not to hire flynn. the obama administration fired him. yet, they let him have his clearance. that is like firing an fbi guy and letting them back in the office. that the make sense so i called upon to democrats liberals and ask them why they did ask obama to pull his clearance.

>> i think there is an important detail missing from that narrative which you laid out. which is that barack obama fired mike flynn. i think that is an important piece of context. i think there is any kind of great mystery behind the fact that president obama want donald trump about mike flynn. there are different reports about whether that was done in a lighthearted fashion, ingest, but kind of ingest. mike flynn spent a lot of time trashing barack obama in public. personal a bit of animus there. how figures in the great conspiracy behind obama saying this to donald trump. with the fact pattern we saw. he turned against flynn, he fired him. he thought it was somebody he didn't want in his

administration and things every poisonous from there. >> democrat line, go ahead. >> eyes want to know, and the president lied like he does and get away with it? the people come on tv, sean spicer and the other press people and they live. is that ok? that should be ok. what is wrong with these people in this country. they see what is going on? jonathan: no, it is not ok to lie. whenob is to point out they have said a falsehood and correct the record, that is all we do every day, that's what we try to do. we try to constantly square what they're saying in public with what they are doing in private. this is why it is important to have a broad range of sources in

the white house. you can actually square what is happening behind the scenes. of what it essence means to be a white house reporter. >> what you make up sean spicer's complained that the press try to make everything a gotcha game when it comes to this administration? jonathan: i have no patience for that. there a lot of theatrics to the press bashing. talk to these people privately, they are much less adversarial than they are in public but i have no patience for that. we are doing our jobs. you can pick on us for being precise. lord knows i make mistakes. the same should be applied to them. they need to be precise in the way they talk. raining, has been

bluefield, west virginia, good morning. this, i think is that donald trump is doing a fabulous job considering the bunch of lying panhandling people that he got or walked into. people are so unaware, i was always a democrat. i did not leave my party, iran my cow. mainly because of what they stood for. i got back up north cap -- from north carolina, i didn't see any trans-genders and the bathroom trying to get in. what is going on is we have a liberal agenda that is so liberal that it is straight out of hell. i can't watch the news anymore because i can't trust anything they say. here's something for you, if you start lying a little bit and you take a little bit of money here and there, soon it doesn't matter what you do because it is all about the money. money?is taking the

>> i'm saying that the liberals are taking a lot of money. that is why the news is so messed up. this anybody care that suarez has a point of world domination and sacrificing children? jonathan: on trust in the news may be a if you want to pick up on that line of thought from the call. jonathan: it is a crisis in the news media which is a crisis of trust. i think that is hyperbolic. a huge problem where people don't trust what they see in the newspaper what they see on television. i will have any grand solutions to that problem except that at my level, the stuff i can control as a reporter, i were to verify everywhere that i put out in public. it is my name above those words. if i make a mistake, it is my name above that mistake, i'm the

one that screwed up. people should judgment for my mistakes if i make them. that is all you have a journalism is your reputation. in my small way, i tried. that is aow that satisfactory answer, i think the problem is immense and we need to really stop being so opinionated it is so destructive what happens on twitter where journalists are popping up about the president and giving their opinions. i don't think anyone is to hear my opinion. i think what they need is reported that's. that is really what i try to do every day. swan, the national political reporter, think so much for your time this morning. >> thank you. >> coming up in just a minute or two, we will be changing our discussion to health care. we will be joined by health care reporter caitlin owens.

>> good morning john. i wanted to ask the reporter about the security clearance. does the president give security clearance or taken away? that is my question. another question i would like to ask you is this, you have all not come on and said with donald trump's regulations that he has pulled affects the public. when they said they don't have to -- a study has artie been done about that pipeline he did in dakota, could you check those days inside the regulation that he has put in or taken away the harm that he could do or the help of the public.

not the employer. >> the employee. john: certainly topics that we could cover. on thean entire show coal industry, one of the environmentalists talked about extreme role that the trump administration pulled back. it was moved at the end of the obama administration and that is one of the topics that you brought up there. for bringing up other topics to discuss. >> scott, anderson, indiana. go ahead. scott: i'm wondering if comey was connected to russia and how big a deal it is that russia would try to affect the outcome of our election. it is in no an, criminal or wrong that our own

media affected our election in such a way. i think it would have been a landslide at the media not commenced so many people that donald trump was somebody he wasn't. even that the election was going in the direction that it was. john: what is the best way for the media to cover an election? if you're looking for lessons andned, will be hefty 2018 2020, how should the media change the -- change the election? >> it would be the media. they will not change what they do. somehow, there can be an agency or somebody that can check facts at the end of every week. the meeting attended check all the facts of somebody who was on donald trump side. the best example is our previous president saying that you will get to keep your provider and

your cost of medical care will go down. that was never true. it was never reported that he will do what he said. out the committee will ever check themselves. it would be nice if somebody could. -- >> do you ever leave -- read fact checks? i rely on thatt, a lot. why couldn't we get a version of and check to that level make it as easy as it is for the disinformation that comes out? >> that is scott and anderson, indiana. -- in anderson, indiana. >> we are joined by caitlin owens not. caitlin owens, health care reporter. i want to start with an update

of where the american health care act is guest: they are writing the built from scratch. we might end up seeing a similar bill, but the senate is doing totally its own thing. host: was there a key moment last week when it came to the health care debate? will it influence what is going on here? of angeru saw a lot last week. calling -- tom macarthur who wrote the compromise, he had a five hour town hall and it was

all about health care. the senate is watching. the bill is still unpopular. we saw polling with 23% favorability. in senators are keeping this mind and watching the reaction. i think that's going to influence the process of writing it. host: we are asking our viewers to call in if you have questions or comments. our health care reporter is with us until about 9:30 its morning. -- whot said the senate should we be watching in the senate? theyre the key players as craft their health care legislation? guest: there are only 52 republican senators, so they

have to get to 52 pass the bill and then mike pence could be a tiebreaker. but the point is they could only lose to republican senators. ofanyone pairs into a group 3 -- you have people like ted cruz and rand paul -- right now everyone is discussing at the table, but that is the trio to watch. you have moderates like susan collins and members like rob fortner and pat toomey. , if anyhese people three or together, they could kill the entire thing. you have people in this working group a put together with the leadership, mitch mcconnell and john cornyn and a cross section of the caucus. conservatives in

there. missing from that group is the moderates like susan collins which gives you some indication of which way this goal is heading. thoseif they are having discussions, how do you think the uproar over the firing of james comey might impact the health care timeline or debate this week? guest: i think it was distracting. this is what the senate was comey caused all kinds of destruction at all kinds of levels in washington and it probably did not impacted too much. the health care discussion in the senate is just starting but the destruction around comey's firing is not going away anytime soon with a new fbi director and -- and democrats want a special prosecutor. see if it closes down the senate and how clogged

up things get there. questions,u have caitlin owens is with us. stuff correspondent at the national journal. she will be with us for the next 20 minutes or so. ronald is up first in philadelphia. everybody.d morning, when president obama said you could keep your health care, he did not say the health care had to keep you or your doctor had to keep you. you -- the representative in your state took away the subsidies. to keep blaming the sky for all the stuff people today dealt now sayy is it people -- a lie is a lie. thank you. you want to pick

up from that? care, it ishealth important to her members at there's always going to be winners and losers. when you make changes to the you areare industry, going to feel that. it's not always predictable. it's hard and these things have consequences. that's something republicans are keeping in mind, having watched the rollout of obamacare and there is risk there. on the line for democrats, dimitri. dimitri, are you with us? stick by your phone if you want to call in this morning.

you were talking about go about what was happening over the recess. we are starting to see some advertisements hitting the airwaves about the health care legislation being crafted here. one of those was from the bridge project. this is their ad from may 9. taxes and gott the health care system. it just passed the house and it breaks all of trump's thomases. but millions would lose health insurance. it does the opposite. trumpcare a tax medicaid and medicare. >> millions of older americans can lose coverage. >> and your member of congress voted for it. let's hold them accountable. one in 24 republicans who

voted for the american health care act, i just want to get your thoughts on the message strategy used there. the republicans are very well aware this is political -- politically risky. president trump campaigned on these promises that he would protect everybody and that pre-existing conditions would be protected. ,t does violate some of those arguably. the cbo scored the latest score and it goes back to there's no such thing as the perfect health care bill. buts such a personal issue, it is a difficult subject for ,epublicans to talk about especially those between 20 and andhat are up in 2018 democrats see this as a big

vulnerability for those republicans. host: are you hearing a response from republicans who have been targeted i those ads specifically? guest: not yet. i think they need to stand by their vote. the talking points are difficult and it's hard to explain. it's a complex till and we saw this with the democrats. the democrats had trouble explaining the affordable and now they are struggling to explain this. now.l comes to the senate that is the next move. with these ads and with the town halls, i think the senate wants to avoid some of the same pitfalls and the liability the house is going through. caller: i was wondering -- it with thee the talks

ability to pay claims? after selection, what obamacare did, just a basic primer, obamacare made it for people with existing conditions of our unhealthy, they cannot be charged more. can -- peopleple are guaranteed to have health insurance but they are confused and there are limited circumstances. the way the a hca deals with this is to put money in high risk. the federal government would subsidize the premiums of people with pre-existing conditions. whether ornnaire is not these hybrid schools are funded generously enough and

whether the concept works at all. the democrats will say they don't and the way people get into pre-existing conditions get into the market is to make sure everyone is in the same pool and healthy people end up subsidizing sick people and when these healthy people do get sick, they will also get insurance. stephanie, and pennsylvania on the line for independence. caller: thank you for having me. any health care bill coming out of anywhere should be rejected unless and until the law is itealed that makes impossible to negotiate drug prices. that should be number one right off the bat. number two, republicans have done everything to destroy what could have been very official -- very beneficial to making the

affordable care act affordable. was in the aca that what procedures are beneficial and -- what procedures are beneficial and what are not. i know the republicans tried to destroy that since day one. host: what group specifically? part -- a is a little little part of the aca and it appointed a panel of respective doctors who said this procedure , the't help ask, why disease and it does more harm than good. host: caitlin owen, do you want to pick that up? first let me go to the

point about prescription drug prices. this is something president trump campaigned on and hillary clinton campaigned on it and it became a very hot issue. they are seeing more and more republicans talk about this, especially with bad actor mp's ready to take the price of a drug and raise it by a lot. i think it is on their radar. i don't know that it is pressing and i don't think we will see much happening until republicans figure out what they want to do with the affordable care act. that's just a normal first up for how legislation happens in the senate. i think it is something to watch. we will see political action because there is such concern among the public and neither party can ignore that. about your second question, i think you are referring to a

panel that medicaid spending, if it gets too high, it might figure out how to create savings. it was never triggered but it could be in the future if it is not repealed through whatever republicans do. texas,aniel in dallas you are on. caller: i recognize said democrats want to keep the affordable care act in tact. is there a chance of senate republicans working together with the democrats to repair if not save the affordable care act if if not, well it happen senate republicans passed the health care act lobbying.ciliation in the

caller: yeah. i mean, i think it is no secret groups spend a lot of money watching closely, an effort, which

has been happening for decades. are invested in this, this is huge chunk of the economy and there are so many players here, hospitals, insurers, doctors, in each group, there is a lot of spending that go intoes this. helpful, ber this is helpful to know from insurers how it is going to affect the industry. hospitals give input how it will affect hospitals, doctors say affect ability to treat patients there, is lobbying and spending, spending of money, lawmakers value groups, from industry while definitely not unbiassed elp inform them about how policy will translate to real life. going to open secrets.org, run for center for politics, check out on the washington journal. they have a tab for total members of 115th

congress specifically by all industries,althcare so you can run through maybe the or 10 of the members in congress who have gotten the most from healthcare industry. mitch mcconnell, the majority leader in the senate at top of the list over 3-1/2 million contribution from the healthcare industry according to open secret. schumer, minority leader in the senate coming in third 2.7 million in contributions to members of down congress and so on the list. check it out, open secrets.org, lauderdale, t, fort florida, line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning. get to talk to you guys. i read this new healthcare bill hurt thet only does it people that obamacare helps, but that sn't help the people obamacare doesn't help. if you choose not to have you are just one

sickness or injury away from disaster. to take a cheap olicy, you get low coverage with highest -- whatchamacallit, happens when you ruin the insurance, you think they will give you to you cheap? through the pay nose. i don't think it helps. they really should try to do something. but republicans have no interest, they are interested in the rich. host: all right. harry's thoughts from florida. ill in arkansas, line for republicans, arkansas. go ahead, bill. caller: yeah. hearing the term, insurance, what everybody is not insurance.s real insurance is where you take policy and hope that something in the future if it covered.en will be when you talk about pre-existing onditions, that is nothing but

welfare, that is trying to get thing has ter the already happened. is insurance usually erroneous and misleading. host: caitlin owens. uest: so that gets at a really biggide logical divide. democrats, the way they wrote the affordable care act, they believed that everyone should be to get insurance, including people with pre-existing onditions and there should be bearer of minimum set of standards what that insurance hear , that is when you about essential health benefit, set of 10 things that every plan cover. and then also that is when we into what we about must issue insurers insurance to peep welpre-existing conditions and people ay the same as without pre-existing conditions, that is community rating. so republicans have a little bit

of different philosophy on this, the market should be allowed to own without regulations, that people will they need and shape products available. their plan, they loosened up offer more taxey credits to higher income people, offer more generous tax credits to younger people to get them to buy plans and again, hard to ngs are compare. generally, that is what they do and rely on free market principle. so it is kind of different set beliefs.gical host: few minutes left with caitlin owens at axios, we've at axios for past hour and a half learning about that publication. caitlin owens, want to ask you ydid you decide to join axios to reporting there? of an so i am kind old-timer at axios, came at end of october of last year. approached me before we had

a name and said, do you want to do something new, described company, no for the product at the time. it sounded really fun and it was trying to solve a problem. reaching readers and koun umers of media instead of trying to force something they didn't opt them. ended up igued and making the jump, six months later, i haven't regretted it, fun.been host: axios launched in 2017, at axios.com, to check it out. time for a few more calls, john alabama.mery, john, you are on with caitlin owens. host: thank you for taking my call. caller: always know the history before we start talking about it. written by s democrat, both house and senate, and the president signing into

law. the supreme court put their hands on it, a third branch of the government. in there and they threw a monkey wrench in the whole process. party, which i vote republican. i voted for donald trump. military.d the bill that is before us right going to fail because you an't force every state to comply with this healthcare bill they are trying to formulate. not going to work. that is all i have to say about it. want toitlin owens, you pick up on that? sure.: part of what you are referencing on the call, supreme court did obamacare medicaid expansion optional. states could choose whether or expand medicaid. passed healthcare act the house, gives state the option to take up waivers and wave is the ld

obamacare regulation, essential pre-existing and conditions regulations. states would have to meet the criteria for whether or not they could apply for the waiver or be granted the waiver. also at is optional and unclear how many states would choose to pick up waivers. rover in montecello, good morning. caller: good morning. you for taking my call. i need to ask a question. they talk about health insurance you can buy at cross borders. . have insurance i haven't had an accident in my ine and haven't had a ticket 40 years, but i'm still paying he same insurance across .orders, across anything else

i pay for insurance because someone else did this or buying insurance cross borders is nothing that change on car insurance, that is all i to say. thank you. host: caitlin owens. the : so remember that we, point of insurance is especially if you don't have pre-existing or for someone like with you car insurance, you accident, it in an is insurance in case something bad happens, in case you get hit bills, in caseal you get in a bad car accident. to i mean, the insurance is help mitigate risk, but the risk of buying insurance, you will it, you are throwing money away when nothing bad ever happens to you.

right now mber that it is -- it is allowed under obamacare. states haven't opted to do it. you allowmplicated if states to get waivers, insurance state.ifferent state to injected into the debate and the would workt how that pairing with the options. debate that senate develops, caitlin owens will certainly be covering at axios.com. axios.com, on twitter is at axios, pretty easy to find , at caitlin owens. time, do for your appreciate it. guest: thank you for having me. host: coming up in just a second, we'll be joined by axios founder ask executive editor here until 10:00 until the end of the program today. but until then, a few more

calls, gidion wait nothing baton louisiana. republican. go ahead. caller: my concern is, they seem to address the cost to the healthcare system. aware of real problem wi with -- if somebody is insured they do more frivolous things needed because they pay for it. the problem is mismanagement and this draws it way up into lawsuits. obgyn who got sued by a -- they didn't like the way their baby looked. the should have looked in mirror first and they could figure it out. it was a true lawsuit, they is, this , the point

drives cost you. ost: john in fort lauderdale, florida, john, good morning. go ahead. years old andm 54 every time i've had an issue has healthcare, the price astronomical. my son got his finger halfway cut off when he was a little charged us like stitch to put two necessary his finger. the hospitals have a license to steal, unless hospitals are regulated, no way the healthcare, any government will ake healthcare affordable for us working people. host: come back to the story about your son, how did they $30,000 for two stitches? caller: i don't know. there for four hours and they ran me in there stitches irl put two

in it and sent us home. i got a bill 10 pages long with $999 over and over and over for never d of stuff they did. i called my insurance company and told them not to pay them, they didn't do that. a y said they don't have choice, they pay whatever the hospitals bill them and it is not the insurance companies, it hospitals, they have a license to steal. nobody regulates hospitals, they want. harge whatever they it is rid rid. gospels john, you have more sympathy for the insurance this discussion that is going on? don't believe it is the insurance company's fault. people charge so much money, they will not be they canix it until regulate the hospitals and keep them from robbing us. host: go to connie, democrat, good morning. caller: hello, connie from kentucky. my question is, i'm disabled.

i have medicare. part a and part b. host: yes, ma'am. caller: you there? host: yes, ma'am. caller: okay. i have the medicaid here. trump said he wouldn't touch medicaid or medicare. he's going back on his promise, what is the problem, why is he going to take their 800 million from medicare and drop medicaid it is ridiculous. he needs to quit lying to the voters. i didn't vote for him and i'm not going to. he's a liar anyway. but that is my viewpoint. i don't want to lose my health care. if i do, i will be at his front door, election day and i will have some words for him. host: all right, connie. our last caller here, joined back at axios headquarters by mike allen, founder and executive editor at axios. appreciate your time. if you want to ask mike allen a question about reporting or how he does his job, now is the

time. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. mike allen, let's jump right into it with your headline from less than two hours ago. why trump can't get congress to do what he wants. why can't he? guest: first, thank you for having asked axios, love having c-span here today. your colleagues have been great, and it has been a super fun day and thank you for having us on. you have gotten such a great sense of the subject matter experts axios deploys everyday. the president will have trouble with the hill because they don't fear him and they elect a don't need him. they feel like they don't need him. the president has been focused on his base and his standing with his people has turned out to be incredibly durable. your viewers saw polls around the 100 days.

today is day 116, or 118. 98%of the polls that show of people who voted for trump will vote for him again, and so he is very strong in trump country but has done so little to reach out to that 54% of the country that didn't vote for him and that weakens him on the hill. a lot of the members feel like they are doing more for him than he is doing for them. and fear goes a long way in journalism and t.v. and politics and life. at the moment, these members don't fear him. host: how much are members and how much is president trump himself paying attention to the polling numbers out there? does it matter this early into a presidency? a quinnipiac poll this month showed 61% to 33% that president trump wasn't honest according to those who responded.

approval ratings, 39% in the gallup poll posted yesterday does it matter at this point? guest: right. super closely,m and of course they matter, in the sense that they reflect a sort of broader feeling. does the country feel like it is going in the right direction? do people feel safe and comfortable with the leader and those things affect the economy and that could affect elections and at the moment, the president has done very well with keeping the sort of euphoria, the excitement on wall street going, they call it the trump bump, the trump trade, the trump rally and it has proven to be more durable than anybody thought, like the trump polls during the trump campaign, it lasted much longer than people thought. people on wall street are getting queasy about how strong the market has been because they are like, what if the market has priced in assuming all the good things in the trump agenda,

regulatory certainty and not -- and tax reform, and is not pricing in the possibility that tax reform won't be what they expected, that there could be trade disruptions. but the economy, consumer sentiment has stayed very strong. the "wall street journal" did a great story pointing out a few weeks ago with new data, we feel better than we spend, consumer euphoria was as high as it has been, but spending wasn't up. all those things go together, and people in the white house follow them closely. what they will tell you, through the discombobulated and scum of the president's -- through the discombobulations, the president's polls have stayed where they are.

the number you just cited, polling we have seen since the comey announcement has been quite steady, but the paul -- the rest of the story is that even though it is staying steady, approval rating is upside down. he's more, fewer people approve of him than disapprove of him, so that is a number you don't want to stay steady, you want it to improve. host: top story on axios' site why congress is against getting trump to do what he wants. how much would change in trump's shop in the white house change things here? does he think new staff can get congress to do what he wants? yesterday about the potential for a sweeping change at the white house. guest: let's be clear, president trump, this is going to be a very donald trump presidency no matter who is around the white house. the story you refer to says outside advisors to the presidents come of the people he has consulted over many decades, say he will make changes, do it all at once, go for the big

reboot. that advice is fueled by what is going on on the hill, hopes that they could find a better way to do tax reform than they did health care or, health is still going, you heard caitlin owens talking about the rubik's cube left to be worked on with health care. the senate is working on it, and read between the lines for your viewers. i was confused about this myself. we hear people in the republican leadership saying that the senate will take the house bill, work around it, and we see senators on your air and on sunday's shows saying we'll scrap the white house bill that was just scrapped and start with our own. two -- just to translate that, i had to have somebody translate for me. it is same thing, people want to tell different stories. so the senate republican leaders say we took the house bill, it

needed a lot of work and some things try to save the house members from themselves, some of the very politically them latablele things, -- impa things that would have real districts andin states. we will fix those and move on. if you are senator susan collins of maine, we did our own thing, started at the beginning. that part is mainly semantics, so the senate will fix this bill, make dramatic changes to this bill. i am told that will take most of the summer. that will take a while. that you aremake referring to, the senate is on its own timetable. this is part of the senator whitehouse tug-of-war between the two ends of pennsylvania avenue. i'm told on healthcare and tax reform, the senate is not going to be driven by policy priorities of the white house or time table

of the white house this, is all mitch mcconnell's show. the senate republican leader is driving the bus on these issues. early fall is when they will try to work the rubik's cube and get health care back to the house. not clear how they would do president is the putting so little time to put -- to finish health care, they say they would love to do it by december 23, when congress goes home. very hard to see how that happens. tax reform is even more complicated than healthscare and caitlin owens might fight me on this, the way one person described to me, if healthcare is roughly one-sixth of the economy, which is what people estimate, healthcare, take tax reform, that is the whole thing, so even harder. certainly not easier, as some administration officials say. host: mike allen with us until 10:00. you can have him in your inbox every morning on axios' website. you can sign up for mike's top 10, the link there on the website if you

want to check it out. scott up first in maine, independent. scott, you are on with mike allen. caller: hi. i want to pick up on something your guest said about the congress not fearing the president. the problem really goes across the border. -- across the board. the president and the congress and the senate no longer fear the people, they forgot who they work for. that is why they can promise you the sun, the moon and the stars to get elected, but once they are elected, all they give you a a free certificate for telescope from kmart. while they are out there, you are on your own. as far as healthcare, a lot of his people are going to get hurt, trump's people get slammed by this just like me, poor people. we were -- we are going to be left to go to the voodoo doctor on the back 40 somewhere to get

health care. literally, that is how bad this is going to get. caller: mike allen. host: scott, i send a lot of -- i spent a lot of time in bangor, maine. i love that he uses the expression back 40. mime -- my grandmother used to talk about the south 40. i haven't heard that in a while. scott put his finger on an issue that is covered in scattered ways, but it is not focused on as much as it probably should be. that is, the programs that may get cut are very popular in trump country, and there are a lot of trump voters, people in their families who depend on these programs. that is why during the campaign you heard president trump say he was going to preserve a lot of these programs, and a scoop we have in my newsletter axios am, john, thank you for mentioning it, axios am is free. he mentioned mike's top 10, it is a super quick one through

10 format. we'd love for you to sign up for and get it every morning here, what we're talking about in the axios newsroom, c-span has been a great visitor this morning. the point we made in there is that the upcoming budget, we are told the senate house and republicans will make big cuts in domestic programs to try to have the balanced budget within 10 years. within 10 balanced years. but president trump is talking about even more cuts, but not in those entitlement programs. that is a dance for the administration and it is another place where there will be tensions between the two ends of pennsylvania avenue. host: waterford, michigan, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. good morning mr. allen. i was listening to what you were saying in the beginning about 98% of the trump voters would vote for him again. host: yeah. it was a lot.

caller: i'm one of the trump voters. what i didn't hear you say, for the eight years that president obama was out and residing over the country, he wasn't representing the other side, either. but i never hear anybody talking about that. we were the forgotten -- guest: excuse me, nancy, i will interrupt you because a point i frequently make is that an interesting parallel between george w. bush and president obama, they were both known for reaching across the aisle. when george w. bush was governor of texas and was rightly known for working with democrats, of course we were told at the time that was because texas has a weak governorship. remember that whole conversation. he was well known for working with democrats. when he got to d.c., he did much less, same thing with president obama. remember we thought he was post-partisan, one of the many reasons he was elected, people thought he was different.

but for various reasons, when these presidents get to d.c., they do less of that and tend to focus much more on their own base and their own party. host: nancy, did you want to finish? caller: i did. i just really don't agree with you on that. i didn't have a president that represented me for the last eight years. his values were not mine, there was not much. but i took it he was our president, i respected him as in the office. but i just want you to know, again, we are the forgotten people. this is why michigan went for trump. host: mike allen, did you want to respond? guest: i think nancy has strongly held views and a lot of people share her views. host: keith, new york, line for democrats, good morning. caller: first of all, i find the word entitlement insulting. people paid into the social security fund, they are entitled

to retire because they paid for it. second thing i'd like to say is, i don't understand how the country could forget that the middle class and the poor bailed out this country when the banks failed. now, you want to give a tax cut and deregulate the system again that crashed around our ears and remove health care. where is the benefit to the middle class and the poor who are carrying the burden of this country for the last 10 years? and you look at the republicans, and they gloat over gutting middle class and poor people as if we cross the border illegally. explain that to me. guest: first of all, context, who did you support in the 2016 election? host: the caller hung up, go ahead, though. guest: okay.

so the point the caller makes is first, he was talking about and the fact that you paid into them. that's right. throughout trump country and throughout the trump coalition, there are a lot of people who both depend on this program and pay for the programs, so that is another way president trump is not traditional to a lot of the republican philosophies that we've heard over the years. host: houston, texas, karen is waiting, line for republicans, good morning. caller: good morning. hi. yes. good morning. i'm calling because of the top of your report, you said trump had not done anything to reach over to the other 54%. but i would like to -- guest: i said i was surprised he hadn't donetle, more to reach out to his base.

that is different. he has done more for his base than the 54%. caller: what more could he do? every time he softens his right position, he ends up being ridiculed. as far as i can tell, everything he does is ridiculed by the left. regardless if he tries to reach across or if he sticks with his core. in my opinion, what i see is that trump is strengthening his support because he can do nothing right for the other 54%. host: mike allen. guest: you point to very sad part of politics, that tends to be how it is. we saw this under president obama, the other side was unlikely to be persuaded toward ever thus as my grandmother would say. host: on the issue of the other side unlikely to be persuaded. we talked a little bit about this with jim, but as you are

starting a new media venture in this environment, where people often retreat to their own echo chamber when it comes to media, how do you break through that? guest: yes, thank you. i think the calls we've had, justin the last few minutes, reflect that and that is people don't know what to trust. you heard jim say earlier, the biggest problem with fake news is that people don't believe real news. it is understandable, you look at a facebook seed -- feed and you understand why people are uncertain, or feel at they are not being served. one idea behind axios and we're axios, for those listening on c-span radio, as i do all day. if you look at axios, greek word for "worthy" we are worthy journalists with worthy audience. we are worthy of your time and attention. one of the ways that we prove we to be a place you

can trust. we hired our 75th person here, and everyone who comes in, we say, when people come to axios, we want them to say, they're smart, i trust them, and the trust is so important. and they don't waste my time, due to smart brevity, you can catch up and get big ideas quickly. but how do you get that trust? one way we get that trust, talking to reporters about the fact that people who know from their life experience that no one is all good or all bad, nothing is all one color or the other. so when they read a story, that portrays them that way, they don't believe it. what we try to do is illuminate people. help people understand what both sides are thinking with trump, who does he listen to? how does he make decisions, why is he doing that? we do that same thing with the other side. we do the same thing with democrats. jonathan swan, your viewers saw a few minutes ago in

his sunday afternoon sneak peek news letter, go to axios.com, go to the newsletter sign-up page and i hope you will sign up for axios am. part of a good breakfast. on the same page, you can sign up for jonathan swan's sneak peeks. he talked about how they were -- he talked to senate democrats and talked about how they were going to keep momentum going in the wake of the comey problem. so explaining both sides, what they are thinking, helping people understand them, they agree, they may disagree, people will have their opinions but we want axios to be place to come and you know you will get the straight scoop. host: allowing someone to go on background writing a quote without a name attached to it. is that hard for somebody to do with you as a journalist? guest: what is important is to be sure that you're getting actual value and that is that they're saying something that helps the reader better understand what is go og or

-- what is going on or takes the reader behind the scene in way you can't get otherwise. too often, reporters resort to that when there are better ways to express that information, or other ways to get that information. there are some things that, if people are talking on the record, they will be more or less likely to be candid. that is a circumstance you may want to do it, reporters should have higher bar for that. ufc news organizations including -- you have seen news organizations including explanations of why someone is background or why someone isn't named. i prefer that you be named. sometimes, when you say that, people say, fine. so again, that is place reporters could are more -- could be more rigorous and that does more for readers. both appreciate it more and it serves reader more. they know where something is coming from.

if you can't use the actual name, we try to characterize where it is coming from, so is it someone who is a never trumper, someone working with particular faction, and that helps you evaluate the information both to understand why we think it is worthy of your time and also you may decide you want to discount it based on our explanation of who it is. we go as far as we can or specifically as we can in explaining who did this. -- who this is. host: five minutes left in the program today from axios headquarters in arlington, virginia. one programming reminder for c-span for later today. today at 3:00, judge panel in the ninth circuit court of appeal in seattle hear oral argument on president trump's travel ban order. c-span petitioned the ninth circuit court to consider allowing a live broadcast of the case, and the ninth circuit court of appeals granted that were west. at 12:30rage begins

eastern on c-span and you can watch on c-span.org and listen on the c-span radio app. wanda? guest: john, if i -- host: go ahead. guest: if i could jump in quickly on the c-span website, a great poll about that c-span over some time has polled the question of whether or not people want cameras in the supreme court. fascinatingly, the number has gone up dramatically. it is a question of the new ways we get information. we want to see for ourselves and that is why axios tries to take you behind the scenes and let you understand what is going on, so you can decide for yourself. that extends to having a camera on the nine justices. wanda in west virginia, line for democrats. caller: good morning. i'm a registered democrat, i did vote for trump. but i am wondering, with this le going on rigamaro and all political stuff in washington, which is getting on

minors. i am on medicare. fory $180 per month secondary. that is a stretch for me to have to pay. is there anything in this bill that will help bring the premiums down for people like me? guest: wanda, thank you for telling your story. it is a sobering story and a reminder that in all the white noise and the blah, blah and politics of health care, all these bills have real-world effects for people like you. i appreciate your sharing that. i am sorry to say that there isn't anything i know of in the bill that will make that situation easier. it is hard to say that, but that is the reality. but you did a great service by telling your story and having our policymakers understand the

stories of people like you. it can help them know the full facts as they go into these debates. very quickly, may i ask you a question, you're a democrat who voted for trump. what was the big reason why and would you do it again? caller: yes. i would. host: why did you vote for him, wanda? caller: well, i think i just believed trump more than i did hillary clinton. there has been too many clintons and bush's in the white house already, sorry, my opinion. but yeah, i was just, you know before obamacare, i was paying $70 a month for secondary. after that came in and i -- my rates went up $180 a month. that is a lot of money for me. guest: yeah, more than a stretch. yeah. your story was moving and i appreciate you telling it. it was eye-opening it. thank you. host: robert in massachusetts, if we can get him in before the end of the program. line for independents, good

morning. caller: good morning. guest: good morning, robert. caller: when you buy insurance, you always have options. why don't the republicans come up with a plan and let the people make a choice between the obama plan and the republican plan? they can choose either one, pay the money, that they want to. it is kind of foolish that we have to have just one plan in this country. i think we are bigger than that. we have proved it over the years that, when you are given options, i always make the best choice. host: mike allen in the last minute or so. guest: robert, please stay there, if you can, and like your point about options and i will take away from that your idea of giving people choice. on your specific idea, because of the way the plans are wired and financed, it is not feasible

to offer choice between the two plans. we start with obamacare and the republican plan would slightly rewire it and neither one of them, it doesn't start from scratch. so, you couldn't run them side by side, but your idea of choices and options and asking what people think, i do take that point, robert. host: mike allen, we appreciate it. co-founder and executive editor at axios, at axios.com. thank you for your time, and we appreciate you inviting the cameras in. guest: john, incredible treat to have c-span and your colleagues here at axios world headquarters, i appreciate the conversation. i love c-span viewers, they are so knowledgeable, they care, and it's been fun to trade stories and i would love to see all of you on axios.com. today, we are launching our -- our science stream. in addition to the big topics of

media, tech, business and politics with energy and health care thrown in, we have science and pretty soon we will start the future of work, automation ai, and robotics. host: appreciate that. thank you for being amazing guest. host: we'll -- guest: you brought bagels, thank you. >> tonight on "the communicators," a look at small town and rural broadband with the ceo of an tca, the rural broadband association. she talks about her organization 's desire for rural broadband expansion to become a greater priority within the trump administration. she is interviewed be -- by david. >> what would you say your biggest priorities are, either in congress are at the fcc? >> had we make sure broadband is considered part of any infrastructure package that is considered? i look at it and i think, you know, the super highways in the future, it is about broadband. it is the ability to bring jobs,

public safety, education, telemedicine, all the initiatives and keep our country robust. we have to make sure policymakers see infrastructure beyond roads and bridges. >> watch "the communicators" tonight on c-span2 at 8:00 eastern. >> he was a look at our primetime schedule on the c-span networks. at 8:00 eastern on c-span, a three-judge panel for the ninth circuit court of appeals reviews president donald trump's travel muslimsix majority countries. on c-span2 at 8:30 eastern, axiosgton journal with media. on c-span3 at 7:00, transportation secretary elaine chao and other leaders discuss infrastructure investment. need physicians and other

health professionals who are technically competent, who are problem solvers, who are lifelong learners, who are team leaders, consensus builders, indeed, who are business managers and who can share >> i would hope that you would understand what this response ability means. it means reaching out. it means caring about more than yourself. it means asking about we rather than me. >> have the fortitude to do the right thing, not the easy thing. do not be somebody's lapdog or sycophant. have the courage to seek the truth. >> i want to talk to you about being open to the unexpected. about making room to the improbable and the unlikely. >> past commencement speeches from the c-span video library. join us for this year's

commencement speeches as we hear from politicians, business leaders and white house officials starting at 8 p.m. eastern on saturday, may 20, may 27, may 29 and june 3 on c-span and c-span.org. next, a state department briefing on the latest diplomatic efforts in syria. stuart jones is the acting assistant secretary in charge of bureau ofment near eastern affairs. minutes.for about 20 >> good morning, everyone. great to see you. thank you everyone for assembling here so quickly. welcome to the state department. we asked you here to provide you with new information on the six-year crisis in syria.thank r