special counsel rob gronkowski. first, we'll hear -- robert mueller. first, we'll hear from "washington examiner"'s kelly cohen and michael allen who is former majority staff director of the house intelligence committee. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016]] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] president trump: i sent it over to congress. whatever they do is fine. it was declassified and let's see what happens. a lot of people should be ashamed. ♪ host: good morning. it's saturday, february 3, 2018, and the political fallout from house intelligence memo released head is pop ok the headlines in "washington journal." the document and declassified by president trump claims that the f.b.i. and justice department abused their powers to obtain a surveillance warrant against former trump campaign advisor carter page.

but democrats call the memo misleading and charge it is an effort to undermine the investigation in the 2016 election and the criminal probe being led by special counsel robert mueller. so today, we're getting your thoughts on the memo and the russian probe. republicans can call 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. and independents, 202-748-8002. you can also reach us on social media on twitter.com/cspanwj and on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. and that memo is topping the hit-and-miss including "the washington post" says the g.o.p. memo declassified on friday accused senior law enforcement officials of misleading a court in order to conduct a surveillance on a former trump campaign advisor. fueling a growing distrust between the white house and

republicans on one side and the justice department and the f.b.i. on another. -- host: we're talking to you today, getting your reaction to the release of that memo. tommy is calling in from tennessee on our independent line. good morning, tommy. caller: good morning, ms. kimberly. i seen on tv yesterday and you handled yourself well. , i thinkt on this memo

it's the c.i.a. motivated. i think the c.i.a. would like to see the d.o.j. be cleaned out at the top. that's just my opinion. i believe the c.i.a.'s involved in this. it's just gives me the impression that they're trying to pull off a silent coup against the president and they're using this to cause impeachment friedings to fried. host: why do you think they're doing that? caller: the c.i.a. doesn't want trump as president. they control more things than most people realize. the c.i.a. cannot be trusted. the f.b.i., i think is doing a decent job. -- they're.a. is the the ones who pull the strings.

and more people need to understand this is c.i.a.-driven. host: ok. let's take a look at more of what president trump said after declassifying that memo. president trump: i think it's terrible. i think it's a disgrace what's going on in this country. i think it's a disgrace. the memo was september to congress who was declassified congress will do whatever they're going to do. but i think it's a disgrace what's happening in our country. and when you look at that, and you see that and so many other things, what's going on, a lot of people should be ashamed of themselves and much worse than hat. host: the "new york times" report the memo left a bit of an impact than expected. says the release of the memo married less than # releasethememo. the three and a half-page document about alleged f.b.i. abuses during the 2016 presidential campaign made public on friday was broadly

greeted with criticism including by some republicans. they said it cherry-picked information made false assertions and was overly ocused on an obscure low level trump advisor carter page. host: gwen is next. what do you think about the memo? caller: i think the memo was just contrived by somebody that tnt even read the documents as he admitted yesterday. and furthermore, people should be more concerned about all of the top k.g.b. agents that visited the c.i.a. and trump last week. that should be more concerning to anybody.

what are russia's top spice doing in the u.s.? one of the people was supposed to have been banned from even coming here. so what does he need to do? i mean, why was he here talking with the top person at the c.i.a. pompeo? and as far as donald trump with the memo, nobody was conspiring against him. carter page was being investigated back in 2013. so therefore, this was already done before trump came into ffice. host: all right. we have saban ra -- sabra calling in from our independent ine. caller: good morning. this is saban rat. my opinion is on the memo, well, he was advised not to release it

but trump's going to do what he wants to gooze he's the president. and like the last caller said, it was from a yahoo! who didn't know what they're talking about. i don't really understand. you know, the proof that he was -- with the russians to help get trump elected and clinton and everything that coming out of the man's mouth is a lie. ou can't trust anything. he doesn't even talk line a president from what i no and i don't even talk that well. it wouldn't be good for the country but no, he's going to go ahead and release it. you know? so yeah, whatever trump does is not good in my opinion. he's bad for the country. in my opinion, he's the

reincarnated hitler and stalin. thank you very much. host: all right. and a little background on the fisa law that gave rise to the release of this memo in today's "wall street journal." it gives a little breakdown saying the law called the foreign intelligence surveillance act covers nearly all surveillance and intelligence collection on u.s. soil. it was passed after abuses by president richard nixon and its predecessors were exposed in the 1970's in several landmark congressional investigations. - host: we're continuing to get your thoughts on the document, the release of that document yesterday in the declassification of it by president trump.

guillermo is calling from brownsville, texas in our republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i like to say i have no political affiliation. you know, i'm not a democrat, not republican. but i think it's pretty painful that a person is trying to blame the f.b.i. no one should be above the law. no one should interfere with the investigation. and, you know, people should ask why is he covering it up? why did he fire -- [indiscernible] why is he doing this? if he has nothing to hide, let the investigation go on. and i like to see his tax records, you know? people should ask what's the deal here? hy is he doing this?

host: are you concerned at some point in the past that fisa warrants were obtained based on information that was created as part of a political campaign? the implication here is that this was a politicized motive, not one out of concern about connections to russia. caller: yes. i am. you know, it should be. what's going on? what's next? what's going to happen to this country? this is supposed to be a democracy, you know? and it look like -- is he going to fire everybody that's against him,? you do what i say or you're done. that's just my thought. host: ok. and larry is calling in from dorchester, massachusetts, on our democratic line.

good morning, larry. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. when i was a kid, we used to have these stupid duck and cover exercises as if that would prevent us from being blown apart by russian atomic missiles and ato have been bombs. and you know, as far as i'm concerned, the republicans attempted at this point to put lipstick on these pigs, still does not negative investigate the fact that they're still pigs. they're enemies of the united states you have these enemies of the united states colluding and i will use that word, with the president ft. to then extent he's inviting -- president of the united states that he's inviting russian agents to the oval office and the on way we found out about it was looking at the russian news media. these people are not our friends. these are mortal enemies of the

united states. and they attack their elections and they are continuing to attack -- preparing to hack into the 2018 election. it seems to me that y'all are going to put away the republicans can really win is to cheat. host: let me ask you this. i meanen this surveillance that's the subject of this memo happened before the election. it was monitoring carter page in 2016 based on, in part, at least, on a document that was created for political purposes. do you have any concern about that being used as a basis for a warrant under this very strict fisa law? caller: they tried to make carter page a non-person after he was no longer politically useful to them. but if you'll recall, carter page made several trips to russia in which he made these completely anti-american comments, you know, on these paid appearances and you're

right. he was being looked at way before this whole memo controversy came along. i think that the agent and the british agent did an incredible job. he has a sterling reputation even among republicans and that this whole memo thing is a farce and i'm glad that it's falling apart and if you notice, they didn't even want the democratic rebuttal. and, you know, until a few days from now. in other words, they're trying to count on the short memo of the american people so by the time the democrats do get to rebut this, these ridiculous charges, it will have already sunk into the american psyche that there was something to this nonsense. host: ok. let's take a look at what chairman, the chairman of the house intelligence committee said last night on fox news about what -- rather, on special

report about what he said about the release of the report. >> i didn't want to have to do this but the sad part is that ivan obligation to the american people when we see fisa abuse. so these are secret courts that exist to target for foreigners, for catching terrorists, for catching people who might be bad actors and the american citizens that are represented before this court have to be protected and the only place that can protect them is the u.s. congress when abuses do occur. that's not a place we wanted to go, but it's where we had to go. >> did you write it? >> myself, our two investigators, and then obviously, checked by the lawyers and the rest of our committee members. >> did you read the actual fisa applications? >> no, write. and this has been one of these bogus news stories that have been put out. so the agreement we made with the department of justice was to create a reading room and allow one member, two investigators to

go over and review the documents. i thought the best person on our committee would be the chairman of the oversight committee, tray gowdy who has a long career as a federal prosecutor to go and do this. and then they over a series of meetings would come back with their notes and brief the rest of the committee members. >> did you or anyone in your committee coordinate with president trump or the administration on the release of this memo? >> no. >> or obstruction of the memo? >> no. in fact, we opened up an investigation for fisa abuse and other matters last summer in the summer of 2017. >> how about with president trump's lawyers in any way? >> no. >> outside conservative groups. just once a day put out an ath that's targeting rod rosenstein, the deputy attorney general saying that he needs do his job or quit. any didn't seems like it was timed out but did you work with any outside groups? >> no, i didn't. i personally like rod rosenstein. but the bottom line here is mr.

rosenstein, attorney general sessions and director ray have work to do. and they can't start doing their work to root off the problems if you don't admit first that you have a problem and they've been unwilling to do that. host: from our republican line, good morning. aller: good morning. i don't hear this over any talk shows and whatever. but what i believe is going on is there is a certain aspect of our society that actually wants to overthrow this government. all the things that's going on, it goes right back to that plot. they're trying to overthrow this government. george sore rass, as an example. if you raise hell, he will pour the money in to give to you. that's what it's all about. to cause conflict, chaos, whatever. that's what they want. this thing going over mueller

right now is creating hatred every which way. it's for the purpose of overthrowing this government. and let me assure you one thing. all the people that's liberal or whatever thinks that is a good things, you don't understand why people were buying ar-15's for the past year. they weren't buying them for -- they expect something terrible to happen in this country and they was getting ready for it. that is exactly what was going on. and people don't understand that. they better start learning it. host: all right. john is calling in on our independent line from hot springs, arkansas. john, now you're on here. good morning. caller: hello, kimberly. how are you doing? host: i'm good. i'm good. caller: you know, this thing is confusing to me. i don't have any legal background but the way i understand it, the whole thing

is over the ability of the f.b.i. to wiretap this guy carter page because they think he's got some connection with the russians which he did. i think he's admitted that. but the thing is, this dossier that they're talking about is supposed to have a lot of stuff in about trump, salacious stuff, but nobody ever talks about eleasing that. i want to see what's releasing that. it's the basis of wiretapping but everybody's talking about the memo. let's see the dossier. what the heck's in the dossier, you know? host: yeah, the dossier was released by a news organization during the campaign. so that's been out for a little while. but this happened before it was released. this is when it was in -- when intelligence officials had it but the public didn't have it yet. caller: i haven't seen it myself

yet. i only hear about the memo. mueller has not released any of his findings yet whatever he's come up with. and a lot of people say well, we're spending all this money and he hadn't found it -- what has he found? i think when he comes up, we're going to find out that there's a lot of money laundering going on between trump and putin. putin is worth $200 billion. he's one of the richest men in the world. and trump says he doesn't need the money for his campaign. i think he's getting it from putin. that's what i think. but that's just my opinion for what it's worth. thank you very much. host: anthony is on the line on our democratic line from detroit. what are your thoughts, anthony? caller: my thought is it think trump ever since he's been in office is just like he's been in, racist, he bias. he's for the rich. he's not for the poor. host: so anthony what, do you think that has to do with this

memo? caller: i think the memo is full of baloney. i think they're trying to overthrow the russia investigation because trump is guilty. host: ok. and in the new york -- "the washington post" has a little bit more of the reaction from the release of that memo. it says matthew olson, a former justice department official who used to oversee the fisa process thought the memo a transparent political amateurish effort that does not raise meaningful legal questions about the application to surveil page.

host: davis webb is on the line from -- ten ra is on the line from new york. our independent line. what are your thoughts today? caller: i definitely female like that was released ahead of the democrats' disagreement with it. so-so it could get throughout and fester and then the emocrats will send out theirs. i voted democrat and republican at different times. we've become so politicized and, you know, there's no meeting in the middle anymore and that's what scares me more than anything. none of us know the truth and it's all political now and who's bought who and, you know, what is their personal agenda to things? so i don't think we can really trust anybody anymore as far as the politics.

i love this show because independent people, republican, democrat and independents can come on air and that's where i'm getting a sense of our country and it scares me of what i'm hearing. people are so polarized. i really wish we should start coming in the middle a little bit more and understanding -- what washington's all about anymore and it's not about the united states people. it's about washington. so, that's my opinion. host: all right. bobby is on the line from fitzgerald, georgia, republican line. are what are your thoughts on the release of this memo? caller: ok, i thought i called on the independent line bit really doesn't matter. can you hear me? host: yes, you're on, bobby. go ahead. caller: ok. my opinion is it's a good thing that they released the memo in the sense that now, we're talking about it on "washington journal." i think you guys take your cue

from the "new york times" and "washington post" and if it had not been released, you wouldn't be talking about it today. and the sad thing to me is that the people that nobody even talks about ever are barack obama, hillary clinton and what they've done. and they just seem to ignore that. but my personal point of view is it really does not matter in the long run. i mean, you liberals are going to keep going and you're going to keep going. the election is not going to meat you anymore. you're going to make sure and i used to enjoy the "washington journal" and i still try. but now i'm seeing you on this msnbc every other week. and i taken a issue with that but a personal issue. i'm more concerned with what brian lamb is trying to do. i see you and jeff hanging out on msnbc and i can hardly watch it anymore because msnbc, it's like nothing over there but clowns in my opinion. and you look like one when you're over there. host: all right.

let's look at what house intelligence committee ranking member adam shift said yesterday on cnn about the release of the memo. >> the memo starts out by saying that they're going to tell the reader about a systematic series of abuses at the f.b.i. that really call into question the whole fisa corps process and what it end up delivering is criticism of a single fisa application on the carter page and it's renewals that cherry picks information that doesn't tell the reader the whole of the application. and as the d.o.j. and f.b.i. have said, deeply misleading and factly inaccurate. you can do the same thing if the committee is seriously interested in oversight here, they would have said let's bring in the f.b.i. let's hear what they have to say. they think something should have been included in the application, you ask the f.b.i. why they. include it. here, they refuse to allow the

f.b.i. to come in and testify that that tells you what their real goal was and that is to put out this memo and use it to try to impeach the credibility f our own f.b.i. host: julia is calling from our democratic line from greensboro, north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning, kimberly. looking back at the women's these i think the public to get together, go back and get donald trump out of office. pull him completely out of the white house. because he's doing work and it just is not right. and i think the public need to go and pull his ass, host: all right. let's take a look at some of the opinions of the major papers.

the "wall street journal" is calling this memo a reckoning for the f.b.i. it says we don't know the political motive of the f.b.i. and justice officials. but the facts are damaging enough. the f.b.i. in essence, let is and the fisa court be used to promote a major theme of the clinton campaign. mr. steele leaked the fact of the investigations to friendly reporters to try to defeat mr. trump before the election. - host: charles is on the line from wisconsin, our independent line. what do you think about the release of this memo, charles?

caller: i think it's a good thing. the public should know all the facts. i hope the facts are correct. host: and are you concerned about either the f.b.i. using information that came out of the campaign for a fisa warrant or are you concerned it's some intelligence official said that this memo was classified and that it's dangerous to release lassified information? caller: well, as i'm watching this, the main deal with this thing is if hillary clinton and the democratic party hired this english spy to collect dirt on trump campaign for being inclusion with the russians, how is that any different if they hire a foreign entity to spy on

somebody in the united states that's still a foreign operative? what is the difference there whether somebody that was involved in the trump campaign talk to a russian, which is -- and they've already fired some foreign spy on the republicans. isn't that conclusion -- collusion too on a foreign spy? host: all right. ron is on the line calling in from pontiac, illinois, our republican line. ron, what do you think? caller: yeah, if i may, i would like to give a little bit of historical perspective on the whole issue. 1972 was nixon mcgovern. i voted for a third party candidate at that time because mcgovern was a fool in foreign policy and nixon was very sinister. i don't think the democrats at that point in time had proven that watergate amounted to anything. but by march when the

president's attorney john dean came forward with his cancer on the presidency speech, then it became apparent that there was something very wrong. one of the things that was very wrong was a thing called the houston plan. now, nixon had already hired the plumbers to break into the d.n.c. to get information so they could run a dirty tricks campaign against president nixon 's enemy list but the houston plan fight one step further. nixon signed off on a plan that would allow the c.i.a. which is not allowed to spy within the confines of the united states to spy on american citizens. this would have given nixon even more leverage to make people like edmond musky leave the presidential election in 1972,

which he did. host: well, ron, let me ask you this, given the history of the fisa law grew out after the aftermath of watergate and the committee and the house were created after that as well, are you concerned about the ability of these committees to do the job of providing oversight to the executive branch, given how split they are down partisan lines? caller: well one of the key things that happened during the whole watergate things republicans started coming forward as an act of conscience and saying nixon did a bad thing, be it john bean, the white house attorney, dan butterfield who revealed the taping system in the oval office. i think it was howard baker of tennessee who said that what did the president know and when he knew it. the point being here is if you

weaponize various government agencies for political reasons against your political opponents that's not only a constitutional violation that we are entitled to some privacy, but it's also very, very dangerous politically because the parties that's in ower, if the agassis are willing to go -- agencies are willing to go along with whoever the president is and launch a political campaign where they're spying on the opponents and then using that information against them, that's very, very scary. one of the things that's going on in washington, d.c. is only 4% of the people from washington, d.c. voted for donald trump. so they're all of a political mind to be anti-trump or anti-republican. it's too easy for them to launch

an unconstitutional and illegal effort to spy on the fellow americans. i don't care if it's the fox news reporter james rosen who has declared an enemy of the united states in a fisa court. i don't care if it's the i.r.s. which is found guilty, by the way, of trying to stop the tea party movement and the electoral process. this is all extremely bad. host: all right. and "the washington post" had its view about the memo that was released yesterday calling it "a giant damaging distraction." says the nunes memo turned out to be a giant damaging distraction after its release --

host: dan's calling in from chesters springs, pennsylvania, on our democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for your program. and a quick comment about your last reading. i agree with john mccain. i really don't think it matters whether you're a republican, libertarian, democrat or

independent. i think that what really makes me nervous is that people in our legislature are really acting unpatriotic. they don't look at to see what's happening. there's a lot of propaganda going around. and i believe they're eroding our democracy. i look back, back in world war ii, germany was a very sophisticated country and yet their re able to erode democracy and if they had one, at that time, and things went the way they were. they could propagandize and sway the people and, you know, that kind of thing worries me and it kind of worries me because a lot of people came to this country for a democracy and not for what's going on now.

i think that's why we're losing a lot of people from the congress on the good people from the republican side. i just wish that people could see what's actually happening. host: ok. and on twitter, edward snowden had a reaction to the release of the memo. he said "i required the journalist who broke the 2013 domestic spying story as a condition of access to talk with government about in advance of publication as an extraordinary precaution to prevent any risk of harm. turns out our standard of care was higher than the actual intel ommittee." snowden weighing in on the fact that the intelligence committee sent that classified document to the white house where the president declassified it. dan is on the line on the democratic line. what are your thoughts? caller: i'm sorry, i wasn't

really listening. just give me what -- host: what's your thought about the release of the memo yesterday, dan? caller: oh. the release of the memo. i really don't think that that was very well prepared. i think, again, it's more just trying to put a wrench in the machine of what's going on and trying to find out what the actual truth is. i mean, without all the spin and without all that stuff, i think we need to look at the facts. i think we don't have options to the facts because of all the political nature, and again, all the propaganda that's going around. i appreciate your program because that's where i can see most things that are trying to be as unbiased as possible. and that's my feeling about that. host: ok. in "the washington post" reports that deputy attorney general rod

rosenstein's job might be in jeopardy over this. it says his tenure as deputy attorney general and the top justice department official overseeing the russia investigation appears to be in peril after president trump refuse to say friday whether he ad confidence in him -- host: tina is calling from minneapolis on our independent line. good morning. caller: hi. yeah. i'm not agreing with the last couple of callers. kimberly, this is black history month and when i think about it,

i think about martin luther king who was harassed by the f.b.i. and so was his wife. and over the years, we know that many individuals and organizations have been pick on y the f.b.i. to me, it's always been a political organization. and it doesn't seem right that this organization that's paid by the people's money, you know, they're being supported on the people's nickel that they're choosing sides. it shouldn't matter if, you know, if he's trump or anyone else. they should always be objective. and it doesn't seem that they have been objective. but like i said, if we look at the history and i think it would be wonderful since it is black history month to have someone on there who knows and understands

the history of the f.b.i. and talk about, you know, martin luther king and the civil rights movement or today, black lives matter and other organizations that have tried to give voice to communities of color and how the f.b.i. has not really been good, you know, objective, i'll say, an objective organization. so i think we should not look at this as a democratic thing or republican thing. we should look at this as trump is the president and if he was a regular person, we should not have this organization. we're picking sides. host: let me ask you this, tina. the fisa system, the house and senate intelligence committee, all of those things were created after martin luther king, after watergate who monitor and be a check on the executive. do you think that lawmakers are doing a good enough job at that

now? caller: of course not. of course not. of course they're not. they're not -- to me, no. they're not putting in checks and balances. i don't know if the politicians are spending too much time fundraising and keeping themselves in office or, you know, if there's just more issues now. i don't know why. but i don't think we have a lot elected politicians being accountable to the people. you know what i'm saying? and so an organization like the f.b.i. can become out of control and even though i didn't vote for trump, i think it's pretty courageous of him to take them on. i mean, how many president have done that? trump is not the perfect president, right? he says things that a lot of us don't agree with. but where he's really showing us here is that the f.b.i.'s supposed to work for the people.

they should never, host: ok. and williams' calling in from newport, arkansas, on our republican line. what do you think, william? caller: good morning, little sister. first of all, i don't think you look like a clown or act like a clown. second of all, carter page, i mean, what does carter page got to do with the process? nothing other than his association with donald trump. nothing whatsoever. was he with the russians? probably. that has nothing to do with anything except donald trump. if fisa is not done what they're supposed to be doing, all congress has to is to change the laws and that's what the oversight committee's supposed to be doing is watching what they're doing and the f.b.i.'s doing and if something's going on there that's not right, that's congress's fault. not anybody else's except the people that are sitting on that deal there. the f.b.i., i'm not a -- of the f.b.i. whatsoever. after waco and ruby ridge, i

don't trust those people as far as you can throw them. but if somebody abducted one of my children, i guarantee you they would be the first people i call. you won't -- that -- you want that kind of people chasing bad guys and that's what they to is chase bad guys. and like i said, i'm not a fan of the f.b.i., but they have a purpose. and if washington is not watching them, that's washington's fault. host: all right. all right. and that's a little more from "the washington post" about the f.b.i. interest and carter page. the basis of -- which is the basis of the memo, the surveillance of the trump administration adviser, trump's campaign adviser. i'll get it right before the morning's over. t says --

host: doug on the line from medina, ohio, calling on our democratic line. what do you think, doug?

caller: yeah. someone had called in and ask about the steele dossier and wanted to see it. it's on buzzfeed. the lso, too, the -- i see republicans as hypocrites because last week, they extended and ifts of the fisa law they tnt like it, they could have changed it last week. but the republicans all voted for fisa and none of the democrats. and none of the democrats voted . r fisa i see the republicans as hypocrites. host: ok. all right. bob is calling in from waldorf, maryland, on our independent line. good morning, bob.

caller: rod rosen steen had to scare affirm under the penalty of perjury that the information he was given to a court was truthful and honest. knowing that that dossier was used to obtain this warrant, knowing that it was a political document, he misled the court. that is a penalty of perjury. rod rosenstein should be fired this morning. if i obtained a search warrant and searched your car and had all kinds of evidence illegally, all of that evidence would be inadmissible in a court of law. that's what we have here. we have an investigation going on under false pretenses. it's called an investigation, ma'am, but what it really is a coup d'etat. all your listeners could look up a coup d'etat without tanks. that's what we are watching ere.

mr. sessions recused himself on this false information. he needs to unrecuse himself. there's no way the department of justice will investigate himself. rod rosenstein is not going to appoint a special counsel. the only way you're going to got bottom of this is what a special counsel and a grand jury to look into the department of justice. that's the only way this is going to happen. mr. sessions must unrecuse himself or this is a total waste of time. host: ok. all right. and those who want to see the text of the memo is, you can fine that on c-span.org. it is right there on the website as part of the congressional chronicle. and in some other headlines today, "the washington post" is reporting on some changes coming from the pentagon. it says the pentagon released a new nuclear arms policy friday that calls for the introduction

of two new types of weapons effectively ending obama era efforts to reduce the skies and scope of the u.s. arsenal and minimize the role of nuclear weapons in defense planning. secretary of defense jim mattis said in an introductory note -- host: paul, what do you think about the memo and the mueller

investigation, paul? caller: yes, good morning. i support the release of the memo. it gives us i think the more the americans are aware of all, how our government operates, the better off we always are. and the problem is that you only get bits and pieces. you know, every american should be concerned if we have reason to believe that our government is using phony documents in order to obtain fisa authorization to wiretap. that would be concerning to every american. we don't matter to the extent which this dossier was used to support the fisa application. and so i think we just have to take a deep breath, step back and wait for this whole thing to unfold. eventually we'll see the fisa application. i believe that. there's nothing certainly classified in those things. they didn't release previously

on other f.b.i. investigations and c.i.a. investigations. and then we can determine the extent in which thes to yay was used to support the application and whether or not the fact that the -- that information was made available to the judge. because the judge, you know, people, if they're basing on just solid information without revealing where this dossier came from and who paid for it, i mean, this is an investigation that was done by the russians, for god's sakes. host: well, paul, let me ask you this, you say that we should as americans be concerned if improper information is being used. are you concerned about the release of information which had previously been classified or should this have been maybe kept within the intelligence committees? people with clearance to read this and have them react to it as oppose todd reesing it publicly? caller: well, you know, first of all, we don't know for certain

that there was any information in this document that was classified. i read this document. i spent 30 years in the they victim. i had the highest level of classifications and i didn't see anything classified in there. host: the document itself was top secret before it was declassified by the president. are you concerned with lawmakers making the decision to release the information over the objection of the intelligence and law enforcement communities? caller: i think the most meaningful -- i think everybody should step back, take a deep breath. the most meaningful investigation is going to be the one that's being done by the inspector general at the justice department that's been going on for a whole year. i do believe that that is the one that's going to give us everything we need to know, not only about this supposed column collusion or obstruction but also about hillary clinton and how that was handled and on and n.

and i understand that's supposed to be released in march. and i do believe mueller wants to wrap up his investigation before that is released for obvious reasons. so that's are my comments. host: all right. james is calling in from lawrence, massachusetts, on the democratic line. what do you think, james? caller: good morning. i'm a democrat. but i'm very upset with my party. i believe that it's turned in just to a party of mean girls and stuff like that. but as far as the memo goes, if the memo is not true to my fellow democrats who i wish would do their -- a little research and if the memo was not true, why were people fired and demoted at the f.b.i.? and then start looking from there. the news media is not telling you the truth. they're admitting quite a bit of things. and it's up to you to do your research. and flip around your stations.

don't go in on one. go around and see what they're saying and go on your net and do it all. t if it is not true and then why was there so much activity at the f.b.i. to demote, double demote and fire people? and so i think they're on to something here. i mean, not political, as far as voters, but this is a problem that nobody in the united states should want happening that we could be spied on and cause this kind of damage to anybody. host: all right. in some other news on the front page of the "wall street journal," it said didn't talks about how the market reacted yesterday with a steep drop to the rare birth of volatility jolted financial markets and sent stocks and bombs tumbling friday. the stock shift that is

characterized of the nine-year bull market run. -- host: dan is calling in from georgetown, massachusetts, on our independent line. hi, dan. caller: hi. thanks for having me on. yeah, i just want to point out some things here. you know, over the years, the f.b.i. has been involved in creating a lot of situations where they can arrest people and get headlines. i mean, this is a fact. a lot of the terror -- so-called terror plots that they undermined and arrested people, it's been shown that they've

groomed someone up to, you know, get in the position to coax them, to, you know, want to bomb something or something and then they arrest them and say they made a great arrest. so, you know, our elected officials are supposed to have oversight on the people that are in government, the lifetimers the f.b.i., judicial debt. well, the judicial branch should be on its own but there needs to be oversight. if historically, we know that abuses have happened to set other people up, we need to make sure that that's not happening. host: do you think the lawmakers and the -- in the house and senate intelligence committee are doing a good enough job at that kind of oversight?

caller: no. there's horrible oversight in government. anyone with any kind of common sense knows that the oversight in government is horrible. horrible. so bad that like over the years, government has given itself so much power since let's just say 9/11. they've seized so much power from the people it's outrageous the thing that we know as the constitution and the bill of rights doesn't even exist anymore after all the presidents with all their executive orders and all these different laws that are in the books. we have no constitution. they can do what they want. and at some point, people need to say, you know, we need to hold people accountable. and just one more small little point. trump has been very consistent. i think and it's what got him elected that he said things are bad in washington. the swamp needs to drain.

people are doing criminal activities. this is how he got elected. and now we've had this russian investigation that's been going on forever. the first thing that people get to hear about it is a republican memo about fisa abuses. so and isn't it ironic we haven't heard one leak out of the f.b.i. investigation about trump, but all these other leaks about trump that kind of make him look bad that came from everywhere else? i mean, people need to be able to put one plus one together and not have it equal like six or eight because the media says that's what it is. host: all right. caller: it's it's two. host: mark is on the line on the republican line from henderson, north carolina. hi, mark. caller: yeah, hi. what were those other callers that >> ahead of me, they're hard to follow, first off.

first off, your questioning is wrong because we're not questioning the f.b.i. agents in the field. the f.b.i. agents in the field, they're doing a dang great job. it's the f.b.i., hierarchy on the 17th floors that have been violating. catch it and look it up. 4 2.d 14 and all these callers prior to me, they've all been referring to that. 18 usc 242. ok? you've been redding stuff from john mccain. john mccain, if you go back, he sent one of his people up to canada to speak with the foreign agents to bring down this dossier that was plot and he paid for by "the hill" hillary campaign which was used by the hierarchy on the 17th floor, crony nd all these other

people that took this to the fisa court and lied to the fisa court. i think the judge that passed this warrant or whatever to unlock and look into it. i think he's outraged. and i cannot wait for the attorney general to come out and i hope they have a closed-door meeting, ok, and get the actual facts and one thing hike the caller from massachusetts said. yes, donald trump, he actually -- this is the most transparent government that the united states is seeing for a long time. and he said that they are going to be transparent with it. ok. you keep reading from the "the post" and all these other left wing saying why don't you look into "washington times" to bring up some other articles that aren't so biased in their reporting? ok. john mccain, he is going to be held in contempt with this also because he's also part of a --

he's the one that brought this memo to comey. comeyy brought the memo to donald trump cornering him to the wall. and like the last caller before me. said all these leaks come out to hurt the president but when the president is in the right, you don't hear no leaks. it's all hush-hush and everything and i think these leakers also need to be prosecuted. host: ok. bill's calling from pennsylvania in our republican line. hi, bill. caller: good morning. yeah. you've had two good callers. the rule of law is the rule of the constitution. that's our highest law in the constitution. it's explicit as an amendment, the fourth amendment to prevent general warrants, which is investigating people without probable cause. unfortunately, we've allowed -- some other things to really

support the rule of law through other laws. through other laws. we have allowed our government to -- this is a very, very seriousthis is a very, very sers thing. republicans should be ashamed of themselves. as far as the fbi, i think some of the other callers put it right, martin luther king was in the crosshairs of the fbi for a long time. we know what happened to him. theseve to take a look at organizations, the fbi, the cia, and you have to have control over them, and you cannot let the oversight to the general population. that is absurd. of course they do not want

investigations of their communities to be broadcast to the general publication, because then they will be held in check. stick withl our conversation about the memo. of next, we will have "washington examiner" justice cohen.r kelly stay with us. ♪ c-span'seekend, the cities tour takes us to arkansas. located in the ozark mountains, it is home to the university of arkansas and the clinton museum. , we will visit the william full right special collection of the university of arkansas library where we will

hear about senator fulbright's. career in the u.s. senate. >> fulbright for talks to just about anybody. this is a democratic leader, of course, fulbright here meeting the president and the future republican president, george h.w. bush. at 2:00 p.m. on american history tv, we will tour the prior center for arkansas aural and visual brooks and historian blevins talks about the history of the ozarks and the stereotypes people face living in the region. >> backwardness, low education, poverty, lots of things that generalcome with that territory of traditionally been emotionally rule -- mostly rural

, mostly poor place most arab types will stick with us. place, those stereotypes will stick with us. on booktv onstern c-span2 and sunday at 2:00 p.m. on american history tv on c-span3. working with our cable affiliates as we explore america. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now is kelly cohen, a criminal justice reporter of the "washington examiner," here to discuss more about the house intelligence committee's memo. talk a little bit about the reaction to the leak of this memo. did it live up to hype? guest: i think it lived up to the hype for republicans. thought there are abuses in the justice department, abuses in the that are up against

trump come up against the campaign. there are issues about how the flies a warrant was obtained for carter page, who wrote the dossier. at the same time, it was also a nothing burger. there was nothing explosive, nothing, in my opinion, that was crazy classified, nothing that was a deal. we still have the democratic memo to come out. nunes said last night there will be more investigations. it lived up to the height of the people who were waiting for it and thought it would be a big deal, but i think there is a lot to be desired. [laughs] host: what information do we not the releaseen with of this three-page memo? guest: the problem is we do not know where the information necessarily came from. we do not know where the underlying information came from because it is only a three-page

memo. there was a lot of chair of thinking. we will see a lot of counter information i think in the democratic memo. there are a lot of questions left about the fisa court. everyday americans do not understand how defies court works. do notf americans understand how it works. it is a very complicated process, and we need to learn a little bit more about it. what part of the pfizer had to do with the trump campaign? saw the president as an effort to fire attorney general rob rosenstein. you wrote about that in the "washington examiner." top congressional democrats told president trump on friday that using the house intelligence committee memo as a pretext to fire deputy attorney general road rosenstein and therefore halt the russia investigation would. spark a constitutional crisis senate minority leader chuck schumer of new york and nancy so they arelifornia

alarmed that trump would use the pretext of the memo in order to fire rod rosenstein. tell us a little bit more about what you learned about this. the attorneyight, general said the job was not in general. -- in jeopardy. rosenstein is the only person who can take mueller out, because attorney general jeff sessions stepped aside. trump cannot wake up and say all right, i am firing mueller. that is rosenstein. he has to put it in writing. he cannot say ok, you are out. rosenstein's job is safe, but the russian investigation will keep going. whether it will cause anyone to get fired think rosenstein, especially with the fbi director saying he would quit if he fired rosenstein.

everybody at top to say for now, but it is washington. it could really change by tuesday. host: all right, we're joined by s"e "washington examiner' kelly cohen as we continue our conversation to the russian investigation. again, republicans can call (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. and independents, (202) 748-8002 . kathy is on the line from utah on our independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, kathy. you are on. caller: thank you for c-span. toant to bring a few things our forum here. all, the dossier is a document that began with the republican primaries, and it was

eventually purchased by the dnc. this is a point that was identified in the memo as being of grave concern. it was the republicans that began this dossier. beginning of the this presidency, condoleezza rice, secretary rice being interviewed, and she told us not to worry about what is happening because our government is a check and balance system, and our constitution will protect us, and i feel like the one-sided release of this memo has not served us well. we need both sides, the democratic side to challenge this memo, and it has not been done. host: all right, i want to give kelly a chance to respond to that. what do we know about this democratic counter memo, and

will it be released? guest: they had a vote last night to release the republican memo. democrats also wanted their memo to come out. they said now all house members can come. that was part of the process. so shift said yesterday they onl try to force a vote monday, and it is undetermined if anything makes the plus five more productive, democrats could leak it if they want to, as long as it is redacted. i think the memo drama will continue into the coming week, and democratic members -- and the democratic memo will probably say almost the exact opposite of what the republican memo said. host: i want to show you reaction of the memo, starting with house speaker paul ryan, who reacted thusly -- amid all the political rancor, we must be able to work together to ensure the pfizer system works as

intended and americans' rights are properly safeguarded. tom glad of this memo helps provide greater transparency, and i reiterate my support for the similar release of the minority's memo once it is properly scrubbed of all intelligence sources and methods . talk about this when it comes to the mueller investigation. hist: the rbc supports party. he will support and yes, the republican chairman of a committee. it definitely is a good idea for him to say he wants the release of the democratic memo, only you will get the charges of being political about something that almost necessarily should not have to revise a court is not something that is supposed to be democrats versus republicans. it is supposed to be to survey all people who they think are foreign agents. a lot of people do not understand the pfizer process, they do not understand by the

court. i think he is good to back up his chairman. he is good to back up his president. thing that he says "release the democratic memo," otherwise people will say why are you trying to stonewall? republican memo was released, there was a little back-and-forth about changes that were made to this memo. do we know what those changes were that ranking member congressman schiff objected to, and at the end of the day, do they matter? he wrote that letter very late. with wednesday night. he said look, you changed the memo that we voted on on monday. no, we just took out a couple of words. iff said there were changes, and people forgot because that is how things go in washington. i do not think it ended up being

a big deal. think it was one or two minor words. host: larry is on the line from elkhart, indiana on our republican line. you are on with kelly cohen. go ahead. caller: my comment is that if you ladies take carter page's name out of the fisa warrant and put your name in, would you be happy with what is going on? can you talk about the concerns that people have? this is a private citizen, and he was the target of a surveillance effort. guest: it is definitely concerning,at is but you have got to remember dingedrter page's name on the fbi radar, and once the fisa warrant was applied company was no longer on the trump campaign. it is not that he was on the trunk campaign and was suddenly on the fisa court.

he was on it because of the survey took to russia. the fbio believe that operates how it is supposed to. there is a reason and needed to 2013, acarter page in reason they needed to look at him and 2016. i think that is why we need to be a little more based on the memo just to get more information about the fisa warrant, what were the underlying reasons that they had carter page. host: this may backfire on the present because it revealed a few things against this narrative, that it was politically motivated, one saying the dossier was not what spurred the investigation, it was the investigation into george papadopoulos that preceded that. had connections with russians, even before he joined the campaign. is this memo turning out to be damaging to the president? those it might be one of

things that backfires, but it also might be one that continues a biggeromes part of issue, the ire over robert mueller, the ira over that investigation. like you said, in the last line of the memo, george papadopoulos was the reason why the fbi started. a lot of republicans say no, actually, it was the dossier. now we see it was george papadopoulos. it was what he was doing. keep in mind, he already pleaded guilty in robert mueller's case. see theto wait and democratic memo, but i think it will become one of these things that could very well backfire. host: tiffany is calling in from connecticut on our democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning, guys. i mean, honestly, this whole business with the memo and everything really has absolutely buting to do with anything putting all the politicians on point.

this is what is about, the government supervising other people. we should know everything we need to know. ok.: our next call from charlotte, north carolina on our democratic line. you're on with kelly cohen. caller: good morning. i am concerned about this because the republicans, everything they do is a smokescreen to protect the president, who is the biggest liar that god ever put on this earth. it is nothing but a smokescreen. that is how come those papers are put out. and the democratic rebuttal should have been published along the republican all at the same time. host: what do you think about some of the reaction on that, be released to this memo? guest: i think a lot of the bigger picture is the fact that there is someone named robert mueller who is investigating the russian meddling in the election

and possible collusion with the campaign and also an obstruction of justice by the president. as i am sure you know, with a lot of stories in washington, we kind of miss the bigger picture. we see the headline -- "european memo released" -- and we are like ok, what does it say? but at the bottom line come is is an investigation is open into the truck campaign because of george papadopoulos. wait a minute, there is still an investigation into the trump campaign. i think that is what you kind of get with these memos. you almost kind of miss the bigger picture, but you get reminded of the bigger picture that all right, we actually need to remember that there is someone named robert mueller conducting this very important investigation. host: you wrote about the reaction of attorney general jeff sessions to the release of this memo. you wrote "attorney general jeff sessions said friday he would departmenthe justice deals with the issues raised in

the house intelligence committee memo about the abuse of surveillance authorities. inquiriesas made concerning an issue of great importance for the country and concerns have been raised about the departments of performance, he said after its release. i have confidence in the men and women of this department, but noted urban is perfect." -- no department is perfect." you have the fbi, which is led by christopher wray, a trumpican troubl appointee. how difficult is it for these republicans leaving these agencies of the president and the intelligence committee -- guest: trump often tweets and says how much he stands behind law enforcement, and then you see some of his tweets where he criticizes the doj, he criticizes jeff sessions, he criticizes the fbi, and it is hard to figure out what to make of it because he appointed these

people to lead these departments. you would think he should be trusting them to do their job and kind of back him up. when he asks people for loyalty pledges, that is inappropriate, and it should not be done. he asked rosenstein, i forget exactly, but "do you have my back?" you on myomey "are team," he asked andrew mccabe, "who did you vote for in the election?" it almost becomes hard for republicans to -- not pick a side, but are you going to be on devin nunes' side? , i wantgoing to say yes to know about these abuses, but also do i want to back up my fbi that is led by republicans, my doj that is led by republicans? it is a complicated side, but i think sessions will be there for a while.

thats the confidence of department come and the deputy attorney general, they are both out there doing things that trump wanted, that trump promised on the campaign. i think that is something also people have to remember. promises, manyn of them, have been carried out by jeff sessions. host: there is an inspector general investigation going on of the justice department. -- thisready was department is already being looked into. tell us a little more about that and how that plays in. does that support the validity of this memo? guest: that started because of the fbi and the justice department's handling of hillary clinton's private emails. i forget exactly when that was opened, that investigation, but i know it is supposed to conclude march, april. i think the result of that are coming to your we saw at the beginning of this week, which is crazy to me that it was only

this week on the we saw the deputy director of the fbi saying he is leaving his position. andrew mccabe. he had a conversation with wray and reported that wray saw the concept of where the investigation is going is that look, you probably need to go. was onady knew mccabe his way out. he has been in the fbi forever. i think that inspector general report is, again, something we almost forget about. i think that is something huge that we should watch for, and it should say something about political bias or motives. that report is i think what republicans will want. host: mary is calling from philadelphia on our democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning, ladies. i believe that these memos are being used to stifle all regarding any political party, democrats or republicans, because of the recent resignations of the

security exchange commission that had an investigative arm regarding politicians in this .ountry also, the ethics committee a star -- resigned did not want to dig into the facts regarding our politicians. so this is a tool that are being used to stifle all investigations. the only concern is the politicians. mueller or any investigator can use this in a court of law based on abuse of power of nunes, violation of federal communication laws, because you cannot put out false information, especially as a politician in this country.

illegal propaganda. this is what they are basically using these memos for. they are not facts. host: i want to give kelly cohen a chance to respond. guest: she run of a good point that there are other investigations going on in congress that are looking into russia. there is house and senate intel. they are conducting their own investigation into what hand election. in the 2016 these are investigations we cannot forget about. they are important. now i have waiting to see what will happen -- now we are kind of waiting to see what will happen with the house until investigation. toy have a lot of people interview. they have corey lewandowski, steve bannon, are they going to come back, are they going to keep going forward without? unes said last week they opened a new investigation into , so there are a lot of

investigations we have to remember. host: and what comes next? you mentioned chairman nu night they are starting to look at the state department. what other issues are on the radar? guest: they have that oversight, they can conduct, they can say they are investigations, but they can also double as oversight. right now, we see the justice department, fbi. i guess really would go into any department and get that committee, figure out well, and they want to go, but i think those are the big ones to watch. again, like i said, these rush investigations that are happening in congress and outside of congress, we have to watch all of them. is on the call republican line from cape coral, florida. caller: thanks for taking my call. i'm concerned with some of your

callers because it is reckless and dangerous to conclude these memos are all factual or all false, but i think the media historical job of opening it up where they formulated an opinion about the memos before they were even released, and so did the democrats. history as to use opposed to anything else, and i'm not challenging anybody to kind of dispute it, but we live in a society where the fbi has been known to infiltrate the black community. we live in a society where the media pass out picture after picture after picture of guantanamo bay detainees, even when they were told it is a danger. so i am curious know what you are, and maybe it is the time to hold the media responsible because of it was show problem to

guantánamo detainees, maybe this memo should come out because people need to know what our government is doing if we are really going to be transparent. thanks for taking my call. host: all right, kelly. guest: i will touch on one thing that he kind of brought up. schiff had a very long statement out yesterday. he basically said nunes did not who putit was not nunes together the memo, it was his staff -- he said nunes did not actually read the documents that make up the memo. when you see this four-page memo, you see the words "unclassified," you see the official list of it, but like schiff reads to the attention, es did not read it, but you also go to the making of the memo, they cherry picked you almost have to take it with a grain of salt because of the fact that we cannot see the document and

information that go into making the memo. i don't know if we ever will. i think there is going to be maybe a push for that. there will be a push for releasing transcripts of house intel. they released the transcript monday night when they voted on it. more members going to be and say there is more information, i think you will see more of a push for more than just four pages. see the memo, the drafting of it, and the "new york times" has a little bit patel,bout this lawyer, who is behind this. says --

host: what do we know about kash patel? guest: thank you for bringing that up, because i did not know the specific details. a politically charged email, again, as i have been saying, we do not get to see the interviews that are conducted, we do not get to see what goes into these memos. he is the person who went abroad for a little bit and compile the memos. you have to take it with a grain of salt, and i know that is butst a weird thing to say, we may not ever been to see the interviews that may have brought up the memos.

we also do not get to see the steel dossier, we do not get to see the process. that is why the dossier was so unverified. like i said, there will be a push for the underlying things that make up that memo. that is how you actually figure out the truth. host: kathy is calling from delaware on our independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i just had a question about the memo that you showed on the screen from the democrats to president trump. i had a different memo that i saw yesterday, and i cannot remember now which network it was from, but the last paragraph \ inform write to confirm you that we wou warrant such actions -- "we write to inform you that we would warrant such actions as an attempt to somethingustice,"

i've not seen since the saturday night massacre. chuck schumer used those exact words, "saturday night massacre," yesterday. i have confused over which memo is the real memo to president trump from democrats. hoyer,, pelosi, durban, warren, crowley, feinstein, schiff. guest: that is the letter they centered i know a lot of the democrat members have statements release, of the memo and some of them released their own statements whether on twitter. that letter was sent around. i think it was sent right before the memo came out, and it is basically saying look among whoever is named in this memo, and rosenstein is supposed to be named throughout, do not use this memo as a means to fire mueller. those of the top democratic leaders.

say and do not do it, or there will be trouble. i think that is the goods made letter. host: antidemocratic actual counter memo has not been released. guest: that has not been released. schiff had a very lengthy statement out yesterday. i think it was 16 paragraphs. that kind of said basically everything in the republican memo is not what we have in our democrat memo. that is completely and totally wrong. there is a minority on that committee, so it is hard, but that vote is supposed to be monday night. host: we can take a look at the tweet from congressman schiff, that the president's decision to publicly release a misleading memo attacking the doj and fbi is a transfer attack to discredit these institutions and undermine the mueller probe. we will fight to release our classified response. glimpse at here is a

what is wrong with her memo. that is the full response that he gave yesterday. there are some lawmakers for calling for chairman nunes, calling on paul ryan to remove chairman nunes. guest: i do not think the chances are high because it would cause more drama on capitol hill than is already there, physically among the republican party. i feel like a lot of them bump up against each other. but want to support trump, they do not want to support everything he does and says. but they are republicans. , think he will keep serving but i also think we have to wait to see what the democratic memo says. host: michael is calling from lawrence, kansas on our democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i think i am a little out of the box in my thinking of the spirit of think the memo really shows nothing, and i would urge the

democrats to not release the memo because the idea was these memos should not go out to the public. they should stay within the intel community. i would urge the democrats do not release your memo, let this thing just float out because there's nothing there. host: does michael have a point, releasing classified information? guest: yeah, but at the same time, if the democrats, especially schiff, i have seen him in person, i have seen his interviews, he is really revved up about this. if the republican memo is totally wrong or mostly wrong, i think, again, if you would have done a disservice by not releasing the republican memos it was completely right, i think you do a disservice to the everyday person if you do not release the democratic memo if it turns out the republican memo is completely wrong. host: joe is calling in from illinois on our independent line. jhi, joe. -- hi, joe.

caller: thanks for taking my call. the democrats are trying to stick a square peg into a round hole. this is all crazy talk. everybody with their committee was sworn under oath. they are not going to lie. i mean, they would be put in jail if it found out that they were lying or in contempt of congress. that is insane. i mean, look at history. the democrats outsource our jobs. they said it was good for trade. obama says if you want your insurance, you can keep it. right now, democrats are saying the same thing. these tv programs, and they all say the same talking points, you know, it is just unbelievable. a dossier, paid for

and they lied to the judges in the fisa court, so come on, give me a break. this is all to make republicans or trump look bad. host: let's give kelly a chance to respond. guest: the right of the committee interviews. house intelligence and intel, they have all been conducting these investigations into russia. i think as part of transparency and is part of kind of this memo -- not backfire, but memo drama that is going to continue, i think we will see a push for havese of interviews they done. andrew mccabe has had interviews before house and senate intel and i think house oversight. the fbi, he had a bunch of interviews, and nunes has brought up that mccabe basically said there would be no fisa investigation without the dossier on carter page your he said this to committee investigators. democrats said that is not true.

i think is part of the transparency come as part of the memo backfire or whatever, i think we will see a push for the release of those transcripts, as much as we can get r. host: let's take a look at the reaction from house minority leader nancy milosevic. "president trump has surrendered commander -- leader nancy pelosi. host: talk a little bit about the democratic messaging. is reallyhink what interesting is that, it again, i am new to this whole world of intelligence. it has been about a year and a half for me. i'm obviouslyre was redacted, but i'm not sure what poncho classified information with it in that memo. aey are not outing in

sources, they're not outing any i think information, so i thinkto remember -- you see headlines that this memo was a nothing burger, which is my favorite word, that there was great classified information, and i think you will continue to see republicans and democrats fumble against each other, and you will see nancy pelosi and chuck schumer using this as a way to continue to say those things, to use those bouquet words to trump and say he is trying to undercut the russia investigation can i think democrats are leaning on the argument, to bring about a mueller. host: laura is on our republican line from detroit, michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. i have had the privilege of traveling to russia and discussing things with people myt live there, and observation now in regards to

this fiasco that we are having in washington can boil down to two investigations. number one, it started to find all the russians messed up our voting, and somehow, mr. mueller timenvolved, and every they come to some sort of a conclusion, it seems to me that our party throws a monkeywrench in to distract things. thisin regards to itestigation, originally started with them i believe some companies were hired to find out about trump's money laundering. prior to his nomination. sent toat, it was another company. the republicans were the first thise that bought

information. then when they were not able to use it, they passed it on to the democrats. i am sorry, the name of the company escapes me, but i saw a report that was very methodical how they investigated this. it started out with a clean slate when they said our company followed our procedures, and we followed this, they went 1, 2, 3, and they came down to the part about investigating russia. well, they said we have got to find someone that is knowledgeable about russia, so -- came in mr. because he was highly regarded. host: i want to give kelly a chance to talk about the origins of the fusion gps memo. how does the origins of that

dossier that was a part of the -- originally paid for by republicans. it started with revoked opponents come and then it trickled into the democrat national committee, and then ,awyers on clinton's campaign they wanted opposition research, which is normal. some gps.red the youtube cofounders have been on capitol hill testifying with if anything it, but come of this memo will bring the dossier, and there were so many toims in there typing trump russia, to moscow. there are parts of the dossier that have been proven true. i think that is a big thing that a also forget is russians had hand in our 2016 election, and there are investigations about that, and that is something that

is crucial and important to keep our elections fair and safe. we have elections coming up in 2018, we have them in 2020. i think making sure that does not have again should be on everyone's mind. host: lisa is calling in from louisville, kentucky on all democratic line. hi, lisa. caller: hi. thanks for taking my call. i think the republican memo will cause a constitutional crisis. i think in trump's mind, it is enough for him to fire rod rosenstein appeared i also think it may cause christopher wray to quit. they have people they want to bring into the fbi. i also would like to know, do you think the railing against the fisa court warrants since the republican congress just decided to reauthorize it, well fbip then use orwell trumps

use the same style warrants to go after american citizens that he is so upset about now, such as political opponents? so the five the court process is something that is very complex and a lot of people do not know about. they cannot be used to justify on americans into after the because you do not like them, but i think, as you said, they renewed fisa section 702 right before this whole memo started heating up, so we might actually see some of those lawmakers come back, especially republicans, "look, we renewed this, and now we're seeing a legit abuses. maybe we should not have renewed it right before this memo came out." host: they renewed it with additional restrictions, and republicans voted against it. guest: and that was put forward by someone like rand paul, who is always up in this fight is a stuff -- fisa stuff.

you might see republicans and even democrat say hello, we just passed legislation, and now we are seeing this. that is kind of the theme for them i think. host: kelly cohen, criminal justice reporter for the "washington examiner," thank you so much for joining us today. coming up next, we will be taking more of your calls on the house intelligence memo and the mueller investigation. republicans can call (202) 748-8001.democrats , (202) 748-8000.in independent ., (202) 748-8002 we will be right back. ♪ and a,"y night on "q author bill james talks about his book am a "the man from the train," in which he investigates one of the deadliest serial killers in history. of times, he was 100 yards from a railroad tracks,

and what helped us identify him as opposed to something else is usually happened at the intersection of two railroad tracks, at the intersection of two railroad tracks presumably because he knew he had to get out, after he committed his crime, he had to get out of town before dawn, and he did not want to be stranded waiting for a train to come through that he could hop on, so be in at the intersection gave him more opportunities to get out of town before the crime was discovered. >> sunday night at eight what eastern on c-span's "q&a." tuesday morning, we are live in jackson, mississippi for the next up on the c-span bus 50 capitals tour. jim hood will be our guest on the bus during "washington journal," starting at 9:30 a.m. eastern.

>> for nearly 20 years, "in-depth" on booktv has featured the nation's best-known nonfiction writers for life conversations about their book. project,, as a special we're featuring bestsellers fiction writers. join us live sunday at noon eastern with colson whitehead, author of the 2016 best-selling novel "the underground railroad," which was awarded the pulitzer prize. "in-depth: series fiction edition," with author colson whitehead on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. take we are continuing to your calls about the house intelligence committee memo and the mueller investigation for this segment and also taking a look at the headlines, which

memo, thestly on that front pages provided courtesy of the museum. it says in the "union tribune," , we have ao released photograph your of the document, the declassified memo annotated, pointing out what it is focusing on, it also, and other headlines, on the palm beach betrothed florida, family here for the weekend in an uproar. talking about them going to the retreat. in other headlines, the chicago gop releases memo, talking about reaction from republicans and democrats there. centuryury news says

.c.e. director leaving the agency to pick up the pace. and the advisor focusing on the big game tomorrow. the super bowl, the contest patriotshe new england and the philadelphia eagles. "i did what i was trained to do, and i feel badly about what happened," about the hawaii false missile alert. stan is on the line. what do you think about the memo and the mueller investigation? caller: i want to say this word -- rico. it stands for racketeering, influence, corrupt organization.

o.j. simpson, donald trump, and john gotti, they think they are smarter than the police. mccain said this yesterday, but we said that six months ago -- who is the true winner? vladimir putin wakes up smiling everyday. not only does he have the president of the united states doing his bidding, he also has an american political party doing his bidding. vladimir putin, like i said, bouquet. a loo he never had it so good. trump actually made vladimir putin with an economy just the size of california. folks, the trump administration is nothing but a corrupt organization, and once again, i am going to say this, i will leave you with this, they think they are smarter than the

police, no different than any drug dealer or any bank robber. they think they are going to get away with it. host: all right. carl is calling in on our independent line from grosse pointe, michigan. what do you think? caller: thank you very much for taking my call. i hope your listeners will do something. it is quite simple. the word is "subversive." tending to weaken or destroy an established political system, organization, or 40, cambridge dictionary. today. what is going on they are using innuendo, they are using false statements, it is sort of like somebody that you know and he lies to you couple of times, and you get upset with him, and he says "well, i only lied to you a couple of times." host: carl, you said "they," who is "they"?

caller: the media and unfortunately the leaders of the democratic party. the problem is our government has become so large, and what they do today is not in the constitution. they should not be doing it. and if we don't take it back, we're going to lose it. so many nations failed in the past, and for the same reason we are failing, taking on more than they should, doing more things that they should not be doing, and that is where we are today. if you look up subversive, it is very simple. or no legalthority people seem to be looking this up, and it is obvious. not everything in the information i gave, the judge, was wrong. that is again, i do not lie to you all the time, i just like to you some of the times. host: kevin is calling in from

ohio. caller: thank you for taking my call. my concern is this dossier, even if it does tur was started by te republican party and then picked up by democrats, it fueled israel, the trump campaign, i would like to remind people that during that time, that the obama administration's appointees over the fbi and the department of justice are appointees. they are appointees, and they are trying to direct all the information, all the intelligence in his favor for the democratic party's favor. according to all the information that has been leaked so far all of these upper echelon people in j, they arei and do picking and choosing information of what they want to put out, what they want to release, and what they want to use for the

fisa or to continue their investigations, trying to dig up information ordered or whatever you want to call it on the trump administration, to try to discredit this presidency. the americanme as people, should be concerned aret who these top people being appointed and what their objectives are, because it is obvious that they was trying to keep trump at any cost from gaining the presidency. i would like to remind people that we all need this justice, know, theseeed, you people in these positions to be , tohe highest integrity continue. it is not everyday workers at the fbi and the department of justice that is being discredited, it is the upper s echelon people who ar controlling them and can direct them in whatever direction they want to. host: all right.

phil is calling from illinois on our independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to make two points. -- how far did this warrants extend? my understanding is it was directed at somebody by the name but how many of the phones in the trump tower were tapped? i am sure that people will say oh, we cannot reveal that, but or was it mr.old, trump's phone, or all his aides tapped? the second question, and i hope the answer will come forth, if any of our listeners were being called to testify or give evidence in an investigation by would anybody be so

stupid, when they know they have been wiretapped, and i think illegally wiretapped, to go into , give testimony, subject to perjury, when they have not been able to see what was recorded under the wiretaps? i think this is just the beginning of finding out exactly how far that warrant extended, if hetell you, mr. trump, testifies before mueller, i tell you, he has had that legal advice because, boy, that would be a terrible, terrible mistake. nobody in this audience would ever do such a thing when they know they have been wiretapped over such a period of time. thank you. host: there are other headlines. the "washington examiner 'reporting that republicans are eyeing a change in the way presidential nominees are selection.

-- are selected. it says beaver national committee will make changes to the nominating process, possibly leading to friction between president trump loyalists and party institutionalist. trump, through emissaries at the rnc, could seek role changes constricting the path of potential gop primary challengers in 2020. it would not be the first time a republican president, or nominee, attended to alter the nominating regulations with an eye toward defrocking future competitions. as in the past, such a move ,ould likely meet resistance reflecting the integrity of the democratic organization run by its members as opposed to a single republican, even if that leader is the president. scott calling in from south carolina on the republican line. what are your thoughts about the release of the memo yesterday? caller: my thoughts were i like to look at the facts not in

dispute, and think it goes back further than the memo, it it goes back to the investigation of hillary clinton. it was not even an investigation. it was a sham. they did not have anybody subpoenaed. they did not have a grand jury. they did not seek evidence. when did you ever hear of the fbi agents destroying evidence in a case? that is unheard of. there are a lot of young man right now that are free because of dna evidence that was collected years ago that was stored. it exonerated them. the fbi destroyed evidence. they let hillary off the hook. they let her people off the hook. that is when it all started. when you have the top people in the fbi controlling investigations that they should never have had a hand in, these people were dirty. rod rosenstein took mueller -- when trump fired comey, they brought mueller in because they thought he was going to make him the head of the fbi, and when he did not come and rob rosenstein put him in charge of the

investigation, that was a huge conflict of interest. that should have never happened. there are so many people dirty at the higher echelon, and when you have criminal people in the fbi, just like law enforcement, that is the worst of the worst. those people need to be put in prison, not only for what they did, but as a deterrent for people who come behind us people in that position. when they used that dossier, when they withheld evidence from the judgment either party -- first of all, you have to look at -- why did the top law enforcement guys get involved in the investigations to begin with? they should have never had a hand in it. you had the same people who were on the sham hillary investigation that were on the trunk-mueller investigation. that should have never happened. there are so many conflicts of interest in the top echelon of the fbi, and it is a shame that the democrats do not want to get it is thenh, because today, but it could easily be trump doing the same thing to

his political opponent tomorrow. i think when you're not outraged about with the other guy is doing, that is called being a hypocrite, and we have a lot of hypocrites, not only in congress , but in the world as a whole. the worst part of it is how the mainstream media went along with the whole thing. host: all right. our next call from phoenix city, alabama on our democratic line. what do you think, charles? all, when youof are going out of your coming up pelosi, schumer, schiff, and all of these people making statements. these people are under oath, and they were probably shot up. ii.s a kid during world war what people forget is the system corrupt, they have corrupt

judges in the system, i am not saying they are, but if they did, it would not be the first time we find a corrupt judge, ok? who aref these people doing all this talking were put under oath, pelosi, schiff, everybodyers, al else, it would probably shut people, because these they just run their mouth, runs home, goes inside, and lock the doors. we have a bunch of pathological liars in washington, and people should realize these people -- i where any rear of these people even established a charity and gave money to anything. they are not givers, they are takers. host: all right. "the hill" is reporting that a key party group has launched an rodttack against

rosenstein, urging him to "do his job or resign" following the release of a controversial memo alleging surveillance of use at the department of justice. actionty patriots uploaded the ad to youtube hours after the house intelligence committee memo was released public, sparking speculation that the president may move to fire rosenstein. jerry is on the line from tampa, on our independent line. what do you think? caller: good morning. maybe the callers can solve the problem i have. it seems that the democrats a you cannot trust the government went the republicans are in charge, now the republicans are saying you cannot trust the government when republicans are in charge. i guess we have to find some outsiders to come in. ast: leah is calling in on

republican line from manchester, new hampshire. what are your thoughts on the memo? caller: we have to wait and see what else comes out, but my favorite thought is the whole thing is a farce. we have heard now for almost a year and a half, because it started when hillary was still in the race against trump that russia had our election. what she meant by that was that the release of the podesta you melt was done to harm her. wikileaks, who released the emails, have said over and over again that it was not rush hour any russian agent or state agents at gave them the so for a year and a half, the nsa, that watches all of us, collects information from everybody, and no evidence that russia hacked to our election and is just so convenient the democrats now, for a year and a half, have kept this story going

so we don't have any discussion about what was in the actual emails. that the hacking of our election took place through the democratic party by stacking the deck in the primary, making sure that hillary was the one that one in the end -- they don't have to discuss that. they do not have to discuss the fact that in that lawsuit that was rock after the fact, the democratic party admitted in court they have no obligation to have a free and fair election. awfully convenient we continuously point at a foreign country as being the problem of "hacking our election" so we don't have to look at what was actually done. host: all right. coming up, continuing our conversation about the memo, we will be joined by michael allen. we will be right back.

♪ >> this weekend on american history tv on c-span3, tonight "lectureseastern on in history," university of north carolina at chapel hill -- >> fundamentalists are conservative protestants who militantly oppose -- that militants is important -- new ideas about the bible, science, and society. >> and it 10:00 p.m. eastern on "reel america," the documentary "island of hope, island of tears."

they passed through rooms and corridor's that were and noisy with human life bought tickets for a place called america. they traded their drachmas, rubles, and lira for dollars. they experience their first american christmas and hanukkah. they waited for permission to pass into the new land. at 10 p.m. eastern, an interview with catherine west moreland, wife of william westmoreland, who commanded u.s. forces in vietnam. off, and iwas read really worked almost every day in a vietnamese hospital. went toital, and then i --

to do red cross work. tvwatch american history every weekend on c-span3. "washington journal" continues. we are now joined by michael allen, a former director on the house select intelligence committee and he is with beacon global strategies. he is here to discuss the release of the intelligence committee memo and the potential impact on the mueller investigation. michael, tell us about your background. backgroundut your and the white house. oh, sure. thanks for having me. i'm a lawyer. i graduated law school at the university of alabama. i moved up. and began working for the

bush-cheney transition and that led to working eight years for president bush, seven at the white house. after that, i went to a think tank, wrote a book, and later became majority staff director of the house permanent select .ommittee on intelligence as you know and your viewers no real well, that is the entity charge with overseeing the 17 intelligence agencies across the government, doing his budget and reviewing all of its operation and collection activities around the world. what is your reaction, with your background, to the release of the memo? do you think it should not have been released? guest: i think it is a useful part of the story. their central charge is an essential part of their -- of the pfizer application that went in on carter page -- fisa

application that went in on carter page was based on politically-motivated information collected from russia. sayou read it, you say, i to myself, if that's true, it does bother me. and-- here is the big but, what everybody is talking about, it is very likely that the fbi and the department of justice used information from a variety of sources to make the probable cause determination that they should, as we would say, go up on carter page, and that means to surveilled him electronically. i think there is more to the story. as the memo stands, if it is true, it bothers me, but i think there might be more information we need to learn. ok, a reminder to our viewers. you can find the text of the actual memo on our website, c-span.org.

talk a little bit about the process. the process of release of a memo the comes from -- this is committee voting on a, at this point voting to release the republican document, not yet the democratic one. you think the democratic process is working properly as you see it? past, i should say in the the congress, both committees and the house and senate, have whether itific job, is investigating 9/11 or investigating what went wrong with the intelligence analysis with iraq, wmd, and typically, when they put out a report, they each branch for declassification purposes. that part of it is normal. what is extraordinary here is this is a memorandum written by , voted outpublicans on a partyline vote, and, you know, i don't know this, but it

seems to have been orchestrated with the white house. hey, if you send this down here, we will likely maybe redact one or two do things, but we are otherwise going to clear it for release. that has not happened before. especially when it is not paired view -- democratic which is sort of a political matter, putting the substance aside for a second. the political matter opened the republican majority to charges that they are being an unduly -- unduly political. the democratic memo shows signs of being released in coming weeks and i would be happy to get into that, too. host: he is now the managing director at beacon global strategies -- i will say that right before the morning is over -- and user to talk about

the release of that house intel and the mueller investigation. republicans can call -- democrats can call -- -- independents ryan on our independent line from indiana. good morning. caller: good morning, michael. thank you for your service. , they canico act basically, the fbi can basically -- they basically let out what snowden did, and to have them do that and to let that go into the it is sod cherry pick misleading. is throwing at is shining ball up in the air so everybody looks at that so you and allee the collusion

of the things that trump has been doing. , tuesday in his state of the union address, he didn't mention russia wants. and now it's all about the fbi, i think it is doing anything to take the eyes -- everybody's eye off the real ball. he hasn't even released his tax returns, and we are talking about this dossier that, you piecemeal, which is basically a died and should not have even brought it up -- host: i want to give michael allen chance to respond. with: i'm glad that nunes forward and put in the debate. where the fbi and the department of justice unduly relying on a document prepared as an opposition research document as

part of a presidential campaign? but we have to see what else is out there to determine whether there was good reason for putting carter page under surveillance. thehe way, you know, in spirit of transparency, carter page was already on the fbi radar screen because in 2015, the fbi announced indictments of two russians buys in new york spies in new york city and they were up on, they were listening to the conversations of these two russians and they mentioned that they had met carter page. i think in fairness to the fbi, when carter page from name pops up again as an advisor to the trump presidential campaign and they get some information about him, perhaps continuing to meet with russians, i think that helped animate their feeling of, well, is there collusion going on? what are these people -- although loosely affiliated with trump -- i don't know that carter page truly knew him or

truly was an advisor -- but nonetheless, that background, we have to consider that background when we ask ourselves the question, was the fbi diluted by politics? host: i want to get your reaction to reaction to the release of the memo by former fbi director james comey. tweeting yesterday "that's it? this misleading memo destroyed the trust of the intelligence community, damaged relationship court, and inexcusably expose classified in best to gish and of the american citizen, and for what yet of the fbi and doj must keep doing their job." and that was expressed to me a lot of former intelligence thertment folks, that intelligence community has been damaged by this.

what do you think? guest: i think so. the intelligence committee is not your average congressional committee, at least in the way it was created. you may remember -- and everybody knows the stories -- there were legitimate fbi abuses in the 1970's and even the 1960's, and that led to a huge investigation in the late 1970's which is commonly referred to as the church commission and the pike commission. and one of the recommendations coming out of this voluminous report, detailed, legitimate abuses by u.s. law enforcement communities, is that we needed permanent oversight of the 17 -- now 17, but at the time, let's think about it. they said, let's have a special committee, people are hand selected on their expertise by the speaker and by we're sorry, the

senate majority leader. it supposed to be special. by the way, it's sort of interesting. bases in the's capitol. there are no cameras. there's no media. it is soundproof against eavesdropping. when you come in there, you're absolutely sort of in bell specialith -- this is a place and this is supposed to be above politics. it's not that politics has not intruded on house intelligence or the senate intelligence committee. it has. it did with 9/11, it did with iraq, wmd, and it did again here today. it is supposed to be as apolitical as you can possibly get and when you run are goingise like you on now, people will be less committeef what the

is doing, at least as far as the people they oversee, i think. calling fromg is jacksonville, florida on our independent line. good morning, greg. caller: good morning. good morning, mr. allen. i am a 30 nine-year watcher of c-span and i appreciate all of the activity that each one of the hosts brings to the program. ofi made 39-year watcher c-span. what i'm incredulous about is the republican supporters of mr. trump, and they see no correlation the between devin being a former campaign worker for mr. trump, and see no partiality he would have with distorting information the way that they accuse either supporters of hillary clinton -- and no one ever mentions that he is a former campaign worker for mr. trump and now sits in a

position of power where he can actually redirect and question the integrity of the people at the fbi. i have heard caller's question of the fbi with dr. king and other issues, but no one admitted that particular problem with devin nunes. now you have. i want to give michael allen in opportunity to respond to that. guest: thank you, greg. your callers watch this show a lot. an capitol behind you is inherently political institution. we try, in different forms and different to midis, to remove or reduce the politics, but at the end of the day, the two parties, republican and democrat, and majority, ishe going to have the chairman of

the committee and that person will have a political affiliation. that member, in this case, devin is a legitimate -- he is a legitimate voice and national security issues. he does speak to this. but he is also republican and he speaks his mind on issues to the party. is weint of the committee should rise above partisanship when it comes to matters of national security. there is a debate going on now whether this is unduly partisan or not. time will tell. by the way, we've got a lot of interesting stuff coming out. we will see the democratic memo, i predict. there's definitely the doj and inspector general's report that ingoing to come out -- waves, i'm told, in coming weeks. so, there are a lot of shoes left to drop. we've got a lot more stuff to examine before we come to some final decision on whether the

committee has overstepped its bounds. host: i want to talk more about chairman nuñes. he recused himself from the russia investigation for a time after he took a memo to the white house that turned out to have been pulled from the white house in his previous position as a member of the transition team -- what you think about his ability to leave, to continue to -- to lead, to continue to lead this investigation? i'm worried about the committee in general. i don't think the democrats, by the way, have been immune from partisanship or at least political motivation. they are politically active, and obviously the democratic party is very upset about donald trump, so there is sort of a sentiment there of everything that trump does should be rejected. so, i get it.

there's politics on both sides. at the end of the day you're supposed to rise above the politics. the senate intelligence committee has done, i think, a commendable job of trying to stick to the investigatory facts and not be sort of as active on as, saying, the house intelligence committee. host: we have peter from florida on our democratic want. michael. yes.r: i am a democrat. the reason i am calling, i have investigationthis with mueller. i know about this memo being sent out. the politics of got to stop. we are all americans first, and being an american, we've got to let this investigation followed through with mueller. keep the independent status.

let him do his job. if there are people who need to be brought in front of the court, let them testify under oath, and let it finish. do not disturb it. keep the politics away from him. if they stop this investigation, there will be a price to be paid by the american voters of this country. host: your reaction their? guest: i am with you. well said. ourrussians interfered in electoral process. this needs to be investigated. this needs to be looked at. it needs to be taken seriously. it should not be used as a partisan bludgeon against president trump, anymore than president trump should try and use this issue to discredit one of the great institutions and the country, which is the federal bureau of investigation, which right now, by the way, here in the city and in other cities across the nation are investigating terrorists, they are looking at potential spies

from russia or china or what have you. their mission is absolutely vital to our democracy. it is the institution of congress to oversee these institutions. so there is a time for politics. i get it. but in this area, i agree with the caller. we need to rise above it. have paul atht, we calling in from pennsylvania on a republican line. good morning, paula. caller: good morning. as far as the politics is concerned, i agree. i think the politics should stay out of its. but on the other hand, if devin corruption, itng should be exposed, it should be exposed on both sides, not just one side. both sides.

to they take exception media trying to make this something that it really isn't. i really don't think we should look at it in a political light. we should look at it as there is bias in parts of our government they should not be directing people and their activities in their jobs. they should be doing their jobs with integrity. and if that is not happening, we need to know about it and we need to fix it. host: all right, let's give michael a chance to respond to that. guest: i agree with paula. let's talk about this bias. it's not that the fbi is perfect. i'm sure there are people who lean left or right. but it's very difficult to pull off a conspiracy whereby we would have a

politically-motivated investigation because our system is very carefully overseen. there are internal checks and balances and the department of justice. we just talked about the inspector general, the inspector general will come out with a report very soon. i do worry, as an american, that our institutions, like the agency, oncurity account of edward snowden releasing treasure trove's of the nation's secrets, i do worry rest.leaks and the i think it has a corrosive effect on our ability in a world wet is quite tumultuous -- need these institutions to perform and not be distracted and be a political football. host: ok, i want to talk a little bit about morale in the fbi. there is an op-ed today written

by and now former fbi official -- is says after more than a decade of service, particularly investigating terrorism, working to rescue kidnapping victims overseas, and being special assistant to the director, i'm relatively turning them a badge and leaving an organization i love. why? so i can join the growing course of people believe that the relentless attacks on the bureau under my not just the americas from your law enforcement agency, but also the nation's security. my resignation is painful, but the alternative of remaining quiet while the bureau is impossible. he goes on to save the assumption among confused and is made fbi employees is this is to soften the blow of the investigation by mr. mueller, the special counsel. however these kinds of attacks by powerful people could go beyond where criticism. they could destroy the institution. what is your reaction? guest: well, he makes a lot of

serious, art felt points. -- heartfelt points. but your viewers are quite current on all of the news. take a step back for a second. president trump is new to washington. he certainly has not spent his career studying the ins and outs of the relationship between the justice department, the justice department, the fbi, and the white house and the rest. he was elected, in part, i think because they wanted a new, an orthodox voice here. from his perspective, i think he thinks there is a witchhunt against him by the democratic party in cahoots with the media, and so he is lashing out at institutions he thinks might be complicit or might have been misused. , orn't think they have been i do not think they are inherently partisan, and we need to step up and say that.

that is where he is coming from. again, attack all of these vital institutions, be it edward snowden or, frankly, democrats in congress -- democrats and republicans who attacked the cia after 9/11 -- it has a corrosive effect. at some point we do need to have these issues out in the public sphere, but we ought not make them political at all. release -- want to ask you about the release of this memo drafted by staff members of the committee, -- would talk to little bit about his background. this is in "the new york times." he found himself in the middle of a controversy. he is the primary author of the politically charged memo released friday over the

opposition of the fbi, the intelligence community. it accuses federal officials of bias against president trump, also reporting that congressman -- how common is this? alk about the process i which memo is put together? is it mostly staff members, congressman? give us some insight from your experience. tot: it varies from member member how engaged they are with the committee. typically the chairman of the committee is very involved because it is his or her show. but staff play a huge role in the institution of the congress. it is staff that take a majority of the meetings and work with the cia and fbi and nsa, write the reports, do the investigation.

the members do hearings and that's a very, very important part of the oversight function. members cannot spend all of their time in one particular area because they have so many different duties. they have duties to their constituents. nunes and ihairman know chairman mike rogers for michigan were incredibly involved. i think they were both involved. on ordinary for the staff to do the actual riding, but the members -- actual members run the show. caller: the thing that keeps coming to my mind is a house divided cannot stand. as i am listening to your guests here and he is talking about now, if i was an adversarial power, right? let's say someone like putin.

if i wanted to check point -- in thete your opponent united states, how would i go about doing that? would i use someone like trump to wiggle his way into the oftem and they get the types destabilization that we are experiencing today? i would say instead of the investment, the billions of dollars the military would put , i am looking at how to work with this, and i think what i am listening to is the fall of america, because if you rt, they if you have

can't come in and propagandize the american populace. but if you can co-opt another station, such as fox, to do the work of rt, and you get the same types of results where you have a counter narrative in intelligence that has been cultivated through propaganda, what do you get? i think we get your point. mr. allen: i am not as that theic as david united states is near collapse but i do think he is on to something. and that is it is the aim of the russian federation to destabilize to margaret sees and specifically the united states. russia does not have that right of a future under -- bright of a future under putin. their economy is terrible.

they are a serious power and we need to be able to deal with them. and they want to be dealt with on the same level as the united states. they see as as their prime adversary. putin himself was an intelligence officer during the kgb. war, in the ek the russians are as active as they were in the cold war here in washington and in the united states on a number of what we influence covert campaigns. one was to manipulate social media and otherwise try and penetrate and destabilize the united states. we are too strong for that, either way. we have these resilient institutions. we will survive. but he is on to something. a sort ofefinitely

fever in washington about this russian investigation. it is not helpful because it distracts us from the real issues but at the same time, we will come through this. host: you mentioned edward snowden. i want to read a tweeti want tod about the process. he pleaded -- i require the journalist that broke the 2013 domestic spying story as a condition of access to talk to the government in advance of publication as an extraordinary precaution to prevent any risk of harm. it turns out our standard of care was higher than that than the intelligence community. mr. allen: what a total joker. took hundreds of thousands of incredibly sensitive document. -- documents. he pilfered them. he stole them out of the nsa. china and lives in russia and by all accounts, the russians and theprecaution e

have all of those documents and i am sure they have been analyzing them for years. it has caused the united states tens of millions of dollars in damage to try to repair some of the collection access that we of sayingd i am fond that if edward snowden wanted to have a debate about privacy and civil liberties in the united states, there are other ways he could have done it. by the way, he could have just released the two memoranda that battle -- that got all of the attention. and 715.those 702 but he did not. he gave probes of information and has absconded to russia. host: melvin is coming from fort lauderdale on the democratic line. caller: good morning. i want to go back to one thing.

i am a listener. one thing i have noticed, is that you have people that continue to call-in indicating they are democrats. and then they talk about nancy pelosi and schumer. normally, the host would say -- no, you are not a democrat and you are not calling on the right line. you are encouraging republicans to continue to call in with the masquerade that they are democrats when you know by their conversations that they have nothingto say about -- positive to say about democrats. you should be cutting them off. you should not give them the airtime. everyoneen telling that dictators breakdown.

he will have what he needs to set up a dictatorship. i really want you to start cutting these people off. host: i appreciate the suggestion. we are going on to sandy who is calling from pennsylvania on our republican line. caller: good morning. allen, could we get back to what this program is all about this morning and that is the memo and the mueller investigation? mr. allen: sure. caller: wasn't the memo put out becausebecause of the investigan

into the fisa court and the steele dossier. i think you're caller is onto

something. it is about the context of the memo and should that have been a factor in whether the fisa application was rejected or accepted. the memo states that the investigation began over the allegations about george papadopoulos. document or the warrant, it was renewed several times. what does that tell us about what went into authorizing it? mr. allen: it tells me that if you are renewing before the court the ability to continue to eavesdrop on carter page, they thought they still had a live

lead. the fbi thought it was justifiable to continue to spend those resources. matter, i do not think anyone would be in a position if the fbi said that they need it, i don't think rod rosenstein or anyone would try to second-guess them. you try not to second-guess the guy in the field. a lot of people are sticking that rosenstein should have looked into it, he should have dealt -- he should have delved deeper into it. dan is calling from youngstown, ohio on the republican line. just a couple of minutes left. what is your question for michael allen? mr. allen: he is talking about the dossier saying that is not the main reason that they started this whole

investigation, but it is. and hillary clinton created them -- and hillary clinton pay them to create that dossier. they lost that election. they thought they were going to win it. andy said under both that they would not have gotten that order if they did not have the dossier. better getse people off the media because they are lying. and you guys are not realizing would bedictator hillary clinton and they want to take this guy out no matter what. host: ok, the memo itself from devin nunes said the investigation started because of papadopoulos. mr. allen: i hear what the caller is trying to say. that there were political

overtones, and there are. there is an active campaign to discredit the president. i do believe some of the members of the media are quite aggressive on this. the investigation by all before theegan episode of filing the application -- that is why everyone in the mainstream media and beyond is saying that this is a very narrow issue. did the fbi use the steele dossier to get the ability to listen in on carter page's phone call. the surveillance of an american citizen. this particular one. i am reading and hearing what he says that it is as an to appear in that bothers me. more information will come out. the investigation into donald trump began in the summer of 2016 when, why the way, no one thought he was going to win but

the fbi wanted to look into this. i hear what the caller is saying. corrosive incredibly and political atmosphere. there are democrats using russia as a vehicle to beat up the president and the president doesn't like it and he is lashing out at a lot of different people. sometimes, i do not think we should lash out at some of our national security professionals who i believe are largely apolitical and trying to help the country. but that is the situation we are in. i wish we were talking about the real issues of the country on a foreign policy basis. the rise of china. a russia that is very aggressive toward us. host: i would like to get to one more color. the president is tweeting about this. he said this memo totally vindicates trump but the russian witchhunt goes on.

there was no collusion and no obstruction. the word now used because after one year of looking endlessly and finding nothing, collusion is dead. this is an american disgrace. nate is calling in from parksville, maryland on our independent line. you have the last word with michael allen. i should be calling in on the democratic line. but moving right along, mr. allen, in so far as democrats trying to discredit trump, he is doing a pretty good job himself. earlier, in talking about the issue of the memo, when you speak of all of the stuff going russia being such pu --ersary of hours and putin being an enemy of us.

to disprove that notion. i think that is kind of funny. host: i would like to give michael allen at chance to respond. mr. allen: such a fair point. the russians are not our friends. we have sanctions against them for the invasion of ukraine, for stealing crimea from ukraine. they are bad act or is and i wish the president was more active on this situation. in closing, in the national security strategy that the president released late last year, he basically said that china and russia are the real ourle that we need to gear national security apparatus around. and so, i still believe that russia is one of the greatest iseats that we face and it an issue that we will have to

deal with. i think the national security community is arrayed against that threat. host: michael allen. managing director at beacon global strategies. andcan find the website michael on twitter. thank you's much for joining us. coming up, we will take more of your calls on this topic. the house intel memo and the mueller investigation. sunday night on afterwards, former speechwriter for president george w. bush and atlantic communist david with his book "the corruption of the american republic." he is interviewed by carlos.

ocracy which comes from the same root as democracy and autocracy is a book about the study of power. this is the study of donald trump's power. how did he get it? of enabling.tem it is the system in the white house. the system between trump and congress. thaten trump and the media enables him and creates his audience. and above all, between him and the core group of his voters. that and made -- that enabled him to win the nomination. >> watch afterwards, sunday night at 9:00 eastern on c-span twos book tv. 2018 marasatch the writers festival on book tv.

starting at 2:00 eastern with karl rove on political candidates and presidential elections throughout history. and the new york times up add columnist ed stevens on foreign policy. about his talks writing life. followed by margaret mcmillan, douglas brinkley and beauchamp on their favorite historical figures. brett -- watch the writers festival beginning today on c-span2. c-span's history series, landmark cases returns next month with a look at 12 new supreme court cases. each week historians and experts join us to discuss the constitutional issues and personal stories behind the significant supreme court decisions. beginning monday, february 26, live at 9:00 eastern. and we have a continued guide written by a veteran supreme court journalist, tony merrow.

copy -- can be obtained at c-span.org/landmark cases. >> "washington journal "continues. your we are taking more of calls on the show discussing the house intelligence issue. for, our c-span cities tour as wees american story travel to fayetteville, arkansas to feature the history and literary life of the city. noon today, all of our programs from the city will air in one time block. here, we will visit the university of arkansas library to see items from the fulbright special collection. he served arkansas as a u.s. senator for 30 years. >> he was a long time u.s.

senator serving arkansas from 19 until 1974. he was a distinguished graduate of the university of arkansas. he was a star football player. an amazing guy. he was a native of fayetteville. at some highlights from the papers as well as some images and a couple of other things to highlight his connection to the university of arkansas. perhaps, one of the most wasrtant things to happen, when the university of arkansas hosted the game of the century. considered a regular-season game between the numbers one and two teams in the country. texas and arkansas. it was an important game and everyone wanted a ticket. if you were a political powerhouse at the time, you were able to get a ticket. remarkable people attended the game. in the stands, all seated together we have senator

fulbright in his fine hat observing the game. we also have the current president at the time in 1969, richard nixon. attending the game right there. and the future president, george h w bush was attending as well. looking towards the camera. fulbright was remarkable in a lot of ways. he could talk to just about anyone from different political stripes, people from across the aisle and people from different parts of the world. he was a democratic leader. bush. with george h w they were all here together watch texas unfortunately beat the razorbacks. host: be sure to tune in this weekend as we travel to fayetteville, arkansas. and --h video of payable to watch video of fayetteville

and all of the cities that we'd work, go to c-span.org/cities tour. caller: good morning. this has something to do with what you are talking about. with the fbi. on january 8 of this year, at the bundy ranch in nevada, the federal government brought charges against the bundy men. withhe case was dismissed malice. they found -- the judge found acts of misconduct by the justice department and the fbi. of withholding evidence from the to very derogatory remarks about the bundy people.

the surprise was that it was not picked up by anyone. a 22nd clip on fox news about this. in fact, the judge read the misdemeanors of the fbi and the justice department from the bench and it took her a half hour. and i found this out about googling it and reading it and google is no friend of trump. i am wondering why you guys do not bring some of this stuff up. on fast andson thatus -- all of the stuff she runs through on the obama administration. you guys never bring this stuff up at all. i note you had her on your program. here are -- i know you had on your program.

bring thisguys would other stuff up. thank you. a caller from conyers, georgia on the democratic line. good morning. caller: yes, i am calling in reference to the last guest you had on. kimberly, you did not bother to allow the guests to call in from the democratic line and share their points. we knew what his point was. the fact is that when we mentioned the sanctions against russia and this person did a great that russia had interfered in our elections last year, the sanctions were never enforced by donald trump.

they were voted on by the senate and the house and they were approved by both parties. that the sanctions would be enforced against russia but mr. trump never activated these. there have been many reasons why we believe that trump is working for putin. because he never criticizes anything that the russian president does. ever mentioned, he always finds a reason to say -- no, it did not happen. even -- he even denies that the russian interference happened last year. this is what we have to deal with. how do we protect ourselves in future elections? how do we know that this will not happen again in 2018?

i do believe the republican party and the congress are following along behind donald trump. why should they do anything? hello? host: we have a lot of callers. frank is calling also from georgia on the republican line. caller: good morning. they needn thing -- to wrap up this investigation and get it over with. if you have something, let us know what it is. if they interfered in our elections, sure, they did and we have done it as well over in some russian satellite country. we interfered in their elections. we are no better than the russians. the big problem i have right now with this memo thing is civil liberties and the fact that a

was caught uprter in 2013 in a database and decision -- that ok, he is in this database and we need to find out and that is -- databases are being collected every day on people and people are unaware of it. databases are being sold every day. when you apply for a job and they do a background check, people are looking at everything in that database. we need to address the databases. i am not sure people are aware that the things you did 40 years ago, it shows up in your background every day. host: ok. to some other headlines. the washington post reports that the fed crackdown on wells fargo -- the federal reserve levied an

unprecedented penalty against wells fargo pressuring the mega-bank to replace four board members halloween widespread consumer abuses coming on the yellen. janet it was one of the harshest ever imposed on a financial firm. tols fargo will not be able have its assets until the fed approves the remediation plans. arizona onlling from our independent line. good morning and thank you for allowing me to call him. i have been listening to the republicans and the democrats on this and it reminds me -- the republican was questioning the integrity of the fbi. arm of lawan enforcement and right now they

are playing the role of prosecutor. this is a common theme we see in all types of cases with law enforcement when they are gathering evidence to prosecute someone. the way this is playing out because of the politicization of it, it is no surprise that one side or the other would point a finger. but to say that this isestigation is unwarranted unfair. on the democratic side, i can see that people from the campaign lied, they were dealing with people from russia. trumpllowed -- donald allow these people onto his campaign. one has been indicted for money laundering and someone has pled guilty for line to the fbi. these were people close to his campaign. if donald trump is not guilty ,ith -- of colluding with them then i would be throwing them under the bus. you put him at risk. -- i agree with

the democratic caller that i don't understand is just that the sanctions on. why wearing matching t-shirts and notdimir putin putting on the sanctions that the congress asked you to put on, it makes it seem like they have something they are holding over your head. if you would just put the sanctions on, they clearly interfered in the election, what you are doing is pointing the our own intelligence and law enforcement. of course they have flaws. with thisa problem type of evidence gathering and aggressiveness and the things they do to gather evidence and what they put out there. that has been a problem, not just with the fbi but all law enforcement agencies. that is nothing new. host: and tomorrow on "washington journal" we will be joined by daily beast reporter nancy to discuss the latest on

the release of the white house intelligence memo and the russian pro. and the atlantic's stephen clements will be here today -- to discuss president trump's foreign-policy agenda and sebastian gorka will be here to discuss the memo and how it could how it could affect robert mueller's investigation. that is all for today's "washington journal." we are back tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern. have a good saturday. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> next on c-span, the fcc taking a look into the recent falls missile alert in hawaii. later, the senate debate on an abortion ban after 20 weeks.

that is followed by an epa oversight hearing with administrator scott pruitt. this weekend on american history tv on c-span 3, tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures in history, university of north carolina at chapel hill professor molly owrthen on 20th century fundamentalism and the growth of pentecostalism. >> fundamentalists are conservative product is -- protestants who militarily -- militantly opposed new ideas nce, ande bible, scie society. easternhat 10:00 p.m. on reel america, the 1980 nine documentary "island of hope, island of tears." 12,000,010, -- men, women, and children past through this way.

passed through rooms and corridors haunted with a special stillness. tickets for 1000 places in america. here, they traded their drop us, ars.s, rubles for doll here, they experience the first american christmas and hanukkah. here, they waited to begin information to pass over to the new land. a.m. eastern,0:00 an interview from the west point center of oral history with catherine westmoreland, wife of u.s. army general william westmoreland, who commanded u.s. forces in vietnam. >> almost every day, i worked in a viennese hospital. -- a vietnamese hospital. and our hospital. then i went to nha trang once a week to the red cross work.

>> watch american history tv, every weekend on c-span 3. this weekend, the c-span cities tour takes you to fayetteville, arkansas. it is home to the university of arkansas and the clinton house museum, the first home of bill and hillary clinton. with the help of our cox communications partners, we will explore fayetteville's rich literary life and history. we will visit the fulbright collection at the university of arkansas libraries, where we will hear about senator fulbright's 30 year career in the u.s. senate. >> fulbright could talk to just about anybody. different political stripes, people across the aisle, people from across the world. this is a democratic leader meeting with the president and

future republican president, george h.w. bush, all watching texas, unfortunately, beat the razorbacks. >> sunday at 2:00 p.m. on a a local historian talks about the history of the ozarks and the stereotypes people face living in the region. ofbackwardness, a low level education, poverty -- lots of things that, with that general territory of traditionally being a mostly white, mostly rural, mostly poor place. stereotypes, those -- this stick with us. they are part of our story. >> watch of the c-span cities tour, beginning today at noon eastern on book tv on c-span2, and sunday starting at 2:00 p.m.