clemons from the atlantic. and latest on -- and later, more on the house intelligence memo with sebastian gorka, a former white house adviser to president trump. [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] ♪ host: good morning. congress is back this week with another deadline that continuing resolution to keep the government open expires on thursday. lawmakers expected to pass another short-term c.r. that would get them into march. expect more finger pointing on the inability for them to reach a budget agreement on time. it is sunday morning, february 4. new questions on the f.b.i. and the justice department following the release of that house intel memo. a release that was approved by president trump. we'll have more on this coming up in just a moment. the front page of "the washington post" has the f.b.i.

fears of lasting damage. our phone lines are open at 202-748-8001 for republicans and 202-748-8000 for democrats. you're an independent, 202-748-8002. send us a tweet. we'll read it @c-spanwj or join in on the conversation. many already have at facebook.com/cspan. and good sunday. thanks very much for being with us on a very busy sunday morning. we want to begin with the front page story of "the washington post" and the reporting of develin barren and phillip instructor. -- rucker. it has repeatedly come under fire for abuses of fire, privacy or civil rights, writes "the washington post" from red scares to recording and threatening to expose the private conduct of it martin luther king jr. --

goes on to write the bureau is under fire not from those on the left, but rather conservatives who have long been the agency's biggest supporters as well as the presidents and his handpicked leaders of the f.b.i. >> there's been another amtrack derailment and two people dead and more than 70 injured. the amtrak train traveling through central south carolina colliding with a freight train early this morning. according to a statement by amtrack, two people are confirmed dead. 70 others have been taken to the

hospital according to lexington county south carolina sheriff's department. it was amtrak train 91, carrying 139 passengers, eight crew members when it derailed in casey, which is located southwest of the capital city of columbia. the accident occurred at 2:35 this morning. injuries were reported after the lead engine of the amtrak train derailed. this marking the second incident involving an amtrack train the other one this past week outside of shooters chile, virginia, when the -- charlottesville, virginia. joining us on the phone is white house reporter for reuters, jeff mason. thank you for being us op a sunday morning. i want to begin with where the week begins with the president the f.b.i. and the justice department. guest: well that's a good question, steve. the fallouts from the memo released last week and just kind of continuing ramifications from

that is where we'll start on monday. whether or not anyone at the f.b.i. decides to step down, i think it's still an open question. and whether or not the president, you know, sort of responds to this ongoing questions and whether he will fire somebody else at the department of justice as a result. important context. the white house officials did say last week that he was not considering firing a deputy attorney general rod rose steen -- rosenstein. host: and christopher ray saying for everyone to carry on with their jobs. doesn't sound that white house insiders were concerned he may step down. guest: yeah, greed. there were those reports and you're right to say that that memo or that message that he --

to employees suggests he's going to stay. it's a tough time for people at the f.b.i. and he says hey, just put your heads down and keep it going. it's got to be a surreal place right now. host: "the washington post" saying he is damaging the u.s. constitution. how do rens fight back from this? guest: well, you know, the flip side of that is, i think, some republicans and certainly the ones who were advocating for the release of that memo up to and including president trump believe that he has not been treated fairly and believe that this memo was a way to show that in fact, what he's been saying

for months or longer, it's true. that there was no disillusion -- collusion between the campaign and russia and that the russian probe has been unfair. but the flip side is this is a party that for years, decades, really, has been considered or portrayed itself as a party of law enforcement. and to sort of up-end that in a way to now be the party that is rect so much ire like an agency like the f.b.i. it's changing its identity in the same way although different but related that used to be the party of free trade and that has been up-ended with the policies that president trump has brought in. so how it recovers is sort of, you know, it'll really depend on how it continues to react both to this and to other issues.

host: a lot of speculation on the two motorcades but the white house announcing that melania trump will travel the president tomorrow to cincinnati. so what is your take on all of that? guest: well, i think that's interesting. i think that that is probably, you know, a way for them to try to reduce some of the speculation about what's going n in their marriage. and it's hard not speculate after she dropped out of the trip to davos and went to congress for the state of the union address, wore a white pantsuit in what some people believed was a show of solidarity, perhaps with hillary clinton or a dig at her husband. and even when she got off the plane in florida the other day that the two of them along with their son, baron landed there,

she didn't look marlie pleased with her husband. and so at least the speculation, when you're a public figure like that but going to cincinnati is no doubt the east wing way of saying look, we're ready for that speculation to be tamped down. host: and policy-wise, what's the purpose of that trip? guest: to sell tell. this is something that the president is very proud of the it's one of the white house's main, if not only significant legislative achievement from last year. and he wants to draw attention to that in the middle of all of this chaos about the memo and some of the other things that have charactersized this white house. they want to show look, we did chief some of the promises that we did from his candidacy of 016 and from the campaign. so other white house and the

administration officials talking about it as well and that will e the focus on monday. host: a preview of the win the olympics games with the opening ceremony on friday in south korea and jeff, you posted a sorry saying that the vice president will be present at the games, not just for ceremonial purposes but also try to offset the charade that he expects from north korea to put on what they sent a team and march into the opening ceremonies with their south korean counterparts. can you elaborate? guest: yes, and i thought that was very interesting. my travel with the vice president on his trip to israel and the middle east earlier this month and we had a chance to talk to some of his top advisers and during that trip and looking ahead towards the korean trip, they foreshadowed the fact that one of the reasons he was going to asia and being such a high level leader of the delegation to the olympics was to do just

what you said. and that is to offset the propaganda that they expect the leader of north korea to do in a very effective way. and they did not want the olympics to sort of be dominated by north korea. they didn't want there to be this impression of major unity between north and south korea and let that sort of win the icture of the day. when the american and the united states does not see the -- what's going on with north korea as positive and despite perhaps some distance of being crossed or being bridged between the two parts of the korean peninsula, still wants to draw attention to the major, major differences and the major problems that are coming out of the north. host: a busy week here in washington and at the white house. jeff mason covers all of this

for reuters. thanks for being with us this sunday. guest: my pleasure, steve. host: on your phone calls, do you trust the f.b.i. and in the justice department? there's a piece that was posted over the weekend by josh campbell. why i am leave the f.b.i. t is available online at nytimes.com. he says working to rescue kidnapping victims overseas and being special assistant to the director, i am reluctantly turning in my badge and leaving an organization i love. why? so i can join in the growing chorus of people who believe that the relentless attacks on the bureau undermine not just america's premiere law enforcement agency but also the nation's security. my resignation is painful but the alternative of remaining quiet while the bureau is tarnished for political gains is impossible. tell us what you think. we'll go to willy first in annapolis. democrats line. good morning.

caller: there is something going on that really is unbelievable when it comes to trusting with the f.b.i. and i do believe in the f.b.i. and the justice department. but what i am disturbed about is that putin has learned that he can tap into our decisiveness and i think we need to stop fooling ourselves. one of the biggest problems has to do with racism that's going on too and he's tapped into this. and it's also telling me it's more than just trump. it's probably the republican party. and again, like i said, i do believe in our justice and our f.b.i. and our federal investigation and our system of government. not have it undermineded. host: thank you. anthony in south river, new jersey, independent line. good morning. good morning, anthony, are you with us? caller: thank you for c-span. can you hear me? host: we sure can. go ahead. caller: ok, i got the flu. i wanted to call. i have a comment and a question. my comment is that the only

proof is that the desert -- indiscernible] there was a lot of stuff going -- ut, you know, they [indiscernible] host: anthony, you're breaking up on the cell phone. we're just hearing part of what you said. but if you want to redial, and we'll try get to you back on and we'll appreciate it. this is from robert charles from the fox news website. president trump is right. he and his campaign were victims of the justice department and the f.b.i. he where is the following. it turns out the much maligned chairman of the house intelligence committee, devin nunes of california is one of the most daring whistleblowers

in modern american history nunes was right to be distressed. all americans should be. why democrats on the intelligence committee do not share this distress is beyond understanding except because of short-sided manuevering for political advantage. and robert charles goes on to write the following. the memo by republicans on the committee summarizes raw intelligence confirming that formerly steady and professional staff at the justice department and the f.b.i. were motivated to act against kennedy trump by personal entity towards him and perhaps personal loyalties to hillary clinton. you can read the full is say it foxnews.com. janice is joining us on the republican line from michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. first of all, i trust the rank and file of the f.b.i. and the justice department. but the leadership has undergone a terrible transformation for the last 10 or so.

and the last time i called c-span was last september and at that time, i said that these obama holdovers have been working undercover. they're trained to work undercover and unfortunately, they have directed their efforts and their talents towards trying to overthrow a duly elected president. it's unfortunate that the media comey ing up people like and adam schiff. he never met a tv camera he didn't like. and they're literally lying about the memo. they said it would have a constitutional crisis and so on and so forth. unfortunately for them, once the memo's released, we see no, it does not give us sources of

method. -- carter page was only a volunteer and i'm so of the nted in some callers. it -- this is the bed rock of our country this rule of law and this trying to twist the rule of law language on its head by bringing -- saying republicans all in support of the rule of law. now look at them. they're trying to destroy the f.b.i. no. they're not trying to upset the f.b.i. host: janet, thanks for the call. let's read some tweets from d.c. venice. the g.o.p. false attacks need to be addressed on the justice department is a separate entity from the executive branch as much as they try to illegally merge the branches, checks and balances. and this from robert.

i trust our f.b.i. and justice department much more than d.c. committee rooms and wall street board rooms. another tweet from this viewer. deceptive question lumping altogether those who use the departments for political bias and manipulation. and this from richard. trump fired comey over "the russia thing." and finally, another viewer saying i used to trust him but no more. the f.b.i. is just part of the swamp. j. edgar hoover is rolling over his grave right now. this is a very shad day for the department justice. back to your calls. robert in kentucky, republican line. thank you for waiting. good morning. caller: thank you, steve. you're one of my favorite host. i think you're very fair. you treat everybody fair that calls. steve, answers are going to vary across about this question. there's going to be a lot of people for the f.b.i. and a lot of people against them. me, i do trust with the f.b.i. i agree with the last caller.

you have got to have rule of law. in kentucky, it was probably in the federal government that got him. it wasn't the locals or the state and it was the federal. so tinge you got have the federal government and we do trust the f.b.i. here in hazard. steve, thank you for taking my call. you're one of the best, man. host: let's go on to the democrats line. ben in clarksburg, west virginia. you're next. caller: hey, good morning to you. host: good morning. caller: i believe fox news might be paid by russia to put a division between them and the people. russian got involved in this situation, when we have a congress that goes against the rule of law, in other words, they're against our police or f.b.i., i really don't feel like the democrats should let it out. although it's kind of like if we turn our back against the police and you're looking at a

situation where the police might tell you hey, sir, to all you people, don't go down that street. so we have to respect the rule of law above any person that's in the white house or anyone that's in congress. i think congress needs to do their job be independent and investigate this. we really need to know where russia stands involved in our government. because there's too many coincidences. have a great day, steve. thanks for being there. host: thank you. if you're listening on c-span radio, we're asking you about the justice department and the f.b.i. we also welcome our viewers on the bbc channel which carries this program every sunday afternoon. local time in great britain and on channel 124, the potus channel every su morning. "the boston herald" with this editorial. representative nunes memo is just pure politics. available online. here is an excerpt. so that was it? that was the classified memo

that was going to shake the intelligence committee to its core? really? if that was the intention of the congress and nunes, to give president trump whatever they shift rationale he is looking for including the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, he is going to have to do a lot better than the pile of steaming pa neuer left on the doorsteps of the american punt. senator mccain wrote if we continue to undermine our rule of law, we are doing putin's job for him. that is the real bottom line here writes the boston harold -- "boston herald" editorial. john is join us from pennsylvania on the independent line. welcome to the conversation. john, are you with us? caller: yecks i'm here. can you hear me? host: we sure can. go ahead, please. caller: i had a comment that i'll just go with the "boston

herald." the first few callers, it sounded like the only thing they've ever watched in their lives is fox and friends and then insane at night. fox news is a joke. they work for trump. trump works for them. the major problem i have with c-span is that you accept these statements from people. you got to know that some of them are just so off the wall and you can't come back. it doesn't to do the american public any good to just have people call in. it's like having trump call in. it's useless. host: well, john, don't you think we are a reflection of america? in terms of who's calling into the program? this or any program. caller: well, sure, sure. but the moderators, you might as well put a dummy up there and let people call in, just pose the question. because you folks know. i mean, you've got kimberly whatever her last name is, atkins, i think.

she where is for the boston paper. you've got brains. everybody else that accepts these calls has brains. you've got to give a little comeback to people are just completely off the wall. host: i like to think we're not dummies. but thank you for that, john. if people are calling in with their opinion, our job is really just to hear from you and to have you and heroes express -- you know, you have your point of view and we're going to talk to bob in just a moment and bill is on the line and he will have his point of view. we go through the path of correcting -- caller: there are facts and there are unaffects. why? host: when they're factual errors, we'll correct that but if it's an opinion, that is the opinion of our caumplets our job is to facilitate that and not to second-guess their point of view. caller: well think about this and tell susan to think about this. you've been on for 30-plus years.

the conditions in the eyes have gotten much worse as far as divisions. if we had something that had like an instant fact check or the best you can do, then we wouldn't be continually divided. i mean, fox news, there is a maryland study and a cornell study that interviewed those of people and i'm sure you've heard of this because it was done a few years back. and people who listen to fox or watch fox news know less than people in terms of world air force and political air force know -- affairs and political affairs know less than people who know know news at all. that's an answer right there. host: and that's your opinion and we respect that. host: and that's your opinion and we appreciate that. thank you for phoning in. bob from duluth, minnesota. is your state ready for the super bowl today? caller: yeah. it's going to be cold that. host: i heard that. i know it's inside but it's going to be cold outside.

caller: the temperature out right now, it's below zero. host: that's pretty cold. caller: i can see that. host: your comment on the f.b.i. and the justice department, bob. caller: yeah. my comment is that the f.b.i. stumbled across carter page way back in 2013 when they were bugging the spy room. this has been going on since 2013 with carter page and it was aying that politically motivated. and if they were doing this way back in 2013, it's got nothing to do with being politically motivated. and the f.b.i., i don't think can rebut what they're talking about because there's a lot of things that they just can't say.

and if every time they put something else out there, they could expose one of their sources that might have found carter page and i'm not saying that that's the way they found him. they found him, i was watching on "rachel maddow" they found carter page when they were bugging a spy ring and that was in 2013. but if you start exposing your sources, you know, the f.b.i. can't do that. that's why they won't rebut. but this got nothing to do with politics. this is just trying to smear the f.b.i. and to shut down the mueller investigation. so that's my comment. host: bob, thanks very much. more tweets. this is from jodey. i'm happy that c-span's "washington journal" allows me to hear real people who if not for the "washington journal," i would never believe what these people were possible.

it's like knowing my enemy is better. and this from liberty. it's not just the f.b.i. listen to republican elites now. they vigorously and routinely attack the court system and half of the judges, especially exican ones. and finally this one -- thanks for your comments. we'll keep reading them. a tweet @c-spanwj or join us on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. bill, a republican line. do you trust the f.b.i. and the justice department? caller: i trust the lying agents. i don't trust the senior management of the f.b.i. and that's what this is all about right now. there's a website by a former .b.i. agent called brick

agentunderground.com and he goes into great detail there about how their senior management are the most incompetent agents that get promoted to up ther rings. the confident agents that enjoy investigations and are excel at investigations do not go into management. they prefer to be what's called a brick agent which is another word for a line agent. and so the f.b.i.'s worst are actually the ones that are elevated into the upper anagement. i'm thinking back to the time that louie free was director of the f.b.i. and it seemed like every other day when we picked up the newspaper, it was ruby ridge, waco, the walker spy ring. i mean some of the massive debacles that the f.b.i. uffered.

and these were incompetent management at the top and that's what's going on right now. the management at the top of the f.b.i. is screwing everything up. it's not the line agents. they have to suffer through this management just as the country does. host: your final point, i'm sorry? bill, are you still with us? thanks for that. we'll move on. thanks for the call from montana. national review has this ed toimplet the nunes memo should just be the start. here's an excerpt. the nunes memo has been released and america's national security has not been harmed. if we were to move against rosenstein, it might cause a semi-collapse of his justice department give further fooder to robert mueller --

host: nick in sarasota, florida. you're next. good morning. caller: good morning. that "national review" is correct. what they should do is point another special council to look into all these people at the top of the f.b.i. and this is what worries me about some of your callers that obviously are from blue states. they want to make this about trump. it's about the presidency. you've got people using the most powerful agency -- agencies in our government to unseat a duly elected president. and i want to know when the word treason is going to start hrowing into the conversation.

i want to see some action on the people that is proven. i don't care what rachel maddow says or any of these people that talk like they're from russia or venezuela. i want some of these people that are destroying our government and it's leer that that's exactly what they've been doing. host: nick, thanks for the call from sarasota, florida. on friday on special report with bret baier, the chair of the house intelligence committee, republican congressman devin nunes had this to stay on the release of that memo. >> i didn't want to have to do this but the sad part is it have an 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 to protect

them is the u.s. congress. that's not a place we wanted to go but it's where we had to go. >> did you write it? >> myself, trae goudy, our two investigators and then obviously checked by the lawyers and the rest of our committee members. >> did you read the fisa application? >> no, i didn't. and this has been one of these bogus news stories that have been put thoifment agreement was to create a reading room and allow one member to -- and two investigators to review the documents. i thought the best person on our committee would be the chairman of the oversight committee, trae gowdy who has a long career as pa federal prosecutor to go and do this. and insane over a series of meetings would come back with their notes and brief the rest f the committee members. >> did you coordinate with president trump with the release of this memo? >> no. we -- 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 st one today put up an ad of a-rod -- rod rosenstein saying he needs to do his job or quit. did you work with any outside groups in the formulation of this memo? >> no, i didn't. in fact, i personally like rod rosenstein. but look the bottom line here is mr. rosenstein, mr. sessions, attorney general sessions and director wray have work to do. and they can't start doing their work to root off the problems if you don't admit first that off problem and they've been unwilling to do that. host: from friday meaning on special report, the, news handle and the chair committee, republican congressman devin nunes. we're asking you whether you trust the f.b.i. and the justice department. the cover story of "national review" has raging bull, a look at senator cory booker. and some of the 2003s on the

topic of our question this morning. north of boston saying trump and the russian mob all hate the f.b.i. and there's this tweet from edward. secret courts no good. who has the authority to overhaul the fisa courts? done is joining us from salinas, california, republican line. good morning. caller: hi. yeah, i wanted to say a few things. first is trump is not going after the rank and file of the d.o.j. or the f.b.i. what he's going out is these politically appointed partisans and their hand picked cronies with the hands on the leavers of power on the d.o.j. and the f.b.i., twisting it and corrupting it for their own favor. case in point, this carter page. how many times were his special re-ups. for terrorists and drug dealers. has carter page been charged with anything and and has he done anything except talk on the phone to somebody?

they wanted a back door. they wanted a window into the trump campaign and that is what they've got. and now, they have the difficult to that when people point this out and say there's corruption gone on then and their allies in the media have the gal to say -- gall to say maybe this is corrupt. you're going to hurt the reputation of the f.b.i. i'm sorry. they hurt the reputation of the f.b.i. and in the media should be very much ashamed of itself because this same media that printed the secrets of our military from wikileaks that was leaked have the guts to stand up and say they don't want to print the memo? please, don't send the memo out. don't publicize it. you'll endanger national security. really if give me a break. host: "time" magazine, the cover story out this past week and we talked to bill hannigan on c-span radio on thursday "making

america nuclear again." trump's gamble. a look at the expansion of our nuclear capabilities you were the trump administration. carol has this tweet. you must read the text messages between struck and lisa page. they made clear they wanted to take trump down. i don't recall the "washington journal" reading any of them and i doubt the liberal media did either. in fact, we did read the text. sam is joining us from hornsby, tennessee, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. first of all, i want to say is the american people got a short memory. ever since then, they've been putting propaganda out and interfering -- the election and everything else they could do. but james comey destroyed the reputation of the f.b.i. in on july 5 press conference when first he was quicked and he's been exonerated. but may 5, the following year,

during his open hearing, he testified and explained why he done it and said i'd do it again. if you listen to jeff sessions' hearings, he testified two different times. that's the reason why james comey was fire because he said he would do the same thing again. as far as fox news, anybody that watches msnbc contributor, that's the authorized television station for north korea and military was -- host: are you still with us? move on to derek in maryland. good morning, democrats line. caller: i tell you, i would be happy when you get some educated republicans on who -- because you can tell most of them. they probably graduated from high school. but this is a shame. the f.b.i. -- listen, why is it that we never talk about donald trump's son? we never talk about donald trump's son. this guy's in big trouble.

is guy set up a meeting with these people from russia and for some reason, instead of calling him up, he could have just called the f.b.i. they could have set it up. they could have been right in there and they could have caught him red handed and then he said his father never knew anything about it. don't talk about the f.b.i. you have a guy that lies every time he opens his mouth. his name is donald j. trump, thank you. host: derek from maryland. share your comments on the facebook page. this is what it looks like at facebook.com/cspan. also, you can send us a tweet @c-spanwj. more editorial and fallouts from the release of that memo. this from the "los angeles times." the nunes memo promises much and delivers nothing remotely credible. "even if one takes the republican memo at face value,

it does not demonstrate that the surveillance of mr. page was illegitimate. even if the government should have been more forthcoming about funding of steele's information, the former british spy had been a trusted source for the f.b.i. in the past and the memo undercuts the idea that the steele dossier launched the f.b.i. investigation of whether there was collusion between russia and the people associated with the trump campaign. the memo acknowledges that the counter intelligence investigation was triggered by information about a trump campaign adviser who pleaded guilty last year to lying the f.b.i." that editorial from the "l.a. times." marylou is joining us from connecticut. good morning. ndependent line. caller: good morning. i want to know how long we are going to have to deal with hillary and bill clinton. what have they done to this country?

i can't understand it. why don't they go somewhere and get out of here? they have destroyed the united states ever since bill clinton ame into this in 1993. he is a sexual pervert. everybody else in the country is being held up to being a sexual pervert, all these men, but not him. everybody in the press denies that he ever did anything. i talk to me and say said other i didn't know that. he raped somebody? gee, i didn't know that. and hillary, she's supposed to defend women. and he has -- lived with her husband. she never thought of divorcing him. she lives with a guy who she knows has done that. and now, the whole f.b.i. is trying to defend this woman.

i mean, i've never seen that two people could have such an effect on a country like this. i toss and turn at night and wonder how dish mean, the f.b.i. is defending her. james comey would not say that she did anything wrong. she has -- she raised -- erased 33,000 e-mails. nobody does anything about that. what -- i wish somebody would ome in and tell me why we keep holding these two people up to dish mean, they're destroying the united states. host: we'll go on to mayor yism joining us from eureka, california, democrats line. good sunday morning. you're comments? caller: oh, hello. host: good morning. caller: hello, steve and thank you so much for your service for c-span pbs and all those other tations like that.

my answer on f.b.i. and intelligence committee, i believe them. i haven't always believed them. i'm an old hippie. you had your problems with the .b.i. a long time ago. i mean i i remember when -- well, it was before 9/11, one of their agents got a clue about something was going to happen at 9/11 and he put intelligence together. he didn't -- wasn't able to stop it, but i certainly thought that he was a smart man. i think he was from arizona. i'm t wanted to say that happy that the clintons are in our country and i'm happy that they've done a good job for our

country. and i'm tired of people talking bill at alking about this point and hillary. i don't think that she should be pillarred the way that she is. i mean, even if she says those things about other women, which was not a good thing to say. host: ok. mary, thanks for the call from california. richard, this tweet. trump supports roy moore, birds of a feather. nixon norman joining us from oklahoma, republican line. caller: good morning, steve. host: good morning, norman. how are you, center caller: i'm doing fine. i think you pretty well held your own at callers back that calls insinuated that everyone's just stupid go watch nothing but fox news and i think you stood up for yourself really good. proud of you. host: well, thank you, norman.

caller: as far as this f.b.i. situation, i mean, it's fog but a coup d'etat. i mean, thank god that he won because if we would have had hillary in there, all this stuff -- and we would never heard about it. they exonerated her. they were so confident that she was going to win because they paid off bernie sanders to get him out of the primaries and then she flashed all the money around and george soros and all them communist. 10 years ago, the democrats would have mirrored trump's talking points. needs border security. but now, they figured out that they're going to import their and obama catch and release. they got buses down there. i've been down there. they got buses down there that

load these people up and take them like to minnesota, utah. they distribute them out all through the country where they need to make up 10,000 votes here. you know, 10,000 votes in some little communities, areas will win an election. and if people think that these motor voter illegal immigrants at are here is not voting, it's absurd. i mean, you -- how you get your head that far in the sand? i'm just a dumb old farm boy in oklahoma. what gets me is -- they're going to say oh, norman, you own all this land. and it's you and your little family in that big old house. there's no way possible you can live on all that much land.

and they've got 40 people in one little -- you know, the way that the mexicans, they all put their let's voteher and -- about this. the demographics are changing in 20 years, in 20 years, they have seven kids to our two. host: we're going move on with other callers and comments. thanks for joining us from oklahoma. and this is from thomas. the f.b.i. has a history of m.l.k., liberals and j.f.k. and etc. since now it's happening to conservatives, now congress is outraged. and the "nation" magazine has this editorial. betraying the service the service of davis cup. here's an excerpt. at the heart of the u.s. constitution is a system of checks and balances that was established primarily to guard against the cancelation of power in an executive branch that might tend toward royalism.

house speaker paul ryan is not supporting the constitution. he is shredding it, make no mistake. paul ryan has zero interest in accountability, transparency or cleaning up the problems with law enforcement agencies and the investigative process. he has shown no interest in legitimate and necessary oversight of intelligence agencies. he has never been -- interested in the cause of privacy line. janes next from new hampshire. ood morning. caller: i want to make a quick several quick observations. there's a couple of comments here. anybody that can look at things somewhat in perspective are just common sense. you don't even need a legal mind to understand what is and what's

not. hammering hillary clinton during the election process, 11 days out, he was a hero. and then, which he shunt have done, that was against -- i'm sorry, against f.b.i. overstep there. that's the investigation. so i do agree with some investigation to some areas of the f.b.i. but i do disagree with the premises that they're using. because when you establish any pe of f.b.i. or confidential informants or use a type of system to identify like, for example, you had that particular fisa warrant that could have been issued back in 2003. carter page isho talking to and that's how

they're getting bugged. and third to that is just seven proved the es all fisa warrant process all over again. no changes. so they're just hypocrites. just hypocrites. and i'm actually disgusted. host: john from new hampshire. this is from our viewer north of boston. putin's puppet is in the white house and the connecticut caller is upset about bill clinton two decades ago? some of the headlines from "the washington post." some see irony on the g.o.p.'s turn on the f.b.i. we wrote an excerpt. and next to that from "the weekly standard," the politics of the memo. and quoted in that piece is sebastian gorka who is going to be joining us at 9:00 eastern time here on c-span. meanwhile, "the hill" newspaper has this story at the house speaker paul ryan.

social media users slammed ryan $1.50 pay hike for citing a pennsylvania woman whose paycheck went up $1.50 a week as success of their recently passed g.o.p. tax reform bill. ryan tweeted a link to an a.p. story detailing how some workers should going see more take-home pay. the a.p. featured julia, a high school secretary in pennsylvania. the paycheck went up $1.50 a week and she said the increase would cover her costco membership for the year. ryan highlighted the story in a tweet saturday that was later deleted. mary is joining us from maryland. good morning. independent line. caller: good morning. i believe the nunes memo is based only on cherry-picking. whatever they find necessary to discredit the f.b.i. if people are interested in transparency, then the

democratic version of the same topic should be made public. why is nunes not allowing full transparency for the american people to make their judgment? this is nothing but putrid mccarthyism all over again. and i think trump is a huge danger to this country. the sooner he is out, the better. and i feel what can you expect from a man who is accused of chasing porn stars around the room? thank you. host: mary from maryland. and this is from davey. nine f.b.i. agents have been demote ordinary relieved of duty over this. obviously, there was wrongdoing and illegal activity. meanwhile, ruth has her opinion inside the op-ed page of today's "washington post." nixon tees comparisons are unfair to nixon. you can read it at

washingtonpost.com. jamie is joining us from new york. welcome to the conversation. caller: thank you and i appreciate you having me. host: sure. caller: i want to make a comment if we hink it would be would look at this whole situation under the obama presidency. it would be much different. president obama was held to such a high standard that and it seems like this president is just continues to lower the bar and think that it's ok to completely insult, you know, the the very foundation of our constitution. and that this russia thing, it's very frightening. and i think that people really need to think about the fact that russia is not looking out for our best interests and that they're very much involved in our election system and that's a serious problem. i appreciate you having me on

host: thank you. coming up, steven clemons of "atlantic magazine". the president's and the president's state of the union and betsy woodruff of the "daily beast" will join us to talk more about the memo. cindy from fort worth, texas. you're next. your comments on the justice department, the f.b.i., do you till trust these two agencies? caller: yes, i actually do. you know, i think people need to remember that trump is the one that appointed rosenstein and ray and sessions and i think rosenstein is probably the only one that's standing in between, firing mueller it's just that unbelievable what trump is doing

to the whole government. and republicans are standing by and letting him to do it. and for those people that are calling in to support trump, it amazes me that they watch fox news and believe that everything that hannity says. i mean, you know, you can just listen to them and it sounds like kennedy speaking. it is just ridiculous that they -- that's all they know. and they don't even research stuff on their own so they could possibly find out the truth. host: cindy, thanks for the call. this is from chris. it's funny how these people hollering about transparency and the f.b.i. don't mind that president trump is still not released his tax returns. the news analysis piece inside the "new york times" on page one of the "new york times." the president wages an unparalleled war. congressman adam schiff appeared on cnn friday. >> but look, the memo starts out

by saying that they're going to tell the reader about a systematic series of abuses that really call into question the whole fisa core process and it ends up criticism of a single fisa-and-involving carter page and its renewals that cher 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 factually inaccurate. you can cherry-pick any in fisa court application and do the same thing. if the committee is not 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. you ask the f.b.i. why they didn't commit. but here, they refuse to allow the f.b.i. to come in and testify that and that tells you what their real goal was and that is to put out this memo and use to it try to impeach the credibility of our own f.b.i.

host: from cnn on friday and this headline from "the washington post" at the f.b.i. fears of lasting damage. "in the 109 years of the f.b.i.'s existence, it has repeatedly come under fire for abuses of power, privacy or civil rights. from red scares to recording and threatening to expose the private conduct of martin luther king to benefit from the bulk surveillance from the digital age, the f.b.i. is accustomed to intense criticism. what is so unusual about the current moment stay current and former law enforcement officials is the source of the attacks. the bureau is under fire not from those on the left but rather conservatives who have long been the agency's biggest supporters as well as the president's handpicked f.b.i. leader. the public attacks from the president have diminished morale inside the f.b.i. according to current and former officials. ron hoss co, a former f.b.i. assistant director sea diamond of the president's behavior toward the justice department and the f.b.i. might do lasting

damage." timothy from new york, democrats line. ood morning. caller: good morning. i want to -- the memo itself many believe constitutes obstruction of justice and they need to diet devin nunes and others -- indict devin nunes and others. host: john is our last caller. good morning. caller: i'm still waiting to hear what all the evidence is about the russian involvement. the only thing they've produced is that there's been $100,000 worth of facebook ads. i mean, there's got to be more than that. and furthermore on the f.b.i., no, i don't trust them. they have a long, long history of interfering with people's private things, ruby ridge, martin luther king, etc., etc.,

etc. i'm just waiting to -- i'm a little disappointed in the memo but it's just a tip of the iceberg. they really need to bring in additional people to see what the evidence from these fisa courts and that's really the problem areas. but these courts having secret courts, secret judges, secret evidences -- evidence, i mean, that's the problem. we need to get rid of those things. we need transparency. let's see what's really going on behind the scenes. host: from california, john, a republican line. thanks for the call. coming up in just a moment, more on the house intelligence memo with betsy woodruff of the "daily beast" and we'll turn our attention to foreign policy, steven clemons back from the davos summit. he will be joining us later in the hour. we return to 2018 midterm election politics on c-span's "newsmakers" program. our guest is tim phillips.

he is the president for americans prosperity funded by the cocoa brothers. we look at -- kokh brothers. "newsmakers" airs at 10:00 eastern time. ears a portion. >> a lot of news in 2016 when it became clear that the koch network wasn't going to in support trump and i'm wondering looking at after the big win on tax reform, after gorsuch, do you think there is any possibility that heading into 2020 a couple of years from now, you all will be spending money to help the president's re-election? >> that's a long way down the road. we have 2018. those on the policy front and then 2019 on the policy front. we'll make that decision down the road. >> but you aren't ruling it out at this point? >> we need to discuss 2020. and let's get through 2018. there's a lot of ball left to be played this year both on the policy and political front. i will say this though. this president had one of the most productive year for a president on broadening

opportunity and genuine freedom of any president going back to reagan. that's how good he is, this president had when you at all he accomplished on the economic front. especially the e.p.a. appointments and the reforms we're seeing that have given energy independents. they had a really good first year that was impressive. >> what are the big areas that you think he's fallen short of where the network's priorities are and where american for prosperities priorities are? >> they've done so much good in the first year. i want to be careful to criticize because they have done a really great job. bring on them to entitlement reform and to start rolling back spending because that's so important for the country. and tax cuts are crucial. and they did that in a generation, best tax cut in a generation. but we would urge them to genuinely rethink the

entitlement reform because our nation is on a path. even though we're starting to have economic growth thankfully, we're on a path to bankruptcy if we don't make some dramatic changes. and that's an important thing they could do. somechanges and that is an impot thing they can do. some of the rhetoric on trade is worrisome. isthink free and open trade something that is crucial for prosperity and the long-term health of our nation and also the world, but especially our nation. the full interview with tim phillips with americans for prosperity, our guest on c-span newsmakers. please feel free to check out our free c-span radio app and all of our program online at c-span.org. host: we welcome betsy woodruff. good sunday morning. let me begin with this memo. who wrote it? author, therimary

guy who was the driver of the frome memo project, putting it together and drafting it tipping it out and making it public was a little-known staffer on the house intelligence committee. he is an interesting character in all of this. before he worked on the intelligence committee he was part of this elite national security division of the justice department working on counterterrorism cases. he was there is a trial attorney during the obama administration. i do not believe he was a political appointee. p brought an unusual vantage point to this memo that was essentially a time bomb for the doj. it is interesting seeing and of that an alum department being the one to draft a memo the department was so concerned about. host: why is it so important to understand him in order to understand the memo and what was behind the memo? tost: it shows the extent

which the house intelligence committee is governed by its staff rather than by devin nunes. i spoke with a former justice department official earlier this week to set in 2014, when speaker boehner first named devin nunes as the intelligence chairman, one concern was that devin nunes was not particularly a heavy weight on the intelligence matters and they believe the result of that would be that he would be governed and directed by his staff rather than by himself. are doing intelligence oversight, it can be politically fraught, it can involve messy relationships with the most powerful people in washington. you want the chairman to be the focal point and the clear governor of the way that intelligence works. , peoplein nunes came on in that space realized it was going to be inverted.

they thought that could cause problems or tensions. when we saw this memo narrative this amazing new story over the last two weeks, for many folks it was not particularly surprising that there was so much unusual tension between the intelligence committee and the house and administration officials. host: congressman adam schiff has been quick to say it's time for devin nunes to step down. the washington examiner saying both should step down because of the politics in the house committee. if you look at what this house committee has been doing and compare that to the senate committee, what are the differences? the house intelligence committee and their investigation of the potential coordination between the trump campaign from associates and the kremlin, their investigations has essentially devolved into a partisan slugfest. behind the scenes, they are doing serious work.

they have gotten tons of documents, they are brought in powerful witnesses who are on hand for many of these controversies. the enormous, dramatic fight between devin nunes and adam schiff has overshadowed that threatened some ways to potentially delegitimize it. on the senate side, the senate intelligence committee, headed by a republican, working in tandem with mark warner, the top has not had that whatsoever. richard burr has kept his head down through this, he has not publicly sniped with mark warner, the two of them appeared together when they are talking about matters related to the investigation. in any investigation like this there is always tension between republicans and democrats trying to work together, publicly we have not seen that in the result is that whatever the senate committee releases as a product

of their investigation is going to have a lot more credence than the ultimate product of the house investigation. host: you have looked at the memo. based on what you've been able byread, was it the dossier christopher steele or george papadopoulos who started this investigation? guest: the memo is short and i was able to read all of it. one thing it says that is interesting is that it is george papadopoulos that is the reason the fbi kicked off its investigation, rather than the scandalous dossier christopher steel put together. that is important because it feels like the memo undermines itself. the memo is pushing this idea ele dossier, which is ultimately funded by democrats, was a key part of the fbi investigation into trump's orbit. toward that end of this memo, it undermines that narrative.

george papadopoulos was the reason this investigation he was and the reason tipped off to the fbi was because of australian diplomats who met with him. fisa in terms of the court, how often do they renew the authority to investigate individuals? guest: you after a new, i believe every 30 days. it is a frequent process. when attorneys go back to the fisa court to get their warrants renewed, they have to show that the investigation is making progress. they cannot just say you gave me a warrant a certain number of weeks ago, we are still interested in this guy, please renew it. wey have to say the warrant had is producing information that is useful to us and that is why we have to keep surveilling whoever they are surveilling. what that means, at least according to the way the process

works is that surveilling carter page produced relevant information that the fbi needed to do its counterintelligence investigation. host: president jimmy carter signed the fisa law into place in 1978. it essentially requires the government went ease dropping on domestic soil to obtain permission from a fisa court judge. the judge must agree that the target is probably the agent of a foreign power and will probably use the specific email accounts or phone numbers that the doj wants to wiretap. guest: correct. it is important to remember there has been some misuse of vocabulary as people talk about the way these fisa warrants work. the justice department's and lawyers and national security division work with fbi agents to put together affidavits. these are basically a pitch to a

judge on the foreign intelligence surveillance court. they can also be extremely thick. it is an arduous process to put them together. additionally, the people who put together these affidavits are career employees in the fbi and injustice. these are not political appointees. president donald trump tweeted, ,hortly after the memo came out that while he was concerned about political leadership at the bureau and in the department, he supported the rank and file. it was the rank and file who put this affidavit together after attorneys in the doj and agents in the fbi assembled these affidavits. than a political appointee has to sign off on them, either the attorney general, the deputy attorney general, or the head of the national security division. one of those people has to give their signature to the

affidavit, then it goes to the court and then a federal judge decides whether or not that affidavit makes a strong enough argument to justify surveilling american citizens. host: we saw from the presidents tweet that the top leadership of the fbi and the justice department have politicized the sacred investigative process in favor of democrats and against republicans, something that would've been unthinkable just a short time ago. rank and file are great people. moving ahead, your question is what? guest: two questions. our democrats on the intelligence committee in the house able to release their own memo that will essentially be a rebuttal to the one republicans released? say: if the republicans they want transparency, what is the argument for not releasing the democratic memo? andt: we are hearing more more republicans say they

support releasing the democratic memo, though they want more time to thoroughly go through it or -- hel ryan, who is devon was devin nunes boss, says he thinks the memo deserves to be released. a spokeswoman for the rnc said she thinks the memo should be released as well. however, they need more time to go through it. it is possible the democrats counter memo will come out. petri -- guest is betsy woodruff. she covers politics for the daily beast. richard, in louisville kentucky, independent line. i would like the young reporter to please tell me who dollars forlions of the steele dossier. fundsed that transfer of and i understand it is kind of

funny how finally got through gps and then i found out that the fisa warrant, they cannot on george warrant papadopoulos and somebody from great britain, a drunken encounter there and they needed more before they could get the fisa warrant and that is when and brought in the dossier then the fbi and the justice department did not tell the judge that the dossier was paid for by barack obama and the democratic national committee. host: thanks for the call. let me take his .1 step further. how did the dossier begin -- let me take his point one step further. how to the dossier begin? it began when the democratic party was funding and opposition research firm that was looking into donald trump's connection to the kremlin. -- wasly the work of

funded by a conservative outlet, but while it was funded, that is not the window of time the dossier was put together. the great question from the collar was who was funding the effort to put the dossier together and how that money got to christopher steel. the dnc paid a democratic , because of attorney/client privilege, the way the attorney spent the money he received to not show up on federal election commission filings. it was not public. the attorney paid fusion gps to do opposition research on trump and fusion gps hired christopher steele. an interesting campaign finance question that has come out of this story is due attorneys who work for political clients have an obligation to reveal the very political ways that they are

spending money that clients pay them. one of the criticisms we have heard from government watchdogs and transparency watchdogs is that the attorney essentially laundered money from the democrats to the opposition research firm. i do not think there is been any ruling or statement on this. it is an interesting and important question. host: with regard to christopher steele, was he a previous informant to the fbi? guest: he was, and that is a revelation we have found in the memo. he had long been a trusted source for the fbi and that is one of the biggest criticisms folks in the intelligence community are making of the memo, that it someone who was the source, it confirmed reports ele's christopher ste work for the fbi. there are concerns that in the future people could be reluctant

to be sources for the fbi. even if the fbi tries to protect them, partisan members of congress will be able to twist the fbi's arm to get that information out. int: we will go to bill theory, pennsylvania -- in eerie , pennsylvania. caller: are you related to judy woodruff? i think this memo has served its purpose for the republicans in a specialll lead to prosecutor because there are so many angles to it. i want to ask you, have you ever heard of a gentleman by the name of daniel hoffman? guest: i cannot say i have, the name does not immediately ring about. caller: write his name down. he was cia station chief in moscow. i saw him yesterday and he had

some interesting things to say. see if you can connect with him because he might be able to help you connect the dots. can you please do us all a favor, refresh our memories and how the obama administration pped onropped -- eavesdro the senate intelligence committee. i remember hearing dianne feinstein talk about that. refresh our memories on how the fbi screwed up the marathon bombers in boston when they put the bomb on the marathon up there. we never got the full story on that. one of the brothers is going back and forth to chechnya. can you refresh our memories on those two cases? guest: i cannot speak to the question on boston, but when we look at folks in the

intelligence committee when it was helmed by political appointees by obama, they monitored some of the work of the senate intelligence committee, that is in my view one of the most interesting and controversial moments to come out of the obama administration. there was an apology for people in the intelligence community for trying to keep tabs on the work that senate staffers were diannes it related to feinstein who was the top democrat on that committee. the controversial torture report. that report looked into some of the methods the cia has used over the course of the war on terrorism to try to get information out of people they had detained. cia and people in the thelligence committee -- in intelligence community were critical of the fact that dianne feinstein in the committee she helped how released information releasedped helm

information about the methods they used, but they did apologize for trying to keep tabs on the work that democrat and republican oversight officials were doing. host: we have had a number of tweets along the same lines, but this one kind of summarizes it or it michael writes that steele was anti-trump for president. guest: he was very critical of the trump campaign. one thing this memo details is that he was against trump and it was known to fbi officials that he opposed him. this is at the core of a lot of criticisms we have heard from folks on the right about this entire fisa warrant that was granted. part of the reason that this so much resulted in criticism and has been so galvanizing for conservatives is that it gives the appearance ,hat a partisan organization

and that the democratic party was able to sic the fbi on one of their opponents. that is the narrative you get out of the memo, but it is not correct. the reason the fbi looked into carter page and the trump campaign was because of george papadopoulos. isiece of context that important is that the fbi frequently uses controversial and troubling characters to get these fisa warrants. one source pointed out to me earlier last week that frequently the fbi works with drug traffickers as part of the process of getting these warrants. drug traffickers are bad people, but often it is unsavory characters and people who are criminals who have the most information that the fbi wants. my source told me that many of they worked with

notscumbags and there are a lot of nuns. i would say john traffickers are more controversial than the dnc. "the the fbi's rotten, close it down." what is the impact on the intelligence committee? story and the comments the president have made seems to have significantly damaged the faith americans have in the fbi. two points spring from that. people should always feel comfortable asking hard questions and criticizing the leadership of the fbi. the fbi has had a troubled history of monitoring political

opponents of the president. we saw that under j edgar hoover. the fbi building is still named after him. additionally, criticism, oversight, investigation of these institutions is important. for the fbi to work properly, there has to be public confidence in it as an institution. the fbi has to be able to go into very fraught situations, to talk to people who might potentially face reprisal or danger for working with the bureau. if people do not trust this institution, it is going to be harder for it to do its job. message from the new fbi director, christopher wray, and tackle hard. guest: yes and are significant

concerns about the way the president has conducted his work. kay is joining us from missouri. thank you for waiting. this becouldn't all of solved by taking the money out of our election process. seeminglyeral disconnected things to throw out. i just want to throw them out there. ordinary americans are very unhappy people. creases on their faces that any self-respecting doctor could remove. i have read that 70% of them are obese. they race around from morning to night trying to supply their families needs and take care of their cars because we have no public transportation. i do not necessarily blame trump because he is the front

man for the republicans who have been obsessed for generations with killing the power of the working class. and subjugating women through forced childbirth. it keeps all of the discussions tangential to the needs of the american people. we have mothers who are forced to give their babies to surrogates after just a month or two and return to that morning to night work. host: i have to jump in. you're losing us in connecting the dots. caller: i would like to throw out that we are facing 100,000 shortage of doctors over the next 10 years and i see no medicalo produce

schools that allow american children to become doctors. the larger issue might be are we not focusing on the right topics? guest: it is a really important questions and i think the subject of what she is saying is a good point. it is also eliminating us to the political impact of this investigation and this story about potential connections between the trump campaign and the kremlin. focused on this particular narrative, have made it central to how they talk about the trump administration. from a political perspective, we know that the number one issue for americans is always the economy. if americans cannot afford health care, if they cannot afford their homes, if they cannot get good jobs than all of these questions are low on the priority list. host: you can follow our guest's

work online at the daily beast.com and she is actually -- she is also a contributor to msnbc. caller: good morning, everybody. betsy, i do not know few read the same memo i did, but the number two man in the fbi quit because he stated that the dossier was the reason they got the fisa warrant. i do not know this george papadopoulos guide, he met this australian guy in a bar. anything democrats could have held onto, they are trying to hold onto to indict trump. tat.s a coup d'e it is obvious. if you want real information, go to info wars, x intelligent committees have their own website. they will tell you the crap that

is going on in our government. there is some vital context that is missing from what our caller is saying. first off, we do not know that mccabe quit because of this memo. if he lefty that because of any potential wrongdoing, that is wrongdoing that will be revealed in a report that is being put together by the fbi inspector general. the inspector general is a watchdog within the bureau whose job it is to monitor potential problems there. additionally, our caller said that mccabe told the house intelligence committee that the dossier was the central reason for this investigation. democrat sources have pushed back against that. they say that the memo's claim is not accurate. that is something we could potentially see disputed in a memo from democrats. the point that our caller made

is one that is -- is one that has been compelling too many americans are concerned about we material in the memo that touched on earlier, the perception, an incorrect one, that partisans are able to sic the fbi on someone they oppose. additionally, this idea that the fbi was out to get president the fact thatd by the fbi also investigated the clinton emails and the information they gave to capitol hill about that investigation was extremely damaging to the clinton campaign. donald trump became president. folks who were in the campaign of the time say that they believe the fbi itself played a pivotal role in the lack of public confidence in hillary clinton. host: we will go to robert in alexandria, virginia. independent line. caller: i think the best way to

promote confidence in the government is to have it as transparent as possible. that would mean making any information we have on this available. i think in a democracy that is how you correct problems, by bringing them out into the open. people have mentioned, just to conclude, people have mentioned what the government did to martin luther king. i think our country is one of the few in which you could have a court case such as king versus , in which king's widow and the jury voted jowers was 12-0 that part of a conspiracy to kill martin luther king and that conspiracy included unspecified of local, state, and

federal governments, and that of 1999.ed in december host: thank you for the call. guest: a point that robert makes are is there is always tension between transparency and national security as reporters -- as reporters, one thing we all care about is transparency, particularly on the part of the intelligence community. information act has been a vital tool reporters have been able to use to help american voters have a much better understanding of the way these intelligence agencies work and the impact these agencies can have on regular americans. that said, folks in the folksigence community and with oversight on capitol hill,

have long argued that the intelligence community could be damaged if the intelligence community is more transparent. that tension will always be there and it is up to voters to decide if they support the side ofon transparency or politicians on the side of national security concerns. host: does the president have confidence in his attorney general? guest: that is a good question. we have not seen strong indicators that president trump is confident in the attorney general, jeff sessions. one thing i can tell you is he is perhaps the most criticized member of president trump's cabinet. trump refused to say if he was confident in the deputy attorney general, who is the boss of bob mueller. the friction between the white house and the justice department is difficult to overstate. we saw that play out with this

memo. very senior people in the justice department, including christopher wray, who is an appointee of donald trump, and rob rosenstein, who was key in the drafting of the first letter that the justice department sent to capitol hill making the case against the release of this memo, i can tell you rob rosenstein was deeply concerned release, memo's however president trump signed off on the release of the memo. opposede diametrically positions. that is unusual. usually the white house has a lot of confidence in the justice department. the rift between the white house and the justice department is significant and it is in my view one of the biggest stories of the trump administration. host: i want to come back to that point. a caller joins us from lawrenceville, georgia. me in onould you fill

the timeline of the steele dossier. we know for a hired fuse and gps. they discontinued that relationship and the democrats got involved. there is conflicting information out there regarding that. guest: this is an important question. initially the washington free beacon, a conservative outlet, was paying for the work that fusion gps did for opposition research on the trump campaign. once the free beacon decided they no longer wanted to fund that work, democrats stepped in and picked up the fusion gps tab. my understanding is that when democrats stepped in, or after democrats stepped in to fund the project, then that money was passed on to christopher steele to put together the dossier. the dossier was not a project of

the washington free beacon's funding of fusion gps. host: is rob rosenstein's job secure? guest: i do not think his job is secure. in the white house, rob rosenstein gets significant and heated criticism. if you were fired, it would set off a dramatic chain of events. the president would be able to appoint someone else you must be confirmed by the senate to take his role overseeing robert probe.'s we do not know who the president views as next in line for that role. the person or gets pointed at the most frequently is rachel , who is the third highest official in the justice department. however, trump could put any number of people in to fill that role and it is possible whoever

he puts in that position would have the power to shut down the --ert mueller probe during the robert mueller probe. host: the attorney general and the fbi director were all named by trump. pict: christopher wray is a who is probably disappointed trump. trump could have seen this coming. christopher wray was in the afterment of justice september 11. he was part of the team that immediately responded to that catastrophe. he worked closely with james comey and with bob mueller. law-enforcement community in washington is small and close-knit. side on the conservative and perhaps trump himself would potentially have been able to criticize christopher wray as a member of the swamp. the fact that trump installed someone at the top of the fbi who has been willing to quietly

isticize the white house something that i imagine the president could have a bit of buyers remorse about. host: we will conclude on that note. betsy woodruff of the daily beast and an msnbc contributor. thanks for being here. guest: thanks for having me. host: we last checked in with steve clemons at the world economic forum in davos. thes editor at large for atlantic magazine. and later, sebastian gorka, the former assistant to the president to talk about the robert mueller investigation. first, fayetteville, arkansas, c-spanpan cities tour on book tv and two's c-span3. among those we talked about was the clinton house museum director. here is a preview. >> welcome to fayetteville, arkansas. clinton house

museum just south of the edge of the university of arkansas campus. the clintons bought this house in 1975 and did a little bit of remodeling. for the most part, the house is entirely original to 1931. this isthe living room, the famous room where bill clinton and hillary rodham clinton were married in front of this window in 1975. bill bought this house while hillary was out of town and surprised her with it. she came back from visiting a friend to the family for six weeks and he said i bought that house you thought was pretty and now you have to marry me, i cannot live there alone, and she said yes. it was the third try. the clintons had only 10 guests here for their wedding. it was the two of them and a couple of close friends and family and that was it. very modest. fayetteville, arkansas, the c-span cities tour and check

it out online anytime at iestour.rg/cit >> tonight on q&a, and author mans about his book "the from the train." >> many of the crimes happened within 100 yards of the railroad tracks and one of the things that helps us identify his crime as opposed to somebody else's as it usually happens at the intersection of two railroad tracks. it is at the intersection of two railroad tracks because he knew he had to get out, after he committed his crime he had to get out of town before dawn. he did not want to be stranded there waiting for a train to come through. being at the intersection of multiple railroad tracks gave him more opportunities to get out of town before the crime was discovered. c-span'st at 8:00 on

"q&a." "washington journal" continues. host: we welcome back steve clemons from the world economic forum in davos, switzerland. how was the u.s. and the president viewed at that gathering? guest: i think it was mixed views. i interviewed a bunch of people and they said donald trump's presentation was appealing. his national economic adviser was largely responsible for his speech. a good chunk of the audience said he is back on our wavelength. another bit of the audience was disappointed because they do not feel they got the donald trump they paid for. there is that hamilton play where they say they want in the room when stuff happens, they want to be in the room when trump happens, which means more of the content first trump, the

one who was dismissive of the international order. they got a very pleasant trump, and as the former state secretary of singapore told me, we were hoping for the edgy trump. this wasn't -- this was a rational, middle-of-the-road speech. host: there is tuesday trump and thursday trump. guest: lindsey graham coined this term for tuesday trumping the work with everybody trump and thursday trump being, something happened and he got nasty. host: i want to ask you about nato. at a meeting with reporters at the white house the president said nato is stronger because of the pressure i put on the organization. how to nato leaders view the u.s. and the president? guest: on the surface, many want to pretend that there is nothing wrong with the nato relationship, and that the u.s. role within writ -- within nato is as solid as ever.

if you talk with anyone of the leaders offline, even those are the most stalwart supporters of the united states, they are disappointed in the doubts that have been created in the relationship and they look particularly at president trump's initial speech at the nato 9/11 anniversary in putting , 9/11 statue in brussels refused to stand by article 5. corrected that, but article five is the one for all and all for one clause. that has created doubt in the minds of many nato leaders. when you havethat doubt in the most trusted relationships you have, that creates real problems and that is not a strong relationship. i think russia senses that shakiness. of the president's points is that the u.s. has paid

a disproportional amount tomato. guest: he is right. but so did barack obama say that . the fact is that many nations are beginning to get back into the line and you can argue that president trump has had some impact on that. threatening to walk away or threatening not to be there when russian brigades and russian troops coming up to the borders of eastern europe, or dissecting countries as we saw in ukraine, not nato members but near nato members. when kind of pressures they come down, and not see a robust resilience of the american promise to secure nato is something that would cause a lot of concern. i would give him some credit for putting more pressure but not being unique in that hearing this has been a consistent position of both republican and democratic administrations. host: the so-called special

relationship, winston churchill -- and fdr, george bush and tony blair, to we have that with theresa may? guest: we do not. she was worried about classified information being leaked out about a terrorist incident in happened, whot those perpetrators may have been, and donald trump speaking out about that publicly, that was one of the straws that hit the camels back. i think issues with regard to donald trump's tweeting out hate group material from britain was another thing that crossed theresa may. more broadly than that, i think theresa may has been trying -- like many leaders, i admire many leaders -- donald trump is not trying to be barack obama. he is trying to take america first seriously. they say it does not mean

america alone, but there is a stridency in that posture that might be useful. i do not find it useful, but it may be useful in some ways in reorienting the way the world need stop right. maybe it does not make sense to rakedhe united states into a lot of relationships that have been the way they have been for generations and out donald trump and shaking those up. he is clearly doing that with the u.k. relationship even though every key world leader tries to show that it is in lockstep with united states. theresa may does not want to have a rift with donald trump. angela merkel doesn't want to have a rift with donald trump. the prime minister of japan does not want a rift. they gave him a golf club. all of that is good but it does not mask the fact that there is instability in donald trump's decisions and that is creating a lot of grief for allies, whether they are like the u.k. or japan,

which should be the most solid we have in the world. host: the french president will be the first state dinner visit by this president. guest: that is an interesting thing that has evolved. ,e all remember the handshake the emmanuel macron and trump-pence shake, emmanuel macron being the first leader to get the better of trump. nesse is been a testin between france and trump. barack obama, when he was president, there go to partners were the leaders in france. we would do things in the world collectively, together. whether that was taking down libya or being engaged in fighting terror issues. that triangular relationship does not exist to the same

degree it once did. emmanuel macron kind of failed todavos, but he is trying say do not worry if the united states is walking away from a lot of its transnational commitments on climate or protecting the global trading order. weanuel macron was saying are the democracy, we are going to stand by western values, we are going to stand by what we need to do and climate change. gave a 70ely he minute long speech that should've been 15 minutes or 20 and lost a lot of people in the message. you can see emmanuel macron reaching for the ring to replace the united states as the definer of the next big set of goals and objectives. i do not think he succeeded, but it is interesting that we tried to host: -- host: one other comment i want

to get your reaction to. the new nuclear player. where are we and how concerned andyou about north korea expanding capability as a nuclear power? guest: it is a complete reversal of america's nuclear position. we have been in a direction for a wrong time -- for a long time of working with the russians and chinese, because the russians and united states have a control over the nuclear warheads in the world. there is been some concern about modernizing the u.s. system. that did not mean innovating in the u.s. system to create more usable nuclear warheads and the fact is most people, there is no such thing as a usable nuclear warhead. what donald trump and james mattis and other people involved, is shifting away from the burden and horror of nuclear

weapons and the implicit responsibility of other nations in the world, to more of a posture that we may foresee a day where we are beginning to put on the table the possible in a more humble and flexible approach to nuclear weapons, even field use or small interestings is because donald trump has such an ambivalent relationship with russia. part of it is being rationalized in terms of russia's innovations with the potential torpedo with a nuclear tip, other things like this. . think it is dangerous when you asked my position, i worry about it. i think the president has many strengths, but one of them is not understanding the deep strategy of nuclear weapons and what they mean and the potential death of millions of people. i worry about that. there is another element here.

part of it i've written and talked about with the l' that donald trump -- with the bellicosity that donald trump has brought to north korea. you owe the rest of the world a deal to wind them down, do not using them. you create a perverse incentive to other nations to use their own nuclear weapons. the deal is we do not use these as practical tools of war. you do not talk about them in that way. the social contract between countries like the united states, russia, and china, and other countries that do not have them. if you begin to play with them as if they are potentially usable, you undermine the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and give an every other nation an incentive to look at how they may acquire them. the work of steve clemons

is available online at the atlantic.com. before we take our first call, i have to ask you, you painted a very interesting picture, arriving in switzerland, heavy snow. guest: 3.5 feet of snow in one day. like asat the scene was these financial and world leaders were trying to get their? re? guest: the place was gridlocked. the ceo of paypal was stuck in his car 5.5 hours. you got into town and you had to get your registration material and you would see the ceo of credit suisse or brian moynihan, the ceo of the bank of america, trudging around, you are not used to seeing these kind of titans of the universe without their entourages and their own presidential cavalcade's of cars and there was so much gridlocked

there, 3.5 feet of snow in one day, maybe some of your use to that, i am not, we are all like a big is playground with powerful people being humbled by the conditions. host: humbled by the weather. , pennsylvania had 5.5 feet of snow on christmas eve. caller: we will go to texas, republican line. caller: i wanted to mention something about the re-tweeting of the videos. there was nothing about that videos that was not accurate. i spent as much time as i could to try to verify them. there were a couple videos showing supposedly muslim radicals doing harm to other people. all the radical groups spend all their time getting as many videos out there as possible. they are not going to be offended by it. the group that is retweeted was

a horrible group, but the british, the europeans have gone to find ways of not talking about radical , whenc jihad is him anyone speaking about those terms is only talking about radical islam. when it comes to england, i spend a lot of time reading history. england got rid of slavery or 60 years before the united states did, something they are proud of your it at the same time, they were getting rid of slavery, they were enslaving entire countries. by the time the commonwealth started on the downhill slide, there were 65 countries in it. i will not say that canada is the same equivalent of kenya in the way they were being treated but they enslaved nations.

just recently, if you were to watch the parliament where they had a group in their, maybe one third of the parliament, talk about how they wanted to get rid tothe invitation for trump visit the u.k., others wanted him arrested if he showed up, i've had such an appreciation for the difference between united states and our true freedom of speech compared to other countries, where they will ban someone like billy graham jr., the u.k. has banned the entrance of billy jam jr. from entering -- of billy graham jr. i think i'm a cousin dennis in texas so i would take i like the way in which you framed the difference between ae horrible things that

weighing of the radical islamic faction has done and promoted and the greater islam community. those tapes do not make that differentiation. that is very important. what you see is a defiling of an entire religious group in the world, and frankly a population in the world in those tapes which are hate filled, and so hate filled that donald trump walked it back himself, and no one in the white house stood by the retreating of those tweets. that is something theresa may took exception to. she retweeted that she wished he would take it back. in an interview, donald trump said he apologized. the president himself took them back. i would shade is good to explore, i like the way you framed it, on billy graham jr. i have no knowledge whatsoever at that.

on the crown, billy graham was a touch point for the queen herself and that is interesting. i do not know anything about billy graham jr.'s problems but i hope he does well. host: mike in new jersey. caller: i want to speak to steve and thank you for this opportunity. i know that the atlantic magazine published a favorable article about the obama isinistration, the question is that in that article there was never any question about the ran policy, never any question -- thataq, the absolute the obama administration committed. now i am hearing this litany of negative explanations of the trump foreign policy. is there a is balance at the atlantic with regards to republicans and democrats?

that ii would respond think there is absolute balance. i would go back to jeff goldberg's piece called the obama doctrine. in that article, jeff had done a serious of interviews with the president. if you go through them carefully, while jeff was asking questions, it is one of the longest articles we have run, and i talked to obama about the speech and he said i wish it had been 3000 words less. reals a lot of honest and president obama in that and i thought jeff goldberg did an excellent job of distilling what the obama doctrine was. it was controversial. it was one of strategic caution, of patience, of not getting involved. a lot of people have been critical of president obama's unwillingness to go more deeply into things like syria, that had there been greater well or

muscle, a greater rolling of the dice and momentum from the united states, we might've had different impacts, that might have been beneficial. i do not share your criticism of jeff's piece, but it is there. on a broader side, we have had bothe on all sides, raising questions about trumps weaknesses in national security as well as his strengths. i try to maintain an objective distance in my view and even in atconversations in the past c-span i've raised questions about donald trump's direction, i've also been careful to talk that the international system did need a kick, maybe you did need to remind allies that the alliance needed to be driven more by redefining what our causes have been about, not by inertia and just doing tomorrow what you did because you did it yesterday. i have seen strengths and what -- and i think you will find under jeff

goldberg's leadership a commitment to objective distance and what we cover and write about. we try to be thorough and try to cover everything. thank you for reading it and keep reading us and write to us if you think we're out of line. here.we are glad you're this program is carried on c-span radio and on sirius xm and in great britain on the bbc parliament channel, where our next caller is from. hastings, england. thank you for having me on again. can i speak to the gentleman? ahead.o caller: you spoke earlier about winston churchill and the connection of great britain to america in more time in peacetime. i would like to quote something int winston churchill said, 1946. he made a long speech to the americans.

near the end of the speech he return,he dark ages may the stone age may return on the gleaming wings of science and what may night now shower a material blessings upon mankind may even bring out -- bring about its total destruction." i think when you talk about nuclear weapons and what mankind might do with them, then i think winston churchill's words were prolific inasmuch as they could see the situation we're in now. thank you very much for being on the program and informing us. thank you. what a wonderful little chapter from norma in hastings, england. i do not think it is just about nuclear weapons, it is about technology at large. about genetics, advances in

micro computing, we are living in one of the most fascinating periods of technological revolution that promises semi-great opportunities for mankind but there are also challenging the way we are organized, the way we see health. i was a very high end dinner at the west coast of the united states were there designing this future and it was a dinner about the end of death, if we could bring the technological capacity to end death are dying and there were two there who said what would this do to social security, what would this do to entitlements? you see the difference there in the fact that between the west coast and the east coast of the united states, and this applies to the world as well, whether you see innovations coming from things like england, france, china, lots of things are changing and we need to

constantly come back and look at what our social contract is. determinism is something we need to make sure we are putting mankind first and putting our societies first and society first. i love that winston churchill quotes, i will go back on washington journal and get it, so two r. host: have you seen darkest hour? guest: i think it is incredible and i think it deserves better on rotten tomatoes. host: there has been a big push testing, cannetic they prevent these illnesses down the road? guest: we already see it happening. it is part of what joe biden has been doing. about differences in congress, but around a lot of these health advances and chains -- changes, there is a partisan support.

another person i saw in davos, was the head of the national institution of health, and he said that from the time we saw on again and off in funding, things are beginning to move in a better direction and these long-term strategic investments and in health around genetic advancements that could take us to new places. have you ever signed up for 23 and me? host: i have. guest: we will have to find out if we are related but it is fascinating to get a quote on genetic markers for $100. remarkable. host: we will talk off-line about that. we will go to rachel in tennessee, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. on thewanted to comment direction of our foreign policy. i am just extremely concerned. i was 21 win september 11 occurred, and to have been in professional work ever since. constant russian

aggression, russian aggression, of encroaching on nato's borders, well, it is nato encroaching on russia's borders. i feel a disservice to the they do not get the full picture of what is going on, especially in the ukraine. although here is russia invaded ukraine. if that were true, ukraine would at be there because russia is much more powerful country. that is not what happened. u.s., andpated, the to overthrowing the democratic governments. and we sparked a civil war in ukraine, so we played a vital part in that. that is not discussed to the public. we also have violated the anti-ballistic missile treaty, we have nuclear weapons in

romania and poland. we have done so many religion actions toward russia, and i do not feel our leaders are weighing the long-term consequences and possible human errors that could set off a nuclear confrontation. host: thank you. raises a lot of interesting points, some of which i agree with. i think the broader question of what our strategic objectives in the world are arbitrary to people. a lost earlier this year former national security advisor to president carter, another great national security voice in this town, and when i would get together with them, they would remind people and how it was to make national security decisions on the knife's edge, where he had a chance of nuclear exchanges and tensions between ,ountries like russia

previously the soviet union, and united states, and how the world has become more complex. the tension and consequences are before. one of the things the caller raises, which i agree with, is we had a neglect, i feel, in managing the russia relationship and identity, where they were, and i think there are a lot of things united states might have done to create a less humiliating path for russia, but we moved aggressively unallotted things. recognizing countries that had previously been in the soviet arbor, faster than russia -- orbitz, faster than russia could digest. there became upset within russia about humiliation and disregard of the national community. one of the interesting people -- isere is a white paper a man who wrote a white paper with a russian path into nato, and that was not taken. you had richard haase having said, if we do not do that, we

will end with a world versus them. right now, you have a vladimir putin, who in the eyes of many russians, appears to be this ronald reagan like, morning in moscow, our time to be resurgence, and challenge global power. it lifts the morale and aspirations of the global people. a lot of that comes from frustration. i disagree with the caller about history the ukraine. the atlantic has a wonderful cover story this week, a deep dive into palm and afford to. much of it deals with his relations with the former president of ukraine. and how that all evolved. deep levels of unbelievable corruption and choices at that time. i would encourage the caller to take a look at that the kind of broaden the to

history of what happened. they're what happened, it is something nations in this era had agreed not to do, and russia violated in terms of agreements with other great powers in the world. i think it is hard to deny that happened. host: vladimir putin will be reelected in march. guest: that is writes, unfortunately, in my view. you have an official opposition candidate running, and you have who has been disqualified, who is obviously the popular challenger. the erosion and degradation of democracy in russia from what it was and that is sad. it means we need to be cautious about celebrating vladimir putin in russia and having our president do that. host: there is one part of the president's speech that i want to get your reaction, or he talked about afghanistan from his state of the union address. [video clip] trump: i warriors in

afghanistan have new rules of engagement. [applause] along with the heroic afghan partners, our military is no longer undermined by artificial timelines, and we no longer tell our enemies are plans. host: what is the endgame? we have been in afghanistan since -- guest: for 17 years. we did not hear why are we in afghanistan? i have been to afghanistan and one of the high points of and we have seen the western afghanistan largely soecting controlled by iran

it has become a mess, where afghanistan has traditionally been a function of the rivalries of its neighborhood. we are trying to create different pathways. i think broadly, i remember one time when senator lugar was chairman of the foreign relations committee and david petraeus was testifying in afghanistan about afghanistan, and he was asked, this is -- is this moving the strategic needle forward and the united states? david petraeus said, i cannot answer that question. i have to talk about afghanistan, and i cannot see how to talk about how to make that work. we need to ask that question. donald trump has not done it great winning or losing in afghanistan might not be the biggest definer of america. i remember when it was said that

we have made afghanistan a defining challenge for united states and we are in it be a non-situation, where if we leave, and looks at lost and if we stay, there no endgame. i hope donald trump and his team and national security people around him realize we need an endgame eventually to create conditions in afghanistan that are resilient and allow us to depart and leave. we spent trillions of dollars and achieve very little in terms of this. spending $120 billion a year in afghanistan and it is incredible, the draw up american resources come with very little return to us strategically and what are opportunities will cost the rest of the world. host: thank you. your work is available at the atlantic.com.

when we come back, more on the memo. our guest is sebastian gorka. he is a fox news contributor. you were watching and listening to "washington journal" on the super bowl sunday, february 4. we are back in a moment. ♪ >> for nearly 20 years, it in depth on book tv has featured the nation's's best-known nonfiction writers for conversations about their books. this year, as a special project, we are featuring best-selling action writers for in-depth, fiction edition. join us live at noon eastern today, with the author of the 2016 best-selling novel, the underground railroad, awarded the pulitzer prize and national book award. his other novels include the intuitionist. our special series with author

colson whitehead is today, live from noon to 3:00 p.m. eastern on book tv on c-span2. tonight on afterwards, former speechwriter for president george w. bush and atlantic columnist with his book -- trumpocracy, the corruption of the american public. he is interviewed by a nonfiction book critic. >> it comes from the same root as democracy and talk receipt. it is a book about the study of power. that is with the suffix means. it is the study of donald trump's power, how did he get it? how to seek maintain it? how to get away with it? it is the system in the white house, between trump in congress, the between trump and the media that enabled him and created and not the in's, a system that involves the republican donor elites, the

traditional elements of the republican party that have succumbed to him, and between him and the court group of voters within the republican party that enabled him to win that nomination and go on to the presidency. >> watch afterwards tonight at 9:00 p.m. on c-span2's booktv. >> "washington journal" continues. host: please welcome back the former deputy assistant to president trump and former national security adviser to the president and a fox news contributor and best selling author. guest: thanks for having me. host: let me begin with foreign policy. in a phrase or sentence, if you were to outline the president's foreign policy, what would it include? guest: there is an informal and formal one. the formal one, america first but not america alone. the informal one i used was, well, it is not an accident we

marines in the administration. three of them, the chairman, the chief of staff of the president, and the actual secretary of defense, they are marines from the same marine corps division and they have a motto, which is no better friend, no worse enemy. i think that is pretty good. if you want to bumper sticker for foreign policy on the trump administration, it is a reassertion of american leadership, not isolationism. he is not an interventionist in the bush-mold or an isolationist in the rand paul mode. there are threats a thousand miles away that can hurt us here, but he does not see intervention in terms of invasion and occupation as a way to solve those. it is a happy middle ground return what we have seen in the last few years. host: our alliances with our closest neighbors to canada,

great britain, europe, and japan, where are they today? guest: if you look -- let's look at the most important ones, nato. created right after world war ii, 1940 nine, this alliance was in trouble for more than two decades. why? because of the concept of the peace dividend in the 1990's that led to a free writer syndrome. too many allies had profited for with theof america article five guarantee over washington treaty that said we would come to their age and there would be in invasion. as such, they did not take defense seriously and spend enough on defense as they had agreed to. what did the president do? he made it clear during his campaign that nato needs to step up to the plate. if you are serious about this being collective indifference, you have to pay for it.

you cannot be a member of the club and not pay membership dues. what happened? well, he became commander in and to have the secretary general of nato in the east room of the white house saying, 2% of gdp? absolutely, mr. president. it is the art of the deal to make people understand there is a time to step up to the plate if you are serious. a deeper message, if you want to understand the president, two things. art of the read deal. secondly, read his speeches. one of the most important speeches is the warsaw speech, not accidentally presented at the site of the warsaw uprising. it was not easy to get that site. we fought to speak there. that speech is clear. american leadership is good for the world. the world is safer with this

leading from behind of the obama years was not good for anybody, syria, egypt,e, not good for the world. american leadership is good for all. secondly, we are proud and we will talk about our as a-christian values nation, the values on which we were founded. as such, we will stand shoulder to shoulder with any nation that has those values, yet poland, israel, and beyond that core group of allies, there are partners. this is why the asia trip was important. you may not have the same cultural heritage, you may not technically be allies, but you are our friends and partners. there you may share not values with us, across the gamut, but interest. one of the key interests is making sure china does not rise

the meantimed in exploits and intimidate its neighbors and is not tried to economic warfare to displace the western model of free markets. buts a three-tiered system in a simple sentence -- american leadership is back, and we are proud of what america has done. host: let me turn to this released memo. should the president fire rod rosenstein, in your mind? guest: i have spoken to the president recently. when ito recognize comes to these issues he has taken a very hands off approach. he may constitutionally be the chief enforcement officer, but he said let them do what they do. i am not going to insert myself on a day-to-day basis. host: but he does. guest: not on a day-to-day

basis. he sends signals publicly. his thoughts are with the ag. having sending signals to the ag publicly as a cabinet member, on a day-to-day basis, he is not getting into tactical issues. should he fire him? best scenario? presidenthink the fires him. he should be removed by the attorney general or resign. this is a man who is up floored in his term of being able to execute his mission. this is a man who signed off all these warrants, we now know, thanks to the memo, which are illegal. you cannot hide as evidence when you're applying for warrant. whether it is a local sheriff applying, or a secret court providing permission to spy on u.s. nationals. we now know the doj and fbi knew that this so-called steel dossier was opposition research,

paid for by the democratic party, paid for by hillary clinton, and they hid this from the judge. host: but -- guest: bottom line is rosenstein signed off on those requests for the lawrence. host: and you is appointed by president trump. does the fact that this began under a republican -- conservative republican organization, was there any merit? guest: i don't think so. the bottom line stays the same, who was working with them in the beginning is irrelevant. untilssier did not exist $12 million landed and hillary clinton's lawyer put it in the bank account. change.ity does not we know that it was fabricated and the twpo most important sources -- on the two most important sources were russian propaganda sources, so you are talking about non-evidence used to obtain a warrant from pfizer

court at the time that those requesting it knew that this was opposition research. that may happen in other do that inbut do not america. i had a chief of police text me when the memo was declassified. he said it any one of his officers had hit in this information on any warrants, he would have had him charged with perjury, obstruction of justice, or abuse of power. law is for a regular enforcement officer. this is more serious. why? this is the secret pfizer court. there is a good reason that why when this -- this is a secret fisa court. there is a good reason we never created a domestic service. after 9/11, there was much talk that we need to have a federal agency to spy on americans. it was shut down, even after

9/11, we do not like the idea of politicized law enforcement. what do we now know under the obama administration? attack initicized opposition candidate and the presidential campaign. that is very very serious. host: should the democratic memo be released? guest: absolutely, with one caveat, the only reason you should not release documents related to the intelligence community is if they endanger current operations or uncover sources of methods. the embarrassing thing for the dnc is that they said for 72 hours that the nunes memo was full of methods and would be dangerous to release. all americans have read it now. [laughter] there are no sources or methods, nothing that endangers current operations. it was embarrassing to the fbi and doj under obama. there are no sources or

memos in the democratic memo, absolutely, let the american people decide. host: our guest is sebastian gorka. bob joins us from illinois, republican line. good morning. caller: two things. first observation, and a suggestion. it is an honor to speak to you, sir. imagine what this country would go out if mueller would and say there is nothing to the russians? .he country is doing so well secondly, i would like to suggest every conservative republican nation, whenever they start a discussion regarding the russian enterprise and the onction 2016, they start out a defense would the questions. i think they should begin by reminding that it was president

obama for seven years and nine months prior to the election that led to putin get away with what he got away with, and once hadp became president, he nothing to do it the election. he could not possibly be blamed for it. he was only in it from november 8 to january 20. i think obama owns it. if all the republicans would remind their opponents, that would be a great thing. host: thank you. great uh, i am a proponent of letting this in atigation end natural fashion. why? because i remember the president said, they me and

will find nothing because there is nothing. it is irritating to him because there is no rush and collusion. if anyone has issues, it is the dnc, whether it is hillary, the superdelegates, or whether it is the superdelegates for bernie sanders, let's have it come out, but to the second point, russian collusion, look at the last 12 months. the pit every policy that has come out of the white house. none of them are good for vladimir putin. whether it is fracking, nato, arming the ukrainian government. of aere was any connection positive nature between moscow and president trump, would we not have seen the reverse of last 12 months? it is an absurd accusation because this president understands you vladimir putin

is in the threat russia poses, not as a global threats, to the andon, especially central eastern europe and are central allies. from thes tweet president upon the release of that republican house intelligence committee memo -- saying it totally indicates trump in the probe, but the russian witchhunt goes on and on. there was no collusion. there was no obstruction. and the word now because of one year of looking into this and finding nothing, collusion is dead. this is an american disgrace. guest: i think the politicalization is a disgrace. the idea you have a team of this nature -- look. the coup robert -- beaucoup robert mueller hired. -- look who robert mueller hired. gotten a team as

far away from the swamp as possible, people who cannot be tainted in any way or shape or form with political bias. what do we find? the opposite. either every member is connected to the left, donated to the left, or were lawyers with the clinton foundation. justice must not just be done as the seem to be done, and a result, the whole premise of this investigation is floored, but also the execution. host: michigan next on the democrat's line, good morning. caller: first of all, i would like to try and establish ground rules. i would like to be allowed to make my comment without interruption by sebastian because these clever right-wingers have a way of interrupting you. guest: steve is in charge. caller: and if i am interrupted, i would like to be able to rebut

and not be cut off. first, i would like to say that the elections in 2018 or perhaps the most consequential in our history because we have to stop and impending dictatorship by ,his white supremacist right-wing trader, and donald trump, make no mistake, is a traitor, along with everyone in his orbit. host: why? caller: i'm glad you asked me that. we had to look at this relationship with the russians. by thetrump is owned russian oligarchs because they funded him when u.s. banks would not. they have compromising information on him. we talk about the dossier, well, nobody is saying that it has legitimate, and

20% has been yet to be proven, but has not been disproven. again, 2018 will be a very consequential election. i am saddened by the pope who live in an alternate universe who use words like dictatorship, white supremacist and traitor. that is inflammatory as dangerous language. as a person who has worked for the president, he does not have a racist bone in his body. the one thing that came through to me most clearly working for him is he does not care whether you voted for hillary or bernie, he does not care if you did not vote at home, he wants two things for you. he wants you to be safe, and you and your family to prosper. that is who president trump is. the steele dossier, 80% disproven? how do mathematically prove the

contents of a propagandized information operation as true? i will quote one line from an fbi senior employee in the memo -- "we know that steele and doll where individuals who were desperate, desperate to make sure president trump did not become president." that is all you need to know about wrath of this dossier. there was an agenda. and agenda was paid for by the dnc by the tune of more than $12 million. we do not use opposition research as a background for secret spying words in america, at least we should not. host: the senate intelligence committee is also looking into this. two different approaches between the house and senate. what are your observations on the senate committee? guest: i'm not privy to what they're doing. i hope they stick to what devin nunes is doing because i can tell you because members of the team are friends of mine that

the nunes team was thorough. they went through hundreds of thousands of pages and material, and they spent months and months. when they got to the end, what did they do? they followed protocols of what is required. they summarized it. sure that they would reveal anything sensitive to national security. it went to the white house to be released, and he allowed it to be released. i want to see that judicious thoroughness out of the senate, as well. we shall see. host: peter in massachusetts, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to change gears and go back to the fact that one year ago, in january of 2017, just as president trump was about to be inaugurated, there were reports that you could not share sensitive information with this president because he was

andllingoo -- too willing too eager to share classified information with the russians. then we flip to me of this year -- then we flip to may of this year, for the first time in american history, and american president invites russians into the oval office without any other american president. no one should make a record of the meeting, recorded, and he has him in their joking, jovial, and he shares lots of information with the russians again. they came out of that meeting with something, something sensitive, and he was on the horn in an instant to moscow to say that that meeting had been productive and that trump had shared things with the russians that should never have been shared. host: you were at the white

house during that time. what happened? guest: i was not in the room. this individual seems to know more than anybody'else, sos i'm impressed with peter capacity -- anybody else, so i am impressed with peter's capacity to spy. what are the facts? judge the administration of what it has done. look at the economy. whether it is national security. look at russia, what has the administration done with regards to russia? runsa is one pony town, it on oil and gas. with the release of access and fracking, with the xl pipeline, we have made russia's capacity to exercise its stranglehold in general much more difficult. with the revitalization of nato and the commitment for them to spend what it takes to provide for security and for us to secure them, likewise. and it is a measure to russia -- it is a message to russia, to

not mess with this alliance. and it is the most anti-russian measure we could take. what are we talking about? hyperbole? hearsay? fake news? or the facts on the ground? the bottom line is i will quote the president and his last press conference before he took over -- somebody shouted, what about vladimir putin? you get the best two sentence summary. in theory, i would like to have a better relation with russia. right now, it is not look as if that is possible. he finished by saying, so be it. the president is a patriot but pragmatist. this is a geostrategic country with the 11 time zones. it is an important country. can we be friends with the? it doesn't look like it. is that a problem? perhaps. that is the reality, he looks at the world as it is and not to an

ideological lens. compare that to the last eight years, bending over backwards. who took a recent trip to russia? it was not rex tillerson. it was hillary clinton, who did absolutely nothing with ukraine. ukraine is a sovereign nation on the border. who did nothing? it was not president trump. it was president obama. a man to be judged by his actions and not words alone. compare russia's relationship to the obama administration and to the trump administration. one last pillow shots, if you will, to this area prussian russiann, -- of collusion. the president said, the puppet of vladimir putin, do not worry, after the elections, we will have much more flexibility. gorka, now a box

-- now eighttor, fox news contributor, from mckinley bill, california, republican line. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. thisnk i understand correctly. the fbi used a dossier that had been financed by the clinton campaign to convince the fisa court to authorize them to spy on the trump campaign without disclosing that the dossier had been paid for by the clinton campaign or the men to compiled it, a former british intelligence officer named christopher steele, had openly stated he was willing to do anything he could to stop trump from getting elected? if that is true, the fbi was

,ssentially a political weapon and i am reminded of lois lerner , repeatedly taking the fifth amendment in her testimony before congress. regarding the targeting of irs.rvative groups by the i am wondering, how many government agencies or departments have been turned into political weapons against republicans? host: thank you. guest: i hope you post this show on the internet because i think his summary of the significance of that memo in one sentence was spot on. host: it is on the web that www.c-span.org. guest: i know last time it was. absolutely. this is not a one off. if it is a one-off, these people have to go. it is rod rosenstein, andrew

mccabe, those listed, they need to be investigated or suspended and output to the hr department of the f dei. it is not a one-off. cia, the ira -- irs, the the doj. the doj was one of the most politicized departments of the obama administration, especially the civil rights bureau. y standby that assessment. -- completely standby that assessment. these agencies have power and not to agree with those politically. . think we will find out this is the tip of the iceberg. this is 10% of what we know just about the abuse of power at the fbi. i think 2018 will be an interesting year. host: what are your current projects? guest: i am doing a series of national security lectures for the national heritage foundation across the country and i have to

finish my second book. my publisher is waiting period i have a plan -- my publishers waiting. i have a plan for stories of the enemies heroes, the they defeated, and what are the common connective links in terms of values between those five and battles, whether -- those fights and battles, whether the vietnam war, or whether the jihadist today? it is a demonstration of why we fight? host: have you read michael wolff's book? a centi will not spend on that book or download anything from wikileaks. i have read the longest excerpt in the new yorker magazine. i met michael wolff in west wing. of seconds,s a man not the meant to give him my time, and i will not allow him to exploit my checkbook.

host: why did he have such access? guest: that is a good question. i do not know who approved this access to the white house. there are lots of series out there. i have not seen the paper trail. it is a good question is if you look at the previous book he published, not only was it generally bad the receipt, 13 individuals quoted in that book by michael wolff demanded he retract the quotes because they did not reflect reality, and now we know the same thing has happened with fire and theory, blair, thethan tony former prime minister, as soon as the book came out, denied ever saying anything of the sort to michael wolff, as he quoted him in the book. it is just a charlatan's work. host: we would go to tim in ohio. democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you?

host: find, thank you. guest: good. caller: i have the comment to say that i really tried to look at things logically and not emotionally, but with the trump thing, it is easy to figure out what ever he is accusing somebody else of doing, that is what he is doing. you bring some charges against them, and they break up false charges against you to fight back. that is the personality, the type of president we have. he will lie, cheat, and steal. he believes the end justify the means, and he doesn't scare the hell after me. as far as fox news, come on, man. talk about fake news. fox news owns that category. i watch it because it is comical. ilife -- my wife cannot stand it and has to turn it off. what the world has come to is

where people cannot realize all this other stuff and everybody wants to play the victim and it is somebody else's fault. the reason my life is the way it is because of an set of saying my life is responsible -- is the latest because i am responsible. project think they do what they accuse others of his what they do. remember, what did the president say? i was spied upon. he was ridiculed by the likes of cnn, and what do we now know? he was spied upon. his campaign was spied upon with an illegal borings, so it is the opposite of what this steele said. --is c -- of what thisalle it is the opposite of what this caller said. gets such fewen viewers on a good night.

who wins the ratings? fox, not cnn, it it is with more than 4 million viewers per show. that tells you who was close to the truth. bst: the vice president to a in south korea at the opening of the winter games. he also wants to send a strong message to north korea. what is that message? to have concerns it about the games in terms of security? guest: there is such a spotlight on those games that i think it going the seriousness of the south korean regime, they will be secured seriously. the message will be the same that they have taken around the world, we will, this country and administration, will hold out your evil ways. this is a stalinist regime. more stalinist then joseph stalin, the regime starves its

own people to build ballistic missiles. again, it will be a jettison of the last eight years, and reassertion these regimes must not be given into. a simple message, that we do not appease dictatorships, whether in europe or asia. and perhaps other foreign-policy advisers to the president, i hope there will be a single --inst beijing, that beijing if we wish to deal with this problem in a way nonconfrontational, the people best able to do so are china because 85% of everything north korea needs to survive comes from china. if they wish to stabilize, it is through beijing. i'm sure there will be a message for the euro in china, as well.

host: you came to the u.s., when? guest: i moved here 10 years ago in 2008. sebastian gorka, now with the fox news channel as a jupiter, and his second book coming out later this year, thanks. guest: anytime. host: please, come back again. we will turn our attention to your calls and comments. our phone lines are open. we will get to them in a moments. 202 the area code. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. --are taking your tweets at as a special project, we are featuring best-selling fiction writers for in-depth fiction edition. join us live today at noon

eastern with colson whitehead, novel,of the 2016 awarded the pulitzer prize and national book award, including other novels of the intuitionist. our special series fiction edition with colson whitehead today, live from noon to 3:00 p.m. easternt on bookv on c-span2. -- on booktv on c-span2. " bill jamesq&a, talks about his book, the men from the train, where he investigates one of the deadliest serial killers in american history. >> many of the crimes happened within 100 yards of the railroad tracks. one of the things that helps us crime, as opposed to somebody else's, is it usually happens at the intersection of two railroad tracks. and it is at the intersection of

two railroad tracks 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 to hop on, a train so at the intersection of multiple railroad tracks gave him more opportunities to get out of town before the crime was discovered. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." >> "washington journal" continues. remaining 15 minutes, our phone lines are open. here are headlines outside of washington, d.c. from the arkansas democrat gazette, the fbi memo clears and the president declares, he will be watching the game this evening in florida. from the connecticut post, a look at the state of the union address and questions on a $1.7 trillion investment in

infrastructure. a democratic senator is calling the fantasy. shoe the snow globe, it is super sunday, the coldest super bowl on record. temperatures below freezing. that's get your phone calls. from bloomington, indiana, democrat's line, good morning. caller: i wanted to comment that i think people really need to wake up. in thingss interested for himself. putin, andorking for everybody in there, they are destroying our country. people should be waking up and getting out there and getting mad about it. this is getting ridiculous.

he is trying to say he is innocent, but he is not. i thank you. host: from indiana. from the l.a. times, the newness memo promises -- the nunes memo promises much and deliver something credible, available on the website. here is an excerpt -- even if it is taken that face value, it is not show it is illegitimate. anna is joining us. caller: good morning.

how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: the first i want to say is i used to be a democrat for 28 years, but i realized the democratic party has been hijacked by the communists, socialists, progressives, it is no longer the party of jfk, my parents and grandparents. stay in theonger democratic party. i do want to say that as a federal employee, i know the regulations, and i cannot go out and set up a private server to do that government business, and when i asked her to know where that information by the department of justice, and i destroy that information, i believe that is called destruction of evidence. i would in jail. i would eat in jail. i do not care what side of the defense you are on, or the democrat, republican or

we are a nation of laws, and we have to stop this greed and corruption within our government. laws apply to everybody. hillary clinton is not exempt from the law. host: this is from the nation magazine, and editorial betraying the constitution in the service of donald trump, in reference to house speaker paul of the u.s. heart constitution, it is a system of checks and balances established against the concentration of power in an executive ranch that may lean towards -- host: emily from san francisco,

republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. thest wanted to correct last caller. she does not mention the fact that the dnc or fbi had fired the spy from britain because they found him not credible, and he was flying with everything he did. campaign for hillary clinton's campaign was alleged to the dossier to the fisa courts, they never mentioned that this man was a spy, that he was not credible, and had fired. they had checks were they paid them.67,000 to work for

this is a terrible situation. we need an independent counsel to investigate, as the man said, so many of the departments in where it has been taken over by the left, and we had to find out where this is going because it could be dangerous for our next election. one thing i ask, if you please tell the people what communism is like. tell them about the people on top, which even today, -- and wait inis is the people line to eat. in venezuela today, people are eating their animals. in north korea, they are eating dirt. communism is a danger to the world. that is globalism, it is the same thing as what happens with climate change. that came from the russian, and

the russian communist and the world communist because gorbachev came here to san francisco to work on climate change. few minutesy have a left and a lot of people want to weigh in. an update on the story that we mentioned at the top of the program, two people are killed and 70 others suffering serious injuries after an amtrak train collided with a freight train. it was on the south side of columbia, south carolina, at about 2:39 this morning, marking this as the second train involving in amtrak train. the other in virginia, as members of the republican house and senate were headed to the green briar in west virginia for that republican summons that wrapped up friday. this is from robert charles of the fox news channel, that trump's rights, he and his campaign were victims of political attacks by the justice department and fbi. it turns out the aligned

chairman of the house chairman committee is one of the most daring whistleblowers in modern american history. you can read the essay at foxnews.com. john, ime, florida, republican line -- miami, florida, republican line. good morning. caller: i am not a lawyer or c.p.a., but i do not understand how we can hire the best man in the country to run our country, and we are $21 million in debt. most people do not even understand. yet, trump comes in as a businessman because the country should be run like a business, and he has tried to do his best, and that think there are so many people against them because some of the republicans and democrats do not want him in there. they do not want him to upset their crazy train. have a tremendous amount of

roads and bridges, and anything else in this country falling apart, yet, we are worried about with russians said read i do not care what the russian said and did. i care about getting this country on track, getting things builds, running a country like a business. $21 trillion in debt if this country was run by honest men who would have taken our country in the right direction. host: front page of the book washington post," the party of law and order, and related to that, the fbi fears of lasting damage. on the democrat's line, dave, good morning. caller: i want to talk about that tax line. hurt most americans in the long run. someone has to pay for all those wars. someone has to pay for this bill. i do not think it is right. if you wanted to be a good

president, people making under $100,000 would get a tax plan, and is making trillions and millions would have their taxes raised. he is hurting millions of people. he took away health care, and he will come after medicare and everything. is sos upsets me, the man heartless, greedy, and i think he has 27 psychiatrists, that he is mentally ill. we will probably get in a nuclear war. host: mike on the republican line in new mexico. your thoughts this one. caller: i just want to thank c-span and thank mr. scully and mr. gorka for being on. i have the memo in front of me. i did not honestly know what fisa stood for. it means for in intelligence surveillance act. that clarified things for me.

on the very beginning of the unclassified documents, there is hpci majority members, an acronym i am not familiar with, but i have something interesting that has happened to me since 2009. i am a finish carpenter and doinetry maker, invited to work along the edge of red square. when i first heard about the job, they told me that moscow had more billionaires than any other, then most other towns, i am was there to work, so a builder, president trump is a builder, it makes sense to me would want to go to moscow to build something. that is the only connection i could see between trump and anybody else, so he is a

businessman. host: we will go to monti in spring, texas. independent line. your thoughts. caller: my comment was about sebastian gorka not challenged by a reporter post memo release. memoemo, he compared the stating how its impact would be similar to watergate. anyone making that comparison is obviously using the most extreme hyperbole, and him not being fact check is a gross negligence of the american media. have any of these people listen to the nixon's tapes? do they have an understanding of the process of watergate? and the president's alerts to?lable to listen it is an embarrassment and it shows how far we have fallen in this type of ignorance has led to the election of a man who is not a builder, who is a salesman, some of you sells water and had a fake university

that was shut down. this ignorance is what led america to where we are today and encourage americans to use online resources to learn something not directed at them. do your own thinking and be an american. thank you. host: mike, you get the last word from east rochester, new york. republican line. caller: good morning. since the risks are much controversy over the dossier and fisa courts, i suggest that congress have the judge or judges that set on it, the fisa courts, and the court records be subpoenaed. made beforey congress under oath. we can find out the exact rate what information was given to the court to ok the dossier. host: mike, thanks for the call. last nights, "snl" was back at it, this skit involving the first lady and president.

[video clip] >> excuse me, mrs. trump, the president's motorcade is ready to take you to the state of the union. are you coming? >> tell them i will take the next car. oh. how will i ever get through this state of union? come on, melania, practice your happy face. [laughter] oh. i wish i could talk to someone who has been through this mess before. >> hello, melania. it is me jackie kennedy. >> jackie o. >> i have come to you in your hour of need because i know how trying being a first lady can be. >> yes, thank you. but, tell me, how can i be good first lady when -- with donna. >> on first ladies have a platform. yours is bullying. your approval rating is through

the rough. theyople like me because are like, this lady looks how i feel. >> you are not the only. jack cheated on me with marilyn monroe. not blonde.he was jackie o, no first lady has never been more humiliated than me. ♪ [laughter] >> hello. hillary clinton, how did you survive being first lady? >> oh, you just tell yourself that will all be worth it when you are president. [laughter] >> but you lost? >> i know, i was there. i see you are wearing white to the state of the union, is that a subtle