do hope will be turned into legislation and we do need to act on it with urgency. to a very much. -- thank you very much. announcer: you can hear more about election security later this morning when the senate intelligence committee holds a hearing with homeland security secretary kiersten nelson and former dhs secretary jeh johnson. --t is on c-span throughout .-span3 at 9:30 a.m. eastern you can also listen on the free c-span radio app. coming up on today's washington journal, talking about the government funding deadline this friday and what is in the 1.2 trillion dollar omnibus spending throughmaking its way

congress. then, republican representative chris stewart of utah and later democratic congressman ride chairman of california joins us to discuss the russian investigation and his thoughts on trumps russian national security team. ♪ this is the washington the 21st.r march the federal trade commission will investigate facebook over the harvesting of data by cambridge analytica. the social media's company deceiving over privacy protection. the required facebook to notify when their data was shared. president trump broke with advisers when he spoke to president putin buried not elected he congratulate him -- not only did he congratulate him attackelection, but the

on a russian double agent did not come all. was it appropriate for him to offer those congratulations particularly with the nate --nature of elections in russia? 202-748-8000 for democrats, 202-748-8001 for republicans, .nd independents, 202-748-8002 if you want to post on social media, you can do so @cspanwj and on facebook at facebook.com/c-span. theyork times picks up nature of that conversation between the american president and president putin saying president trump called on tuesday to congratulate the russian president on his theection is outrageous in lopsided nature of his victory, the interference in the u.s.

election and moscow's role in a nerve agent attack. thepost going on to say wase house said the focus on shared interests among them, north korea and ukraine. the president speaking on camera about the call yesterday. here is what he said took place. i congratulated him on the victory, his electoral victory. the call had to do with the fact that we well probably work to gather -- work together in the possible future so we can discuss arms, the arms race. he made a statement that being in an arms race is not a great thing and i was right after the election. -- and that was right after the election.

a lot of it is we are going to remain stronger than any other nation in the world by far. we had a very good called and i suspect we will probably be meeting in the not too distant future to discuss the arms race, which is getting out of control. we will never allow anybody to have anything even close to what we have. and also to discuss ukraine and syria and north korea and various other things. probably we will be seeing president putin in the not-too-distant future. host: those of the topics that came up amongst others ignored in a conversation with president trump and russian president. we want to get your thoughts on the nature of the conversation and what you think about it. 202-748-8000 for democrats, 202-748-8001 for republicans. independents 202-748-8002. not the first time this kind of thing has happened. the foreign policy website take you back to march 9 of 2012 in

which president obama faced a similar type of phone call congratulating the russian president over his election win. from march the ninth of 2012. this election, that conversation garnered reaction on a lot of fronts, not only foreign policy field comments, but members of congress commenting as well. we will show you that throughout the morning. larry in massachusetts, democrats line. you are up first. what do you think about this conversation? caller: thank you for c-span. it does not matter if obama congratulated this killer in russia, i don't think two wrongs make a right. president, especially when his advisers are telling human capital letters not to congratulate him and he does it anyway shows instead of a grown man, we have a bully and

petulant child in the white house. i'ms very dangerous and with tom stier. host: so the nature of does not matter which president does it, it is still wrong regardless? caller: absolutely. because this flies in the face of our democratic values and it should be acknowledged that this man is -- this is an insult not only to the american people, but the russian people. host: we have to move on. richard in pennsylvania, democrats line. go ahead. i completely agree with larry from massachusetts completely. that there has been a russia investigation.

we don't know her the money trail will follow with the mueller investigation. all to do with russia and prudent. taken by theis so putin called him a genius once. host: if the president had brought up those talk to -- topics, do you think it would have mattered? if he brought up the meddling and incident with the spy? caller: i don't believe he would have. of --here is a degree russia during the yeltsin years and when putin, before he became the longest leader -- the authoritarian leaders and stalin. -- since stalin. russia is an important country

in the world. mr. trump has this knack for -- i was looking at the financial times this morning and now he is all buddy buddy with the salaries. coleman will go next to , joining us from tulsa, oklahoma. go ahead, republican line. caller: good morning. on the russia trump exchange, russia is an enemy and trump understands that. the thing that is going on with the mueller investigation, the democrats calling for impeachment -- as far as the conversation itself, what do you think about

the appropriateness of it? caller: i think it is very appropriate. we had hillary go over there for a reset when obama came in and you have to communicate if you can with your number one enemy. conversation where there are conflicts in disagreement, it is good. they are both nuclear powers. host: so does it matter to congratulate him -- -- the democrats are causing russia to be more of an enemy by all of this we have to impeach trump because he had collusion with russia. he didn't have collusion with russia. host: we will leave it there. john mccain putting out a tweet on his thoughts of the nature of the conversation saying "an american president does not lead

the free world by congratulating dictators on winning sham elections. by doing so, president trump insulted every russian citizen denied the right to vote in a free and fair election. " senator mccain is currently recovering from surgery regarding cancer. line,amont, democrats south carolina. you are next. i believe donald trump is a russian agent. debt putting russia policies ahead of the united states. look at cambridge analytica. alexander croghan went to facebook with the app, where did he get that from? from russian intelligence. host: lamont, back to the phone call. what do you think about the phone call itself? caller: it was inappropriate. host: why so? caller: it was a sham election.

legitimate when he stole the election. he is supposed to promote democracy. ohio, you are next up, independent line. caller: i'm thrilled this morning to hear our president made that call. my sign back put out in the yard that says trump. because he is the kind of president we need. host: what specifically about the call were you thrilled at? caller: i'm just so happy that people are going to talk. all this bad news, most of it is not true. that we hear about russia. i'm so proud of the president that i won't ever take that sign down as long as he is in the white house. host: the president talked about

the topics in the conversation. white house press secretary sarah sanders talk about the topics that did not come up. --e is her from last yesterday's press briefing. >> does the white house believe the election in russia was free and fair? ,> in terms of the elections they are were focused on our elections, we don't get to dictate how other countries operate. what we do know is putin has been elected in their country and that is not something we can dictate to them how they operate. we can only focus on the freeness and fairness of our elections which we 100% fully support and something we will do everything we can to protect to make sure bad actors don't have the opportunity to impact them in any way. did the recent poisoning in the united kingdom, up in the

call? host: mark, in fredericksburg, virginia. republican line. caller: good morning, how are you? host: i'm well thanks. caller: i was watching cgtn chinese and the third world countries are all sending letters to ping for getting think donald trump congratulating gluten is welcoming the new neighbor. i and is and always calls with these frenetic people with their anti-russian and russian fears. they are only 190 million people and they on a vast territory and have their own interests. we should only be concerned about our own elections and welcome other elections in the world. at least they are practicing elections in a democratic way. thank you for your time. host: do you think those were

purely democratic in nature than? caller: i'm half polish, i'm half slavic. intel andwork in army the slavic people are evolving into democracy. but you have the old soviet empire and their old czarist empire in their history and culture and it is hard. first and who was in second place, the communist party. they are still dealing with these issues and i'm awfully interested in looking at polish politics too. in hungary, you've the remnants of the old red. 90 years of soaking indoctrination into the culture. we have to portray ourselves as the leader of democracy and we have to reach out to other

people and encourage them through our behavior and our media to gravitate towards our kind of democracy. host: that is mark income -- in fredericksburg. -- says "vladimir putin does not deserve congratulations for his sham reelection. the outcome is inevitable by silencing and disqualifying any credible opposition." independent line, you are next. caller: i love c-span. i wish i could get it in hd. ,t is an excellent question c-span. if you support trump, then yes it is appropriate for gluten to get the in -- for to get the nod. but if you support america, it would seem like it is a conflict because the senate just came out and said there are things that need to be cleaned up in our own

elections not just from our like -- from the russians. it kind of contradicts what the senate is saying. i'm interested to see this hearing today. pose, do youat you fall in line with what you said originally, are you the former were latter -- or latter? caller: first i am texan, but that is definitely american. [laughter] so it doesn't really matter what the president -- what they do to the president. bicameral legislature and a judicial system. we keep going with the system and it works. the senate talking about that here in taking a look at russian involvement in election -- in the election. looking at changes as november elections, but later on this year. come aboutom --

later this year. an attack on her election structure is a hostile act in to work with allies to develop better rules of the road for operating in cyberspace. the first recommendations are the output on the year-long senate probe in the 2016 elections. what u.s. intelligence agencies have described a kremlin backing link that's leaking of information and pushing president trump over hillary clinton. ow discord in u.s. politics. republican line, you are next up, good morning. caller: good morning. unders -- falls under formalities between heads of state, not an endorsement of election methods and practices. held backing egregious

circumstances. i don't believe president trump what congratulatory korean president. helpede know putin president trump get elected, this should not come as a shock to democrats. at least he did it in publicly compared to what president obama having moree flexibility to deal with the russians after he was reelected. host: so the phone call was a matter of protocol over sincerity is that we are saying? caller: yes. of how this question presidential or appropriate someone is. if they caught president obama's quest -- comment he will have more flexibility. it's in a just and compares and what gl at a. lity.esidentia

host: david in wilmington. question fore a all the hillary and bernie lovers, why do we have an ambassador to russia? i agree with the previous caller. it was merely a formal thing to pay congratulations. they say keep your friends close and enemies closer, that doesn't mean he agrees with him. why did c-span stop the news headlines? if you would answer that please sir. all those hillary lovers are mad this morning. host: we will show you a news headline for the wall street journal about the interaction between the american government and saudi arabia.

the white house gives the saudi royal treatment. the president welcome the crown prince to the oval office tuesday by showcasing photographs of tanks and helicopters the uss sold the kingdom. a contentious polls meant to military support for saudi arabia were shown a sobering image of a khamenei toddler injured by an airstrike, one victim of the protracted war with iran backed militants. the two countries confront obstacles to their ties and agree on new steps to counter iran. it marked the beginning of the two and a half week visit to the united states as he hope to gain support from washington. that is in the wall street journal. the washington post picks up a little bit about the money involved in these conversations that go on.

the 12.5 billion the saudi's were paying for tanks and ships and munitions sold in the posters were peanuts for the kingdom. said you should of increased it. the post goes on to say finalize sales fall short of the $110 billion figure the president cited during his visit last may. additional deals might still come to fruition. is that conversation between the american president and the russian president that took place yesterday, in part congratulating putin over his electoral victory. cheryl in georgia, democrat line, your next up. caller: i wanted to say i think was anlers -- call appropriate formality. i thinking catch more flies with honey than vinegar. i think it was an appropriate call. we have to respect a country

that has 7000 nuclear bombs compared to our 6800. i think it was appropriate to call him. key foreignou hear affairs people on capitol hill such as john mccain and ed royce criticizing the president over these conversations, does that make any impact on you? no, john mccain is still enemies with the president. i think john mccain is a rino. host: from delaware, kathy will be next. republican line. caller: good morning. my question is i am concerned about or worried about a phone call to properly elected head of state when the obama administration and hillary clinton sold uranium to these

people. if you are not looking at the ridiculousness of the two issues, it just boggles the mind. the only way you're going to get the truth about what's going on in this government is from donald trump. because if you're going to keep looking at the newspaper articles and washington post, the new york times, who have an agenda and it's not to promote presidency, you will not ever get to the truth. we heard from donald trump himself that the nature of the conversation only stuck to the election itself, not these larger issues. why is that not a concern for you? caller: because donald trump is the president and i think we need to stay out of his way and let him do the job that he was hired to do that he takes no money for. let's give him a little bit of

credit even though there is a definite undercurrent in washington that is definitely trying to keep him from getting anything productive done. 100% with the democratic party. host: we have about seven minutes in this segment before we move on to our next one. if you want to comment on the phone call, 202-748-8000 for democrats, republicans, 202-748-8001. independents 202-748-8002. the front page of the wall street journal looks at another international issue when it comes directly to china. they are reported about tariffs, particularly china saying there will be terrace on imports worth and the -- administration plans to release the package thursday. tariffs won't be imposed

immediately. u.s. industry will be given an opportunity to comment on which should be subject to the package. andwhite house will respond direct the treasury department to outline rules governing investment from china. final details on the plan including the amount of imports to be had by tariffs, remain in flux. matt is next, democrat line. caller: pedro, good morning and thank you for the c-span radio app. under normal circumstances i would think it would be appropriate to congratulate a world leader, especially a nato member. however, you are under investigation, donald j trump, for colluding with that government to get elected. you are under investigation by special counsel robert mueller, the house intelligence committee -- the senate select committee on intelligence and you are congratulating him for his reelection. , ii was his personal lawyer

would tell him to not say anything. there is something called the fifth amendment that can stop incrimination. ,ou are not helping your cause donald j. trump by congratulating the man that helped potentially get you elected president in 2016. host: the austin american-statesman reporting about those bombings in texas. they report the suspect is dead according to the interim police chief, the name of the suspect described only as a 24-year-old man has not been released. police are investigating the accomplice, wea believe this individual is responsible for all the incidents in austin, texas. new jersey, this is mary, republican line. caller: i would never have thought of congratulating russia

if i were trump. sitting back, listening to your program and other people's comments, i could not help but go back in my mind to obama when he was working with a ron and this -- iran and this was our enemy even though we wanted to think of them as our friend, what did he do? he invited them over here, we welcomed them, he listened to they were able to work out what we thought was a good deal. whether it was or not, i'm not so sure. when trump tries to do the same thing with russia, why are we so quick to feel it is the wrong thing? let me tell you something, the republicans that are not supporting him are doing the republican party a disservice. so thank you for listening. host: charlotte, north carolina,

democrat line, this is jason. caller: good morning, thank you for allowing me to comment. that by to say briefly reaching out to putin the way he has with his congratulations and how he has during the term of his presidency causes great pause. it as fuel to the fire as far as the complicity. host: what connects the phone call to the things you listed? caller: when you say phone call you mean the congratulations? host: yes. what kenexa does -- what connects those? caller: i guess it would be tangential. , he is not taken the steps necessary to death it feels it -- it feels they are walking

hand-in-hand with so many things , starting with the american election. unless putin comes out to say that he has looked into these issues and these matters and he helped the american people clear that up, persona non grata may be too strong but i don't think it should be seen as a friendly relationship. host: joe from washington, d.c., republican line. caller: i'm calling in. , but ibeen a republican want to comment on your people calling in. it is simple. we have a standard of ethics in the united states government and it's always been there. you might not agree with the people you pick as leaders, but you have people who are supporting whatever donald trump does is ok, but you turn your head when it comes to a standard. host: how does that relate to the phone call? caller: it relates to the phone

call, people supporting but they don't want to look at the fact the country, not just a few people who support trump, the country has a standard that truth matters. when you are in the highest office in the land, you have to be a representative of people that really stand on that moral. we have better watch out as a country those who call in a try to be so high and mighty. we have to be fair about reality. host: you are saying that phone call was not appropriate? caller: it is a standard. you have to do things that are decency and order. if we don't watch out, the same parallels and roads we are navigating now we might have to navigate them again. int: let's go to dave cincinnati, ohio, last call on

this topic. caller: hi, pedro. obvious it's a horrible thing to do. his advisers told him not to do this. not to do this, pedro. he ignored that. puppet.tin's this pinocchio president, i like to find out what putin has on him, pedro. is it money laundering? let me finish my statement. is it a sex tape? what is it? host: how do you get all of that from the phone call? caller: because he wants to front him, pedro. this man is a multi-murderer, pedro. this man is a horrible human being. this guy will do anything. he kills people. what does he do to anyone that opposes him? he kills them.

the kgb, on the way back. that is all the mentality he has. host: last call on this topic. switching gears and talk about congress as they work on a spending plan to keep the government open past friday, the price tag for that plan, $1.3 trillion. joining us to break that down, kellie mejdrich of cq roll call will talk about the elements and resistance by some to this plan. we will have this conversation when "washington journal" continues. >> monday, on c-span's landmark cases, a petty the spent his time in jail stunning the law.

in his case gideon v. wainwright come he challenged the state of florida who had denied him and access to an attorney. the decision in his favor established a broader sixth amendment right to counsel for criminals. watch monday and join the conversation. @cspan.us you can also order the landmark cases companion book and find a link to the national constitution center's interactive constitution. andmarkcases.org/l q&a, heal university law professor talks about her book. >> my book calls for overcoming political tribalism. we need to be able to talk to each other as americans again and i just say you are the evil

ones. it used to be that people on the other side of the political divide were people that we disagreed with. the peoplelmost like who voted for the other candidate are immoral, enemies, not even americans anymore. because i study democracies around the world, places like libya -- what is the difference between libya and the united states? libya is a multiethnic country, too. it is a failed state, disintegrated. why? it does not have that overarching strong, libyan identity, strong enough to hold the country together. it was really a colonial construction. but we do. this is what makes us special. >> "washington journal" continues. host: kellie mejdrich joins us,

from cq roll call. good morning. omnibusabout this spending package, especially this week as congress debates. my guess what that is. we have heard anywhere from 1.2 trillion dollars to $1.3 trillion. this is a catchall bill for the .overnment congress is late to fund these programs, so we had been operating under all caps. that expires friday at midnight. if lawmakers don't take action to fund the government before then, we could enter a government shutdown. expecting,g, we are around 5:30 this morning i heard from democratic aides that they expect sometime after 9:00 for bill text to drop. negotiation's drag well into the early morning hours, until 2:00

a.m. we have been up through the night staggering shifts, checking every few hours seeing what is going on. what are the major sticking points in the negotiations, the price tag or the things attached to the bill? guest: as part of the last government funding measure that cap the government operating through march 23, lawmakers also agreed to a two-your budget deal. extraeans there is an $143 billion in this spending bill, $80 billion for defense, $63 billion for nondefense that they have been sprinkling throughout these 12 bills. right now the big disagreements have been mostly over policy. and how to spend based off of that policy. hasident donald trump called for a border wall between the u.s. and mexico. is 1.62018's request billion. there is also the man from northeast corridor democrats and

republicans for funding for the gateway project, that megaproject that would replace the aging hudson tunnels under the hudson river which are damaged by seawater. those are just a few of the major issues. abortion issues in the health bill has also been a big contention. host: we will continue to talk about the spending package. questions --o ask you can tweet questions or comments @cspanwj. would it make it easier to pass this without these attachments? guest: the original process for appropriations was to pass every one of these bills that will be rolled up in this giant omnibus measure that we expect to see today. the tradition used to be pass them on at a time. whether it was 11 or 13 -- it is

now 12 spending titles of this omnibus that are coming out -- they used to pass this one by one. the house and senate with the very on small subject of issues, a small chunk of the yearly spending, send that to the president, see if he would sign it into law, and they would be funded. now we have compressed everything into one bill. because of that, these policy issues gain more leverage. one tiny issue can become the thing that stops the entire 1.3 trillion, 1.2 trillion, depending on what we see from becoming law. process compress the into one bill instead of 12 that you are sending to the president, the pressure ratchets up on every single contentious issue. host: some of those policy riders we will talk about whatever guests.

first call from california, independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning, pedro, kellie. how are you this morning? guest: good, thanks. caller: with the government supposed to be shutting down on friday, today is wednesday. how is congress going to have enough time to even look at this bill? it is going to be probably over 200 pages and they are going to look at this thing in today's? -- two days? guest: that is a great question here considering the defense bill is about 500 pages, i would expect this document to be in the thousands. you have to remember congress makes its own rules. this billnt to pass friday before midnight, they can agree to do so. but if they want to follow regular order and have this go to the regular process and likely channels, it is

they will need a stopgap spending measure, which is what we have been running under since last bill. that would just basically put spending on autopilot for a weekend, perhaps through the recess next week. we are not sure. , when theis morning omnibus comes out, if it comes out, we will get more direction from leadership if they need more time to keep things going in the interim while they get the larger bill together. host: indiana, democrat line. edward, hello. caller: how are you this morning? i have a question on this law. the president keeps saying mexico will pay for the wall. i don't think the american taxpayer should have put a dime out for this thing. what is your comment on this? guest: that is one of the major contentions that has been a part

of this omnibus measure. democrats have rallied behind the back at president trump, when he was campaigning for president, said that mexico would pay for it. it was part of the chanting at the rallies. of course, this is a sore sticking point for democrats. republicans acknowledge, and some democrats, too, that border security is an issue. it is a matter of where they will put the money and how they will fund it. $1.6 million in the scope of the spending bill is actually quite small. there are more pragmatic members of congress who are looking at this dispute saying, or we going to let one million dollars hold up a trillion dollars? that is one of the main interplay's that has been going on on this wall issue. host: when it comes to republicans, how unified are they on this omnibus? guest: that is not clear yet either.

we have a very conservative group of republicans, the house rhythm caucus as well as the republican study committee, they always end up taking a position on these bills when they come out. i have already heard from very conservative republicans that they are quite upset about the extra spending agree to in the budget deal. on top of that, they are mad about the process. arizonatative biggs of told me that he will second of the bill is red, every page. that will take a very long time but he says he has no intention of voting for the legislation until he has had time to read it. that seems to be the sentiment of a lot of these conservative republicans. host: mark meadows commented on it. he said it sounds like the democrats are getting all kinds of wins in terms of writers. i have not read it. what you're looking at with most of the wins are the fact that we are funding our military.

that does not speak well for the sick two 3 billion in non-discretionary spending as wins. guest: let me mention this. representative liz cheney, on the rules committee, told me yesterday that she was glad the omnibus did not drop on monday there was taught during the republican conference yesterday that certain abortion related policy language, as a result of not filing the bill on to thenight, had gotten point where republicans were very happy on tuesday. taking agh this is long time, there are some republicans who are now seeing a strategic, positive value to holding on to this bill. there are some big wins in there for them as well, including that $80 billion for defense. fiscal conservatives may not like that, but defense hawks love that. host: chula vista, california.

democrats line. henry, go ahead. caller: i am a contractor. i have been out of work two weeks because of this bill. we are waiting on his bill to be passed. i am affected by this bill. the 23rd if weon are going to be at work or not. host: ok, thanks. guest: that is something the defense sector has repeated, sectorent contracting across agencies have her. for a long time. this is an annual problem. stopgap spending bills that keep the government on autopilot as leadership cobbles together these giant deals, have created government inefficiencies and spending that trickles down to the private sector. your concern is something that

is felt by a lot of people involved in federal government. if you look at the price tag, does defense take up most of the? if that is the case, what else are the big chunks of the price tag? host: about half of that will be for defense. there is also the overseas contingency account, which is kind of a slush fund that they can use to spend for defense above the cap's, the limits placed on defense spending in law. approximately half of the other half of the other spending will be done defense. because of this contingency account, a little more than half is for defense. the other half is for the other nondefense programs. host: las vegas, nevada. on the independent line. jay. caller: hey, how are you doing?

my question is, if we are so much in debt with these other countries, how are we getting these trillion dollars for more defense stuff? what are they preparing for? that is a lot of money for something that, you know, is unnecessary now. that money could be used elsewhere,elsewhere, especiallye google was made in california, all of these homeless people. here in las vegas, there is an epidemic of is an epidemic of homeless because the house is going on right now are so high-priced we cannot afford it. defense is throwing money away like it is nothing. of thethe major question national debt versus this massive spending bill, that is something that is on the mind of conservative republicans, has been for a long time. if you look at the annual process of funding the government, this is not

something that we will get away from, even of the national debt continues to grow. republicans at the end of 2017 passed him accept tax overhaul that could contribute 1.5 trillion to the national debt. on top of that, we continue to bust the caps with war spending overseas. the fact that the debt continues to grow does not mean that appropriators are not going to fund the government. the budget process, appropriations process, dealing ,ith the debt, procedurally have been split apart in this way. funding the government is one priority. tackling the debt and deficit problem, even though they are interrelated, is really another authorization priority that has to happen in a separate legislative process. if you look back in the mid-1990's, as i'm sure the viewers remember, there was a

lot of wrangling over annual changes, toextract reduce the debt and deficit. clinton come to mind as major examples of this. these processes, the matter how much lawmakers want to put them together, are very much separated. host: kellie follows budget matters for cq roll call. here to talk about is on spending package. you talk about policy riders, we have heard about school shootings and russian meddling. any avenue for those to be inserted into this legislation? guest: there is definitely room for election security funding. that is something people will be looking for this morning. as for whether there are funds to help local governments and national security, federal agencies to protect the sanctity of the election processes. as for the gun legislation, that

is very much tied to what is known as the dickey amendment, and obscure provision. this amendment prevents federal research on gun violence. this has been a main route of advocacy for democrats, mainly, who want to see changes in the spending bill that allowed this research. the problem is the fiscal 18 bills have already been reported in negotiated through the appropriations committee, they were done in the house by last summer, done in the senate by november of last year. in terms of the process, they have it assembled to the point where that is not one of the issues that is of negotiation. voters need to pay attention to things in the upcoming season and political action to see if things will change on that gun issue. put out anmeadows

op-ed talking about the affordable care act, particularly in the larger scope of the conversations coming up about the bill. they say these proposals would snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by shoveling billions of dollars into the pockets of insurance companies which have been losing money on obamacare's exchanges because of the laws misguided one-size-fits-all approach. explain that to the viewers. guest: he refers to these reinsurance payments and these other stabilization payments for people who are buying health insurance on the obamacare as they are known. last year, president trump took action to end those payments. there was an ongoing legal dispute, it was pretty unprecedented between the house of representatives and the executive branch over whether the money could be paid. donald trump chose to end the payments, which some republicans have been calling for.

the problem is that led to an increase in premiums. these dollars, which are essentially subsidies -- he is right on that point -- are used to lower the cost of insurance premiums and treatments for people on the exchanges with the idea that those who are taking obamacare, some of them are sicker and cannot get health insurance that meets their needs or perhapsemployer they cannot afford private insurance that is not run on the obamacare exchanges, so this is to compensate for the fact that there was going to be a huge influx of sick people holding off treatments. but that gets into a larger health policy debate that there is not time for in the on the bus. of utahator mike lee also came out against these that issue payments, kind of fell away and we don't expect to see those cost-sharing reduction payments, as they are

known, in this bill. from athens, tennessee. independent line. caller: good morning. saidestion to you is, you that there was a time when they took one bill and send it to the president for a signature. i would like to know when, how, and why that was changed? guest: great question. one of the reasons why the congress started compressing all of these bills into 12 spending bills into one bill, was because there was not enough time. deliberative process that was set up to move each spending bill, lawmakers started attaching amendments that would poison the well, as people say, other dilatory tactics would slow down advancements of the bill in the senate.

when leadership took a greater hold in the spending process, that is when you start to see a real compression of the appropriations legislation. so it really depends on what leadership wants to do with this. we saw a couple years ago there was an effort to try to move these bills individually but because of individual lawmakers submitting amendments to the legislation that would throw off , that kind the bill of slow down the process. another major sticking point now , lawmakers will tell me as to why they are not moving individual bills, is because rank-and-file members don't have a lot of skin in the game anymore because earmarks don't exist. -- typical example would be if congressman smith has money for his sewer restoration project in the north of his district, and he gets

$500,000 in water financing money for it as part of the energy water bill, maybe he would be more willing to support the legislation than if it was just a blanket grant that he has no idea whether money will go to his district. largert gets into a much policy debate about whether earmarks are ethical or not. they were abused in the past. that is another issue congress is grappling with. host: alan from brooklyn, new york. democrats line. a question that i want to talk about related to the bernie made of scandal a few years ago when people found they had windfall profits from his funds and the government could establish them. the profits were not real. even though these people were not criminals, they were forced to give back those ill-gotten gains. it is called clawback. it was established that they

were never entitled to the money they received. i want to know why we don't use that kind of language to talk about the money received by the very wealthy under the last several large tax cuts under trump that under were created by the republican-led congress at a time when the government did not have those funds, when we had a massive debt already, which is different from the tax cuts under reagan when the national debt has not been spun out of control before his tax cuts. at a have tax cuts now time when our national debt is so large that it cannot be paid off within the lifetime of existing, to me that runs against the principle of the rule of perpetuity in common law which says that you cannot do something that encumbers the rights of people more than a lifetime in being plus 21 years into the future. host: thank you.

guest: i think this gets into a tax policy discussion that goes beyond the omnibus. , thehing i will say is idea that the national debt has grown to a point where one generation of americans will not be able to pay it off is a real in laying the groundwork for the policy debate about that issue. it is a major source of contention between conservatives and more liberal lawmakers as to how they will tackle the issue and how they will spread the pain over multiple generations of americans who, if the goal is to pay off the debt, will have to contribute to the, through whether revenue increases, corporations, individual, whatever, but that has not much to do with omnibus today. host: if there is not a lot of support for this larger package,

what isackup plan to -- the likelihood of that? guest: if they are able to gather consensus in the house or senate, that they want to keep things running and not shut down the government over the weekend. there has been some bricks mentioned language among senate leadership saying we are going to stay here until this gets done. but a major factor that has maybe not been discussed among leadership and the press publicly is that there is a big old march coming to washington on saturday. so the optics of the government being shut down when there is this massive ascent on washington protesters and people calling for policy changes could be very bad. today, in the early morning, we will get more information as to whether they are ready to push

this through by friday and make the deadline, whether they will need a stopgap that will drag us along until the next work week. that thes, factor into house and senate are sent to go to break. guest: yes. so what if the continuing resolution continues past the break? it depends on how much lawmakers want to get this done and how much consensus they have from within their chambers to move things quickly. in the senate, for example, if they cannot get unanimous consent for every senator agrees, we are going to pass the stopgap, then the dilatory procedure could stretch out to three days. we could be here on sunday, if the delegates in the senate on friday. it is really up to whether leadership, republican and democrat, can work together in both chambers to come up with an idea that will keep the government funded. host: tammy from california.

democrats line. caller: my husband is a department of defense employee. we were really confused because we were under the assumption that the government had decided to fund the military. recently, we found out that they will be furloughed again and we were thinking that the dod will be considered under military funding. theye finding out now that -- that is not the case. we have been dealing with front of the last 12 years. that depends on what part of the dod you are working. there are contingency plans that, for every agency. some personnel are deemed essential to national security, others are not.

that really draws the distinction as to who becomes furloughed and who doesn't. as we saw with the last shutdown , even when these employees get furloughed, the essential personnel working without pay during the shutdown time, congress is intent on paying people for that by the end of that. forre waiting for funding fiscal 18 funding for all programs including dod. host: republican line, military, massachusetts. doesn't the caller realize that we have the highest corporate tax, that we are losing our beer companies? they went overseas. we are losing our autos. even burger king went to canada. they cut the corporate tax to 15%. they have a good medical plan. thank you for that we are

talking about the spending package. do you have a question about it? caller: we spend too much. don't you realize here in boston, they had the big dig which was allocated out to $2.5 billion and wound up being $20 billion? if schumer would stop spending, maybe he would get some money to build his own tunnel. host: expand on the gateway commuter rail issue. guest: there have been reports trickling in that gateway is out . i tried to ask house appropriations chairman if ,esterday gateway was out reminded him that he had support summer.project in the he would not comment on it, said it was up to schumer, cory

, ther, and bob menendez two democratic senators from new jersey. that was something of a shift, even though he would not comment on it. went into an elevator so i could not continue to ask him about it. the gateway project, just the hudson tunnels would be $12 billion. the house omnibus contains 900 million. one of the main objections from republicans -- and they had been bolstered by these murmurs that donald trump does not support is that the local communities in new jersey and new york are not putting up enough money for the project. this is a huge authorization issue that may be the transportation and infrastructure committee will take up as part of an infrastructure overhaul. it seems to me right now it is too contentious for the omnibus. we will see this morning as to

whether it's included. tunnels, which carry all of these commuters across new york and new jersey, were to crumble or close down, the economic impact of that would be massive. some lawmakers said that would trigger a recession in the northeast. movement of the people in the subways is not just about them. tose people then still on the roads, snarling traffic for commuters. it is really a question of whether lawmakers can fund this say thebefore they tunnel can be filled before 2030. host: one more call. esperanza from miami beach. independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. some of these extensions, like

, itmilitary, the wall shouldn't have been. we are trying to control the people that come to this country. it costs a lot of money. planned parenthood should not be paid by taxpayers. whoever was to approve the abortion, they should pay for planned parenthood. but the military, yes, absolutely, we have to pay for the military. put up the technology, everything that has to do with the military. guest: i think this is just another example of why crushing all of these issues into one bill really muddles the conversation, and does that give the american people or the individual representatives real

time to have a deliberative conversation about everyone of those issues. abortion, immigration. the immigration issue is not just the wall, it is also how many detention beds we will pay for, as deportations have gone up. there is a myriad number of issues that will not get the airtime that many constituents want because this bill will be crushed into one piece of legislation. host: walk us through a timeline from today on. omnibuse are hoping for to be filed sometime this morning. then that will end up in the hands of lawmakers who will then assess what their level of support is for it. if it is truly a bipartisan package. if it is, that means all four corners, democrats, republicans, house, senate have signed off on it.

before that, the rules committee needs to meet to ready that legislation for floor consideration. i will be watching rules today. that is among my favorite committees. then after it gets through rules, they will set of a rule for consideration on it. they could consider it today. then it goes on to the senate. then the senate has to decide, are they going to agree by unanimous consent, is every senator going to agree to allow procedures for the bill? seems not likely. if that is the case we could see a stopgap continuing resolution may be moved faster than on the bus. there are a lot of moving pieces. we don't know this morning. watchesllie mejdrich the budget for cq roll call. thank you so much for your time. for the next half hour, we will give you a chance to comment, if

you did not get a chance in the first half hour about that phone conversation between president trump and the russian president. president trump congratulating him on his reelection. we want to get your thoughts on whether it's appropriate, if it matters. we will take those calls when "washington journal close and continues. this sunday, on 1958, america presidentialhe election of 1968 began with a presidential candidates. by the end, the sitting robertnt bowed out, kennedy was assassinated, and television was dominated by clashes with police, and richard nixon won a decisive victory. joining us on the program, pat

buchanan, who served under presidents nixon and reagan. and barbara perry, director of presidential studies and codirector of the oral presidential program. 8:30 a.m. sunday at eastern on washington journal and on american history tv on c-span3. monday on c-span's landmark cases, clarence earl gideon was a petty paper spent his time in jail studying the law. in his case gideon v. wainwright, he challenged the state of florida which had denied him access to an attorney . the supreme court's unanimous decision in his favor established a broader sixth amendment right to counsel for alleged criminals. watch monday and join the conversation. @cspan.s

there are resources on our website for background resources on each case. or you can order the landmark cases book. .o to c-span.org host: here is how you can give us your thoughts on the conversation that took was between president trump and russian president putin. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8001, republicans. .ndependents, (202) 748-8002 you can also tweak your thoughts. from the white house yesterday, here is president trump talking about the phone call. putincall with president and congratulated him with his electoral victory. the call have to do also with probablythat we will

get together in the not-too-distant future so that we can discuss arms, the arms race. as you know, he made a statement that being in an arms race is not a great thing. that was one of the first statements he made. we are spending $700 billion this year, our military. we are going to remain stronger than any other nation in the world by far. we had a very good call. i suspect we will be meeting in the not-too-distant future to discuss the arms race, which is getting out of control, but we will never allow anybody to have anything even close to what we have. and also to discuss ukraine and syria and north korea, and various other things. we will bebably seeing president putin in the not-too-distant future. host: host: that is the president from yesterday.

aside from the phone lines, if you want to express your thoughts on this phone call, you can go to our facebook page. we have a poll to participate in. not scientific in nature, but those participating, when asked about the appropriateness of that phone call, when it comes to congratulating president went 32% saying it was appropriate, 68% saying no, it was not. you can also leave comments. about 350 people doing so on facebook. on the phone lines, judy is up first, alabama. independent line. callr: regarding trump's to vladimir putin, when i heard this, i thought it was a joke off of something like the onion or saturday night live. it is absolute dereliction of duty for a commander in chief or

anybody in the united states of america to pick up a telephone and congratulate a murderous, who is by 17ator intelligence agencies in the united states of america, has murdered numerous foes who are simply reporters, members of the russian public. the president apparently fancies himself to be some sort of war hero. , withccain, god bless him a lot of guts and real valor, chimed in yesterday and said exactly that. this is a dereliction to the highest degree. warought jim webb, another hero, retired senator of virginia -- these are men are real character and valor who served our nation, did not run away as draftdodgers during the vietnam war, citing some bogus reason like bone spurs.

they serve their nation, fought bravely, risking their lives. they have both said that what this president is doing is not leading us as a real commander in chief. for whatever reason, he has found a way to buddy up with vladimir putin. we will find out why. could it be business deals over 30 years? the family's investments? could it be that he is just a show off? it is a dereliction of duty as commander. host: the caller mentioning former senator jim webb. he was on the program this past sunday as part of our series looking at the major events of 1968. if you want to see his thinking on some of those topics, you can go to c-span.org. the caller also mentioned john mccain putting out a tweet about the president's phone call. there is the tweet in part that says an american president does not lead of free world by congratulating dictators on winning sham elections. lewis in rogersville, tennessee.

republican line. caller: good morning. hope you are having a good day. i would like to say, the last caller sounded like one of the panelists on cnn. i think everyone needs to take a and giveth and backup the president some room to work. he has been bombarded constantly , day after day, minute after minute, 24/7. his congratulation to groton, there has to be a dialogue somewhere. there has to be participation. put our head in the sand like so many, john mccain, lindsey graham, they are back and forth. they would rather go to war with russia. they have made it clear. time to back the

president. he is doing wonderful things that so many people don't want to even comment on, much less give him credit for. host: that is lewis in tennessee. the topic of war powers in the new york times this morning. he writes the senate rejected a bipartisan effort to halt military support for the saudi led bombing in yemen as lawmakers from both parties declined on tuesday to support a rare attempt to limit the president's war powers. the resolution which brought together republicans and the democrats brought together an unusual sight on the senate floor. over the extent of the use of force abroad and congress's role in doing so. by a vote of 55-44, the measure was referred back to the senate foreign relations committee for further debate. the trump administration sent pentagon officials to capitol hill last week to make the case

in a classified briefing that the measure was misguided and could do lasting damage to the united states relationship with a key arab ally, saudi arabia. you read earlier that saudi arabia leadership was in town with dialogue in the white house. charles is next, democrats line. silver spring, maryland. caller: good morning. it was a bad idea to make the call. why would you congratulate the president of a country which is actively trying to undermine your democracy? number one. number two, the president was specifically advised by his national security council to not place a congratulatory call to the dictator, yet the president did. on the outs, i think. host: independent line, erie, pennsylvania.

we will hear from mike. caller: of course it is always appropriate to congratulate your boss on his successes. ridiculousolutely that he would go ahead and congratulate a guy that we have sanctions on. oil and theys on have a lot of oil and they want to buddy up with china. we are at war with them. if you don't think we are at war with them, you have not been awake for the past 40 years. host: democrats line, gary is next. indiana. caller: good morning. , it does noto say seem like a trustworthy proposition to me. it seems to lend further credence to the collusion talks, i think. you talk about two people

getting together and doing the same things, that is just another example. president obama, in his intimate wisdom, was right in his judgment of vladimir putin. on with this thing goes mr. trump, you can see why. is, to put it in simplest terms, it is scary. they don't want anything good for the american people. to establish a hitler's-like dictatorship. host: that is gary in indiana. we will continue with your thoughts about this phone call. (202) 748-8000, democrats. .epublicans, (202) 748-8001 independents, (202) 748-8002.

two members of president trump's cabinet on capitol hill yesterday, one of those was the education secretary, betsy devos appeared before the appropriations committee. a story this morning about that testimony, saying she went before a house appropriations subcommittee tuesday not long after a student opened fire at great mills high in maryland, 70 miles south of the capital where two students were injured. she talked about topics including gun safety, saying that we are moving beyond the platitudes of this point, students lives are on the line. incident.out the gun betsy devos' role in the gun issue. she will need of a task force on that topic. one of the other things that happened was a dialogue between the secretary and katherine clark about money that goes to private schools, school choice vouchers as they are known.

to see ifclark wanted discrimination policies would be a prerequisite, nondiscrimination policies would be a prerequisite for those getting those vouchers. here is some of that dialogue that took place yesterday. >> will you guarantee a secretary of education that that money is included with nondiscrimination policies for those private schools? >> as i have said -- >> is that a yes or a no? >> federal dollars going to any program -- >> what is your interpretation of federal law? just say yes or no. >> federal dollars going anywhere for education, federal laws are here to. would not be able to send federal dollars to a private school that did not adhere to the full panoply of civil rights laws in this country? >> federal law -- >> is that a yes or no? just say yes or no. >> federal law must be followed

when federal money is involved. >> is there some problem? ? yes or no? >> say yes or no. >> yes. ben carson, head of housing and urban development, talking about furniture purchases. the new york times saying for the most part mr. carson sought to distance himself from the purchase saying he delegated most of the decision-making to his wife and top aide come including his executive assistant. "i invited my wife to come and help. i choose something, i dismiss i saw from the issues." he says it was mrs. carson who chose the style and color of the furniture with the caveat that we were both not happy with the price. if you want to see those hearings, you can go to our website, c-span.org. we took in both of those yesterday and you can watch them for yourself.

you can see the full comments of the education and housing and urban development secretaries. c-span.org is how you do it. calls. phone greg in palm coast, florida. republican line. caller: i would just like to say that i fully support trump: ling putin.l we want to have good relationships with russia. some people say the russian election was not fair. i watch russian tv. . see that election i saw that that election was free and fair. you should ask russian people who they support. they support putin. there is no question about it. thate way, i would suggest some of our media outlets go to russia and ask russian people, what do they want to see? whether putin was good for them

or not. host: you saw the elections and saw that they were free and fair. what led you to that point? caller: ok. this is the first time during the election you were able to see many polling places on internet real-time. you can go on internet and watch every polling place, ok? that is number one. number two. i watch russian people speaking about support of their support of putin. i know we have some problems, some disagreements with putin, some disagreements with russia. there are some problems. think, election was, i free and fair. host: let's go to richard in new york.

democrats line. caller: hello. i think the phone call from mr. trump to president putin was entirely appropriate. licky good lackey should his bosses goods when good things happen. thank you very much. host: in the new york times, this from a primary that took place yesterday out of illinois. tended off athere primary challenge from a republican legislator. it goes on to say that governor bruce rauner seeking a second term in office prevailed in that battle for the republican nomination while jb pritzker, a billionaire philanthropist and investor from a chicago family won the democratic nomination for governor. pritzker, heir to the hyatt hotel chain, will give a serious

challenge to mr. rauner. for more than three years, the frustrated mr. rauner has battled michael madigan, a powerful speaker of the house. in the process, he will become one of the most multiple incoming governors in the nation. the new york times also highlighting a story this morning, taking a look at the third congressional district in new york -- sorry, illinois, saying it was arthur jones, a holocaust denier, described as a not see by the republican party. a heavily democratic district that includes parts of chicago and suburbs. mr. jones unsuccessfully sought the nomination five times in four and his victory on tuesday was a foregone conclusion after the republican party failed to drop another candidate to run against him. "even if only myself and my wife voted for me, i win the primary because he republican party screwed up big time."

we hear that from kimberly. caller: good morning. i support mr. trump congratulating mr. putin 100%. we did not have this propaganda crap when ronald reagan was dealing with mikael gorbachev, we did not have it when bush was dealing with saudi arabia. we did not have it when obama was making -- not him himself, but when they were making deals. it is ok for russia to get involved with our money but not ok to treat each other with respect? it is crazy. it is like people are wanting more all the time. does it matter overall because of concerns about russian involvement in the 2016 election, should that have been a factor in the phone call? caller: it doesn't matter what we are involved with half the world interfering with their governments and their stuff.

it is really hypocritical. host: jeff in virginia. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. on the russian meddling thing, they always say russia, but when you look at it, it is a known meddling all of this originated in ukraine. it is the ukrainian people retribution appearing in our election. there may have been russian backing. host: to the nature of the phone call that took place, what about that? caller: that is just typical political speech. i would have called and congratulated him. would you rather be happy or right? the world needs peace. we don't need to be at war all the time. it would save a lot of money. we just have to find out a way to get along with everyone in the world.

what do you want to do? you want president trump to call and curse and spit at him? that will not help the situation. host: matthew is in new jersey. emerson, new jersey. independent line. caller: it is absolutely appropriate our president want to keep lines of communication open with russia. if you recall, russia did warn us about the boston bombers, the tsarnaev brothers. we do have some mutual interest. by the way, the more the fake news media constantly attacks our president, who is a good man, and he is helping people in , they are out of their minds with hatred. it is pathetic, because their madam hillary went down in flames.

the more they do that, the more the american people will support this man, president trump. god bless him. that is all i can say. host: the washington times this morning highlighting that school shooting that took was in maryland talking about the work of the school resource officer in that incident, saying it was the 17-year-old who opened fire yesterday morning, wounding two classmates before exchanging gunfire with the school resource officer. he credited the sheriff deputy for averting a worse attack. the shooter was identified as austin wyatt rawlins. he was guilty -- killed in the exchange. a girl in critical condition tuesday afternoon and another boy in good condition. one more call on this topic. diana in wisconsin. democrats line. caller: thank you. i think it is a sad day when we

have a president who is supposed to be protecting our country from the likes of somebody like him. and actually praising came to trump from his national security advisers, from people who have been around for years and years and know what a president needs to say and does not need to say to somebody like putin. and he went against this. , start listening to more than fox news. listen to all different channels. i listen to fox news once in i cannot believe what i'm hearing. you are not getting the full story. this is very serious. just realizingre what is happening to them. they are being preyed on right now. that is diana.

last call for this topic, joining us, to members of congress to talk about a variety of issues. first is chris jordan of utah about the government funding efforts. the mother investigation and other topics. later we are joined by brad sherman on the mother investigation, shakeups on the president's national security team. those topics when we come back. >> for nearly 20 years, in-depth depth on book tv has featured the nations nonfiction writers. this year, as a special project, we are featuring best-selling fiction writers for our monthly

program, in-depth fiction addition. first -- mosts recent book is down to the river. don fission and fearless joan. plus, over 40 critically acclaimed series -- books and mystery series. our special series with malter -- walter mosley. live from noon to 3:00 p.m. eastern on book tv on c-span2. our podcast, c-span's the weekly takes you beyond the headlines to explain in depth one significant news story shaping the conversation and washington and around the country. you will hear from leading journalists, policy experts, and -- providing

context. online any time at c-span.org. washington journal continues. host: representative chris stewart is our guest. he is a member of the select intelligence and appropriation committees. appropriations, there is debate on whether or not this spending bill gets done. guest: there is no question we will get it done. it is just whether we get it done today or tomorrow. maybe a day or two longer. i think this is a ridiculous way to govern. when so frustrating to me we start our hearings in january. we have dozens of hearings through the summer. months later, we are presented with an omnibus and told to vote for it or not to vote for. it is very frustrating. it is frustrating for the american people.

we can do better than this. crry three weeks, and other or omnibus. it does not reflect well on congress. was: one of the concerns the extra spending that will be included in this bill. where do you fall on that? guest: that was a real challenge for me. the reason i ran six years ago was because of our debt and spending. i felt like we were committing national suicide. if you ask people how much is our debt, everyone knew the answer. you asked people now, and they do not know the answer. we have made a little bit of progress on that. we have control our spending and our debt a little bit. it is going to get worse now. debt and spending is a fundamental issue for us. as a member who sits on the intel committee and spends most of my time on national security,

we have to find our military. we have not done that adequately. i love sharing this with people. force, we in the air had 157 fighter squadrons. we have 56 today. that is a remarkable change. when i say we have to find our military, a lot of them say, ok i get that. you do have this conflict. the military has to come first. perdition --their their position that increased spending is a problem for us. host: one of the others is appropriations. one of the things we heard earlier was the attacks by the policy writers. did that come up? guest: it does if we do not fund the government. all of us have things on the omnibus or appropriation bills that we want.

it is part of the reason we are on the committee. it has always been that way. at some point, you have to say here is a bill. here is the deadline. let's fund the government. the american people look at it and -- it has gotten to the point where they are not even paying attention to it. there is not a countdown to a shutdown. people just tuned it out. it's just silliness. we have to do better. there are some very simple proposals that would change it. if we do not change it, the outcome is not going to change. we could implement the changes. by fall, wepe that have some recommendations that will fix this. host: this is representative chris stewart joining us. if you want to ask questions, it is democrats, (202) 748-8000, republicans, (202) 748-8001, independents, (202) 748-8002. you can post thoughts on twitter.

let's look to the intelligence i -- intelligence side. did you agree with the assessment that there was no cook -- no collusion? guest: we did not stop the investigation. -- it think the narrative want to fight back on a narrative we just quit. i think a more accurate description is we think we came to a reasonable conclusion. it is not like we stopped in the middle of it. we told the american people that when we started the investigation, we would reports them before the midterms. we have something like more than 25 recommendations that will affect the next election. do your second point about collusion, i do not know anyone -- i do not know very many people who actually believe there was collusion between the trump campaign and any russian officials. they just is not evidence. that is not me saying that

either. sayingenator feinstein that. nonpartisan or democratic leaders have sound we have not found any that have said we have not found any collusion. host: how would you approach more evidence to sit through? guest: they gave us something like 80 or 90 witnesses they wanted us to interview. this was a couple weeks ago. some of those people -- we will never talk to. -- there is noe way the russian officials are going to come before our committee. one of the officials has passed away. we have to talk to these people before this investigation is complete. these are people you cannot talk to because of the reasons we just described. then, the investigation never ends. we are not learning anything new any longer.

we have not learned anything new in months. we are hearing the same thing. let's tell the american people what we know. initialll it an finding. and an initial -- an initial report. this is -- these are our initial findings to the american people. host: on the robert mueller investigation, we heard there was no reason to believe for him to be removed from the investigation. guest: i do not think there is any chance at all that the president will fire him. i think the opponents love to talk about this. i do not think he intends to fire mr. miller. -- mr. mueller. why would he? i think it would be a terrible mistake. i think the president knows that. host: their calls on both sides for legislation protecting

robert mueller. guest: i think it is unnecessary because the president has not indicated he is going to. the white house has said that they are not going to fire him. host: we have calls lined up for you. the first is from utah. this is the democrats line. you are up with representative stuart. 90,000 wild horses lives are on though line with this -- are on the line with his budget because of you. horse advocacy associations were trying to show you evidence that they are not starving. howng crocodile tears about you love horses. yet, wild horse advocacy groups trying to show you evidence that they are not starving. insked you that about that

your town hall. 90% of your constituent calls are pro-horses and against is killing. you said that i know my constituency better. guest: there is so much i would disagree with. i know my constituency. you do not know the people calling. you call them crocodile tears. this is kind of a local issue. it is important. i grew up farming and ranching. i love these animals. it is not ok to start them to death. that is what we are doing right now. we have 90,000 horses that the range cannot sustain. i can take anyone out there in july and august and show you dozens of animals that are starting. we have got to do better. host: this is rich in florida on the independent line. caller: yes, i am only curious

why do we have to spend nearly a trillion dollars on defense when we do not really take care of our own citizens and our infrastructure is crumbling? can't we model our country after other countries like japan who actually have quality today when our country is struggling like crazy to maintain itself? i just want your response. host: we spending about 700 billion on defense. that is after a significant markup. not a trillion. this is the fundamental question of these issues. that is, how much do we spend on those things? how much do we spend on infrastructure? i think the fundamental responsibility -- i am going to say it again because the fundamental responsibility of the federal government is going to protect americans and america's interest. we just have not done that over

the last eight or 10 years. i think we have to accept that responsibility. it is important to note as well that along with increased defense spending, we did increase a lot of other nondefense spending. there will be more money for infrastructure. there will be more money for other programs. i hope we spend that money smartly. i hope we do not just think that we create money out of thin air. that money has got to come from somewhere. it comes from the american people. i hope we are smart on that. i think it starts with, you have to defend america. caller: can't you see that spending is actually going to bankrupt us? we are the only country in the world -- i am retired military i spent a great deal of time supporting and defending our country. what we are doing today is totally ridiculous. very quickly, thank you

for your service as one veteran to another. whether we like it or not, america has a responsibility in the world. we have bases all over the world because we defend freedom all of the world. if america does not, i promise you that china will or vladimir putin will. we have a very abrupt choice before us. we can lead and print. freedom, -- if we do that, what kind of world do we live -- the our children and? host: you mentioned vladimir putin. think it was an appropriate comment for the president to congratulate mr. putin? guest: i do not know it was appropriate and not. i'm not as concerned about it as some people have been. it is the policies that matter.

i want our president to be friendly with every leader including the leaders we disagree with. i want him to talk with president xi jinping and china. it is the policies that matter. are we doing things to try to contain russia? i would argue this president has implemented important policies to do that. he said we are going to put america first. he is said we are going to rebuild our military. he has forced nato for the first time to adhere to their commitments to fund nato. he put pressure on them and now most of them are. his energy policies are the most important sanction we could put on russia. barrel rather than 110. it is the things he does that matters. if he is friendly and gives them a call, i do not know if that is good or bad. i'm not terribly uncomfortable

with it. i want him to talk to these leaders. the most important is, what is he doing? host: to that dialogue include this idea of the russian meddling? host: with this president? president?ith this host: yes. guest: there is note question they attempted to metal. i came home and said to dozens of media that they are going to mess up our elections. i cannot think the president has ever disputed that. what he disputed is that he was involved in collusion. yesterday, a group of senators came out with a proposal to strengthen the election security. what to play a little bit of that there -- of their proposal. [video clip] >> let me just draw a few

conclusions. we need to be more effective in deterring our adversaries. the government should partner to secure their systems. dhs and fbi have made great strides. they must do more. dhs offers a suite of cyber security assistance. we've heard they do not have the resources to fulfill all of the requests. we will work with appropriators and authorizer's to see if we can fill that gap. we need to take a hard look at the equipment that records votes. we all agree that all votes should have an audible paper trail. in 2016, 5 states only used electronic machines with no paper trails. nine used at least some of these machines. all of the security costs money.

we want to make sure the federal government not only says we are partnered but that we are partnered. be expressed as early as the omnibus spending bill. host: what do you think about those proposals? guest: i think they are all necessary. you have the house intel committee and our proposals. they nearly overlap perfectly. there are a few variations. it may require a little more money. there are a couple things some of us are not comfortable with. thatf our strengths is they are very diverse and different. that makes it harder for someone to hack in their entirety. of theseme time, some counties and states have to do better than they have in the past. that may require a little bit of help from the federal government. i agree with them that there needs to be a paper trail. denny's to be something that we

can go back and with certainty say that the vote matches with their intention. no cyber security -- question, it is one of the great challenges. secure not only are voting processes but everything around us that is so vulnerable. this is one of the priorities. host: democrats line, oregon -- hello. caller: hi, yes. good morning. -- i havetive stuart a three-part question for you. could you respond to the ethics complaint that was filed against you with the office of congressional ethics that included a criminal violation of the u.s. criminal code title 18? host: and we talked about that very quickly -- guest: let me talk about that very quickly. i have never had an ethics complaint about me. is one that was

filed on january 24 by my organization. guest: i'm completely unaware of that. it might not have even gotten through the initial review. caller: we faxed it to your office. you might have a problem with your office. host: other question please. horses we have starving and clearly there are 8.7 million livestock on the state public lands that are not starving. we have half a million deer, half a million elk on the same lan. none of them are having serious starving problems that you alleged last year and in 2016 75,000 wild horses are starving. i want to know why they are the only population that is having an issue. guest: once again, that is one

of my concerns -- that it does affect the wildlife. you say that i alleged. here's the deal. you come to utah august, and i will show you animals that have starved to death. until you do that, i am not going to change your mind. if you are willing to do that and come see the truth, i will show you animals that are starving to death on the range throughout the west. your third point. host: she is going. peter, go ahead. peter from kentucky. caller: good morning. thank god for c-span. regarding the question that everything has been caught -- brought to a conclusion about the ongoing russian involvement with our election process. that you all find nothing further to find. amazed atall, i am

your feet bouncing around the bush. i am a veteran myself. i served 20 years. i find it rather interesting that instead of framing the beense process, you should cradling the defense contractors because that is who you are bill will be -- that is a your bill will be bringing spending to. i'd like to see the republican party given back to the one i remember. the one that stood for law and order. that stood up against the russian incursion around the world. i do not know who you people are. i wish i could get my republican party back that i remember from the 1960's and 1970's. guest: i'm not sure you asked a question in their.

-- as i havere said, one of our fundamental principles is that we support national defense. and he said summing about contractors. i'm not sure what his point was for that. one other thing is -- when we are critical -- and this is an important point. criticalport, we are of some of the leadership of the fbi and the department of justice. in some cases, people have said you are tied to the f. that is not -- tied to the fbi. activity thate took place that was inappropriate and abby great -- b. abby grabbed -- abu gra people in the department of justice are the f era by the military -- if those leaders are

doing something inappropriate, of course we can provide oversight. of course we should correct that. you cannot say, you cannot attack the fbi. i have had a number of agents reach out to me and say thank you for doing this. we are offended by some of this activity. this does not represent how we would act. what we are doing is defending the fbi in this case. many of them recognize that some of their leaders have set them that they some things should be held accountable for. why was by -- that was andrew mccabe was fired last week. that was a professional process within the fbi itself. they recognize that this is wrong what he is doing. host: referred some saying there should be a special counsel looking at the doj. are you one of those people?

guest: i am. the house and senate do not have the capability to look as deeply as we should. we do not have access to some of them. some of these people have left government and we cannot compel them to speak to us. it has become too political. on the house intel committee, on of the things i love and still do is that we were more partisan than we used to be. we used to do work behind closed doors. we've become too partisan. democrats line, allen is next in chicago, indiana. caller: good morning gentlemen. thank you for c-span and particular the washington journal. takeessman, i am going to odds that you that you say we have a weakened military. especially considering today's

-- today we are the only major superpower in the world. i don't know if you heard earlier this year, the army has commissioned another aircraft carrier, the uss gerald ford. are you aware of how many nuclear powered aircraft carriers we have? guest: i think i am. i think we are at 13. here's the problem, of those number -- it depends which are available and which are in drydock. our ability to put the number of carriers at sea has diminished significantly. just like the number of fighter squadrons. we can have this debate and i look for other people's views. my view is that we have to be stronger. we have to be willing to take a position -- 56 fighter squadrons

is not enough. we are the world's only superpower right now. at vladimir putin's announcement. last week about his expanding capability. look at china's intention in the south china sea. look at china building bases in djibouti. in aat their investments new generation of weapons systems from the air and the sea and land. we cannot just closer i -- close our eyes to that. they are in the process of hopscotching over us. they will surpass us if we do not respond to that. when last thing on this. -- one last thing on this. we have used up and worn-out our military and our military families. i cannot tell you the number of people i know who have been deployed again and again. . it is hard on these families. . it is hard on the wives and the children.

i'm not saying we can fix every problem in the world. the balance is, how do we recognize we have limits? time, stand up and say we will defend freedom and especially when it is in our own interest to do that. host: lauren from minnesota on the republican line. caller: good morning. as far as the molar milktigation -- the robber -- the robert mueller investigation, i think it is time he quits. we have better places to spend the money. as far as law and order, that is what trump has been saying from day one. he wants to get day will -- he wants to get all in order in this country. that is what we need. the sanctuary cities, they are going against us. i think it is time the democrats

quit piddling around because they lost the election. color.thank you, -- thank you, caller. i want him to complete his investigation. i hope he completes it before the midterm election. we felt a responsibility as members of the house intel committee to report to the american people as quickly as possible, i hope he feels that responsibility as well. host: is gina haspel the next best person to head the cia? guest: i can tell you that the people around her have enormous respect for her. there is enormous respect for her. i think she is an excellent choice. host: we heard from senator rand

paul. he said direct participation in the cia torture program would be disqualifying enough for me. this should not be acceptable to congress. guest: i would say a couple of things. a of those accusations are unfounded. it would be unfair to paint someone in that light without giving her a chance to defend herself. differente a perspective on what was appropriate. i do not think they should torture or ever torture. they did not torture they never tortured. some of the interrogation techniques -- we have had that debate. we have decided this is appropriate and inappropriate. she has been accused of doing things that i just think were unfair, and i look forward to hurt defending her reputation. host: rick is an illinois on the

dependent minor -- on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. my question would be. ismy question would be, what onresentative stewart's take candidate trump on the campaign trail basically called for the russians to hack hillary's females -- hillary's emails. on top of that, the united states would have a great relationship with russia. while on the campaign trail.

this president, i think, as every new president should, seek to secute should, have friendly relations with people around the world, the world, ound especially those who are our adversaries. those an improve relationships, that is good, i'm glad. if we can have dialogue, that's glad about that. the thing that matters is the to cies, what are we doing counter our adversaries around the world? this president made it clear the campaign, he would put america first, he would rebuild our military. it clear that he would and beacon for freedom those people who wanted democracy around the world, he's that.ented policies to do once again fhe has conversations say that leaders, some is coddeling them or kind of

owing to them, i just don't think that is a fair description, i think he's trying to have dialogue with him. call.one more jame necessary south bend, indiana, republican line. last, saved best for huh? christian america, be aware, you war profitteers, public integrity.org does a good job listing the blood money. two biblical cult consist explain this better than i can. james, your direct question to the representative, please? 41, creed and covet covetness. host: thank you, caller. what is the plan if people can't ome together to approve this plan, as far as keeping the government open past friday? days cr, ple continuous resolution would fund it for a couple days while we dialogue.o could i say this, is silly way

to govern, we have to do better, implement reform that doesn't take us from one potential overnment shutdown to the other. host: republican member of the house of congress, thank you for being on and thanks for on the program. oming up, we'll hear from brad che sherman, discussing the russia security interest, that comes up when "washington journal" continues. >> sunday on c-span's q&a, law professor amy chua talks about tribes.""political >> my book calls for overcoming tribalism. we need to be able to talk to each other as americans again

nd not say, you're the evil ones. you know, it used to be people n the other side of the political divide were people we disagreed with. now it is almost like the people voted for the other candidates are immoral, they are not even real americans anymore. study really i democracy around the world, places like libya, i mean, what is the difference between libya and the united states? libya is a multi ethnic country, too. 140 different peoples. it is a failed state. grated.sent why? it doesn't have that overarching overarching, strong libyan identity, strong enough to hold together.ry it was colonial construction. but we do, this makes us special. q&a sunday night 8 eastern on c-span. >> podcast, c-span the weekly,

takes you beyond the headlines one plain in depth significant news story shaping he conversation in washington and around the country. hear from leading journalists, olicy makers and experts providing background and context. find c-span's the weekly, on the radio app, and itunes, stitcher and google play online any time at c-span.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: this is brad sherman, democrat from california, a affairs the foreign committee and ranking member on the subcommittee on asia, on committee of and financial services, good morning. guest: good to be with you. affairs side of things, could you give thoughts on the conversation between the and president putin and more that should have been election.out with the guest: should never have called someone.atulate

you don't call and congratulate over a sham. excluded his major rival rom running, not to mention irregularities in the election, this should not have been a call that was ever made. staff let him make the call, putting in the memo, do was ongratulate i think beyond the point. you don't make the call. host: as far as the other topic comes to topic of the direct conversation about the affairs, how ther much do you think this administration is interested in in those conversations? >> guest: they seem more interested engaging than the conversations. particularly denying them oil and y to exploit other resources. banning a few of their people from coming to the united states, i mean, these thugs want to visit disneyland anyway. host: other issues, foreign

korea, recently announcement from the north korean interest in talking to the united states. what do you think about the sincerity of this conversation? uest: it's a huge victory for kim and north korea. sta ts to be on the world stage, eyeball to eye sdlt ball with the approximate president of the united states, not one of the most illustrious, but thertheless, a president of united states. something his grandfather and father tried to achieve. suspending test, they often go many months without testing. engineering, g manufacturing and testing in the summer instead of spring. no -- it is said there is a rumor that maybe they are going to talk about denuclearization, but the north committed en't themselves publicly to that in any way. and we in effect ourselves, not to rachet up the sanctions, imagine

war-like and inappropriate it would seem to sanction more companies, particularly those in china, in the months leading up to these historic negotiations. given an awful lot, both in terms of stature and many months on the economic and it is hard to see what we've gotten. of same time, it's not one the 50 biggest mistakes trump has made in foreign policy. host: we'll continue on our with our guest, if you want to ask questions, 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8002.nts, you can also post your thoughts on twitter at c-span wj. said a victory for kim. how much credit should president if the conversations come to a point? guest: well, i think this deal table for been on the any president. on the other hand, it is a good idea to have discussions, we're it in the wrong way, we made concessions in effect going

in, but it's, when you think of the other things, like alling him little rocket man and antagonizing someone who we unstable e somewhat and certainly nuclear equipped, calling him little rocket man mistake than entering into negotiations, even when little more to the negotiations than they have. host: if you think it, why you see this invitation come with eight years of the obama administration? because obama would have worked it up slowly, but also now.is more powerful he's got his missiles mostly tested, he's got 20-plus nuclear weapons, according to the press. march into that of a s head of state nuclear power. host: we have calls lined up already, one from virginia. john, democrat's line from troutville, virginia on

sherman.guest, brad hello. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span for being here. the gentleman how the democrats plan to hold president trump's feet to the thing. this russian he just does not say anything against them and all he does is praise them. thank you. guest: we passed legislation to sometimes that legislation is ignored. the 2018 election will hold him accountable, all in congress, particularly in the house of representatives are in republican hands, but i don't colleagues and i are particularly shy at pointing out people that this putin is esident killing people on british soil, outlawed internationally outlawed weapons and that is this week. eight until next week. host: from ohio, republican

line. next. go ahead. caller: good morning, mr. sherman. only time i know, want to worry about trump and ussia, we already know conclusion is not there. the only thing i worry, if he billion, just like our previous guy gave the country in thest world, killed thousands of americans in iraq, that is when worry about it. you understand what i'm saying, right? we'll go back to this you are just creating voters, people, i didn't vote a trump, i thought he was nut, but i plan on voting for him now because i see how the democrats are. watched him for a long time and i paid attention and i vote are, you know, i'm an independent, but in ohio, i have to have a party so i can get in. i'm registered as a democrat, i am not republican, i'm voting for trump because of the

guys are acting. we know there is no conclusion, you will carry this on to know that.ou host: thanks, caller. guest: well, if the decisive support trump was opposition to the iran deal, i'm surprised you didn't vote for election sincest he preceded the iran deal. congress t member of of either party to go to the floor and speak against the deal only because not of 1.7 or slightly less in urrency that was to be delivered, but the unfreezing of iranian assets around the world, many tens of billions of dollars. other hand, only somebody interested in politics, rather policy would say, since it was a bad deal then, worst t now because the part of the deal for us, the worst parts that occur in the deal, havears of the already occurred. here is no way we're getting

that money back from iran or been zing assets that had .nfrozen in 2015 foreign policy based upon where we are now and what is in our interest, rather trying to exercise the political demons of the pass. host: what is positioning on the deal leave other countries also involved in this process? uest: well, you know, the executive branch has -- you talk about shredding the iran deal, extent, shredded the constitution over the last 20 so, entered into international deals and they don't get approval for them and then they say, my god, it's a travesty to america, ifso, ente not ca's word, it is america's word. the word of america is when congress acts. one individual is when the president decides to do

congressional ut approval. need to nk it's -- we remind the world and the state department needs to remind the a constitution, we have a congress, if you deal with the american people, you eed a vote in congress, not just to get a trump or obama or any other president to enter a deal. gaddafi gave up his nuclear program, just as we and a couple years later, he was dead. that is not lost on north korea. the iran the shredding deal will not cause north korea in the a lot of stock word of a single american president, it will be any deal g to see if is negotiated that comes to congress, but like iran, north subject to american sanctions and getting rid of those sanctions would be one

have in theey would negotiations and that would take congressional action. brad, hello., congressman?re you, guest: good to be with you. aller: since 2008, i can turn on the television everyday and ear a democrat call me a racist. democrats that took my health insurance, doctor and tripled my premium. sold a democrat that russia the uranium. democrat who said 1980s for foreign policy back. my enemy, not russians. host: thanks. uest: that's the level of partisanship we've reached when and ne call on the show

says the other political party is the enemy, not russia. wow. and that is very hard for the an ed states to play important role in the world if we're that divided. can't go through the whole litany, as to the uranium deal, keep in mind that deal could first en reversed on the day of trump's presidency, or in ny age since then, everyday woke up in the white house, could have undone and reversed that uranium deal. of ver 150, many hundreds occasions, donald trump decided that deal is not a threat to american security. host: i'll ask about robert mueller investigation, the house has er paul ryan saying he no cause for concern about mr. mueller being removed from the position. concerns or his sentiment? guest: no, i have the concerns. way, you see, unless republicans speak out now

tell the president publicly if he interferes in this fires mueller, they'll in the words of lindsey be hell to pay. unless they collectively say that, he'll fire mueller and of avoiding their real moral responsibility to speak is no to just say there, problem there. does anybody think it is be a tweetthere will in the next hour firing mueller? that could happen. happen as long as donald trump has his phone. failure of republicans to speak out and defend the mueller investigation is a huge problem. and it is a moral lapse to say, we don't have to talk about that. senate majority leader was asked about the mueller investigation and about mr. positioning in it, here is what he had to say and response.your

senate majority leader: i don't going ob mueller is anywhere and it is agreed he ought to be allowed to finish job. , oroughly credible individual it was an appropriate appointment and we all his finishing the job people ing the american what they need to know about this episode. host: representative sherman, is strong enough for you? guest: it is not lindsey graham, ryan.tter than speaker he didn't quite say i'm drawing line in the sand, he did recommend to the president the investigation go forward. host: democrat's line -- out, i should point think there is already more than nough evidence to impeach the president now based on his obstruction of justice last year. looking at eller is collusion, but we learn from

crime, te, it is not the it's the cover-up o. two or three very well documented ccasions, trump has obstructed justice, tried to get comey not to investigate flynn and threatened his job. when he fired flynn and said he did so to derail the russian that is tion, obstruction of justice. unsuccessful s obstruction of justice is illegally irrelevant. ou can be convicted of obstructing justice when you act to stop a criminal investigation he's done that. so we can and i think will wait the mueller investigation, particularly with regard to there was collusion. even if there is -- if there is to prove our ability it is going to be difficult unless they are very sloppy. been, we don't know. but what is absolutely proven by

own statements on video and audio tape, he obstructed justice. we've seen house intelligence committee stop what they are doing, seen other investigations continue. do you think in light of the robert mueller investigation, do in till need investigation the house and senate on the same topic? uest: i think the house intelligence committee should have continued because we have a issue of how to respond to russia's interference in our election. deter them from doing it again, how to prevent them from it again. start with better security for voteing and ballot system. we in california have audible trail, voter verified paper trail. to everywhere has that and think that knowing they tried to tried to and how they interfere in election last time to go forward without major

mistake.cemetery clear host: democrat's line from new york, bob, go ahead, you're on. for taking my call. i have couple of comments. i'd like to go back to north korea. i have a comment about iran. is delusional.st 55-year democrat. let me tell you why he's and most democrats are delusional. they want to do the same thing expect over and different results. bill clinton paid north korea nukes and as soon as they took the money, they went program, so north korea doesn't know what we're going to do. sixth grader could have made a better deal. you divide the deal into 10, 15 you divide the money. , 101ive the money up front

tell you we're screwed. host: thanks, caller. guest: surprised someone has a democrat for 55 years and regards us all as delusional. i voted against the ran deal, first member of -- couple hours afterit was published. there are problems there. t the same time, we've had several different presidents be ineffective in stopping the nuclear program and they have a problem far more threatening to right now than the iranians do. lewis, on new jersey, the line for republicans. good morning. morning, gentlemen. about north korea, obviously the

three presidents didn't out right, you democrats, you guys, now he's on a world stage. this guy hat, maybe should be put on the world stage and get some recognition, even he's a nut. and as far as trump, you know what, he stretches the truth, loud mouth, obviously that leader was testing trump in if he inning to see was -- had backbone because our last president didn't and i thought he could push trump around the way he pushed the clinton, baush and administrations around. and guess what, he found out he going to now they are meet. before you guys were worried up, t him blowing the world now he's going to meet the guy and you're disparaging that. mind.p your good day, gentlemen. guest: well, the idea of talking makesen sense doing level.the presidential

head of state level and should e accompanied by more concessions from north korea. author art of the deal been more successful north perhaps we would have gotten that, instead of accepted his aide uggestion of the deal being proposed really before the proposal was enunciated. but the fact is that our policy oward north korea has been relati relatively effectless up until now and up until this day. sanctions against north korea cannot be effective unless you're willing to sanction the chinese economy, unless china cuts trade with north korea. instead, trump has continued, the bluster is there, the hetoric and tone is different, but the policies on the ground similar, take out small

aren't doing that business in the united states, small companies that aren't doing business in the united sanction on them, they can't do what they are not already doing and namely do business in the united states say, we've been effective. lifeline north korea has to china has not been nterrupted and we -- no president, including the current one has been willing to take on going reet and say we're to make beijing worry whether continues in order to get them to be very serious about north korea. that and nt has done just doing what we've done nastier tone a and louder voice, is not really a new policy. prince udi arabia crown is in town with meetings at the white house. what would you like to see come conversations with the white house? guest: first and foremost, i'd ike to see a nuclear cooperation agreement, that is the gold standard of preventing

case, from a in this developing a nuclear weapon. we entered into such an the united arab the closest ally. they will not enrich or reprocess. instead, saudi arabia is coming here, seeking a nuclear cooperation deal with no limits, ot even the level of limits iran has accepted, none of the iran has agreed to. nd i don't think that the solution to inadequately controlled nuclear program have uncontrolled saudi arabia nuclear program. host: what is nuclear program ike in saudi arabia, what is its ability? guest: very low now, just getting off the ground, but they money, they can get off the ground quickly. host: independent line, bob, good morning. indiana.n hi. caller: good morning, representative sherman.

several callers call in and mention that our resident should never have any dealings with dictator and a murderer. your t context, what is opinion of the alliance between roosevelt andill, sta to be a mass murderer? of t: i think your lgs bit histories absolutely correct, i've never said you shouldn't putin or kim jong-un or to ne else, you need maintain conversations in the right way and communication in the right way, particularly with adversaries, you don't make peace with your friends, you your enemies.h we have often

had to have alliances with those that are not up to full standards of democracy in order achieve more important objectives. working with the madin in afghanistan during the 1980s, we back on that and say those folks were not our time, the ut the same defeat of soviet union in afghanistan was important to cold war. people who may ot be our best friend, but related interest, i am not opposed to talking to anyone, way.do it in the right host: congressman, the omnibus week, whereing this do you stand on it? guest: it hasn't been written yet. publish it at noon. and then have us vote on it or a day later.

they are violating rules in that respect, interesting to see what is in it. none of us want to shut down the government and at the same time, the fact that it looks like no the ure on us to deal with dreamers, those who came to our country as children, and now deportation, that worries me greatly. phone matters of money, one thing you have been concerned about cryptocurrency in the united states. 8% of the in website, american population earn cryptocurrency, what does that mean to you? people8% of the american do not own crypto-currency at&t owns one bit oin we don't know about and americans own or something absurd like that. cryptocurrencies are the

least regulated investment out absolutely is absurd, we make it harder to raise money to build a factory raise money to build a scam. the any of crypto-currencies, perhaps all of them, are a crock. time, one of the things being touted by the people cryptocurrencies is that there is device to evade taxation, evade government regulation, move crimina terrorists or criminals. hy we have put up with this, i don't know. but particularly on the nvestment side, to think you would have an initial coin or offering structured as a new company or new stock offering, that goes through

s.e.c. us amount of disclosure. how much attention is congress paying to this? guest: not nearly enough. hearings recently and even there the attitude tends to one of -- oh, just isn't this interesting. who are a lot of people are going to lose their isestments in this and there no disclosure and while it is that conventional canning used, there is not more that ive way to achieve objective. host: brad sherman, member of the foreign affairs committee us this morning, thank you for your time. guest: good to be with you. phones until end of the program. 202-748-8000 for democrats.

and748-8001 for republicans independents, 202-748-8002. we'll take calls when we come back. this sunday on 1968, america in turmoil, the presidential of 1968 began with eight presidential candidates, end, the sitting president bowed out, robert assassinated, television coverage violent clashes between police and protesters at democratic national convepgz and richard nixon won victory. joining us television coverage former candidate pat buchannan, and author of nixonest comeback, richard rose from defeat and barbara erry, co-director of presidential oral history program at university of virginia. turmoil, , america in

live sunday 8:30 a.m. eastern on "washington journal" and on american history t.v. on c-span 3. for nearly 20 years in depth on book t.v. featured the nation's best-known nonfiction writers for live conversations about books. for year as special project features best-selling fiction riters for monthly program in depth fiction addition, join us first, day, april mosley,he wrote books, plus over 40 critically acclaimed books and mystery series. we'll be program, taking phone calls, tweets and facebook messages, our special depth fiction edition author walter mosley, on

booktv on c-span2. > "washington journal" continues. host: also besides the phone on c-span at c-span wj is the twitter feed, post website at to our facebook.com/c-span, elizabeth vegas, democrat's line. first up on open phones, good morning. ahead. caller: good morning, sir. happy day too you, just a couple comments. host: go ahead, you're on. caller: oh, good morning. on.asn't sure what was going i have a couple comments. i think probably my first deeply, deeply concerning the precarious situation of our north korea ng to and negotiating. i do not think he has skills or

to do that, be able especially since he's not asking for advice. is his r concern i have meeting with putin and discussing arms again. don't think he has ability to negotiate with putin on any kind of deal whatsoever in the best nterest of the country and the people. what i don't really understand can we not allow this to happen? if somebody can answer that question. i mean, can we -- can the say no, no, no, you can't go to these places right we find out if you're these to negotiate on things or how does that work? host: okay, mike next in line.t, republican caller: hi, good morning. two comments, first, last -- not call, the last congressman, person you had on, he said that

when we asked president trump talked to putin, he shouldn't have made the call. then talked about something he said should should. contradicted himself. here is why i'm calling in, this talk about the congress reventing the president from firing mueller. congress cannot do that, purview of the president. separation of power. can't pass laws against executive branch, separation of is against the constitution. i want people to know that, you. florida, t lauderdale melvin, democrat's line. watching sinceen 1980, most of the time resident ake a statement you know is wrong, you correct it. ouple things specific with first republican congressman

e-mails were on's hacked, no evidence her e-mails hacked. i thought you were going to straighten him up on that. he second one, the congressman indicated the treaty obama made he want a treaty with the country, send it congress. the constitution gives president right and authority to make treaties in the constitution. nd secondly, the president elected by people, only in that state. president is elected by all he was wrong,t -- you.k host: mike in maryland, independent line. caller: hi, good morning. thank you for taking my call. i just wanted to, there was a

caller who called in from the previous segment when the congressman was on the phone. he said, reference about democrats being enemy and not the russians. i just wanted to call in, me. really touched home for it baffles me we've come to that point, we're so polarized, blaming each other as the enemy. i want to remind americans, we are all americans, i don't care are, where you are, where you come from, we are mericans and if it we don't remember that, we're really in going to end our country. politics are one thing, we have o remember that we're all in this together, that is all vito say. maryland, sheila, in you're next up on open phones, line.rat's caller: from north dakota. host: sorry about that, north

dakota. shame like to say tis a the way people put down our president. when i was young, we didn't put president. they were against the law to do that. president trump is right, by the time -- he's one that should have been the firing and investigating, to be the president to do it? duty, shame. thank you. host: sheila on open phones. 10:00. participate until 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. independents, 202-748-8002. several story about facebook, cambridge analytica. the "washington post" this morning write the ftc, federal looking intoion is this saying issue for the company and at the heart of the is settle ments reached with agency in november 2011, ending investigation facebook had deceived users

bout protections afforded on the site. shared beyond the privacy setting they have established, decree is subject to facebook 20 years of privacy compliance.ensure former ftc official says entanglement with cambridge violated may have legal agreement with the federal watch dog agency. that is in the "washington post." go to the "new york times" this morning, story things you liket on facebook and how that data is used and what it might say about you. this is nicole and sheila frankel's story. researchers at stand ford university and cambridge model toy that built a assess personality using facebook likes alone. conclude amongst others, you might be considered

considered -- traveling and cooking as hobbies. may be considered least anime, ted if you like video games and most agreeable, agreeable in the most agreeable category, you might be considered that if you group casting crowns, the bible, god, rascal flatts, least agreeable if you manson or judas priest. larger discussion of facebook, in the "new york times." if you go to the "wall street page, paul opinion burgen, technology and ammunication executive writes no e saying zuckerberg is james madison, in designing the

constitution, madison appealed people while calculating men's capacity to harm and badly. facebook designers appear to have assumed the best about and expected users to connect with friend necessary benign ways. baby and puppyes brags and lace isis seek to undermine the institution of free society. it goes on from there. the full op ed this morning in the "wall street journal." are next from mississippi, independent line. hi. hi. caller: yes, sir, mr. sherman didn't mention the fact that was praised by south korea for moving the ball forward so something could be theren this situation and as ardly anything said good

far as democrats and trump has ball forward in many areas, i appreciate what he's doing. north port, orida, jim is next, republican line. caller: yeah, hi. interesting another democrat has something to say about foreign policy and he use or sell of nuclear material. gave the clints clinton north koreans the nuclear products. administration was flying palette loads of cash into iran in the middle of the night. hillary clinton is selling ranium material to anybody in the world and bad actor necessary the world. the people that have the moral uthority to tell anybody anything, it is interesting at this point to come on the t.v. and assume to speak with any is in the bout what best interest of the united states. host: line for democrats, jerry, hello. caller: good morning. i would just like to say that

government that supposed to be representatived as voters, we spend more time arguing between democrats and i think there is intelligent people in both parties, but it the politicians seem to want to represent their versus common sense of the average voter and, you know, us voters attack each other, instead of average common intelligence of the american. so i think we'd be better off parties, have politicians directly represent the voters. you.k host: yesterday, republican and democratic senators gathered on about their to talk concerns on election security laying out set of principles of as they would like to see far as strengthening within the united states, before the go to c-span3ion, channel this morning, kristen

department of home land security secretary speaking before that committee of the security committee and senate on the matters of election security. monitor that on c-span3. you can't do so right now, watch our website at c-span.org, ther ways you can monitor, as well, and more information about website frch. from sacramento, democrat's line, don, hello. caller: hello. yep, called white supremacy ither way you look at it, donald trump separated blacks and whites like no other youident has before because know that every time you look nothing, but e prejudice and racism everywhere now.his america right it is separation, white folks

want to stay in power. they will do anything to do it. since obama was president and they found out all black people democrats, they split vote and started to go right back to because lican party they know all black people are and you know the love -- f you don, to bret in riverside, california. democrat's line. hi.er: i'm 60 years old and ever since notice s president, i pattern of whatever party loses, to s immediate effort mpeach the other president. i and -- ith clinton abolish the electoral college.

e do not elect the president through popular vote, it's electoral college and apparently work for the democratic 10 y because they've had and i ow to change it don't know of any effort to do that. thank you. ost: "u.s.a. today," this morning takes a look at the cost of working vacation that was one by president trump last year. this is jessica estepa, writing, august the president spent 17 day necessary new jersey on a working vacation, kwocost of the trip $185,000. "u.s.a. today" review shows he visited one of the properties on weekends, about 73% of and president obama's visits were far from speech. judicial watch says the

president's final trip to vineyard in august of 450,000 in flight cost when it comes to president over the ip in 2016, course of that 17-day trip he trips on of six oeing, which is used for official travel, leading to 7.4 totaling ravel time $18,000 and highlights secret involved, you can see more if you go to the website. line from republican florida. hi. caller: yes, good morning. something.say the democrats want to bake the cake and eat the cake. not criticizing trump for meeting with putin or north dictators and killers. did everybody forget that the to a administration went cuba

cuba, was not even received by the dictator at the airport and do? did they vacation in cuba on taxpayer money. trump is the bad guy, but we what obama did before. host: chico, california. line, wanda, you are next, good morning. caller: can you hear me? yep, you're on. caller: back in 2008, the did the the democrats they are that complaining about with facebook. ook the data and used as opposition research and the that is one reason e defeated hillary was because of that. they want to complain the facebook ns are using and so they are bragging about 2008 when maxine waters

went on t.v. and bragged about stolen data they had from facebook. kind of warped. host: earlier in the program we feature u hearing that etsy devos and houseing and urban development secretary ben carson and particularly he was asked about, you probably saw in the news, furniture purchases and cost of that, here defended buying of this $31,000 dining set was his wife a large factor in that decision. ere is a bit of dr. carson's exchange with members yesterday. >> i was told the dining room changed.d to be i said, why, because people are nail, chair by collapsed with somebody sitting in it, it is 50 years old. okay, we can potentially do that. also to help me with that.

showed us some catalogs, i prices were beyond what wanted to pay, made it clear that didn't seem right to me. with my wife. i said, help choose something, said, the money that is going to be used, we need to ake care of the deputy secretary's office and whatever care of the take dining room furniture. it was very important to do that. i realize that, but i had so many other things to do at this had no assistant ecretary, no deputy secretary place, i om place to wasn't that concerned about furniture. next thing that i quite frankly it was that this $31,000 table had been bought. said, what the heck is that all about.

i investigated immediately and cancelled. not that we don't need the furniture, but i thought that excessive. host: "new york times" version story, that is available com.y times dot go to c-span.org, watch the questions about the purchases of that and the hearing with betsy devos, that is the website, c-span.org. is next, crystal lake, illinois, independent line. taking hey, thanks for my call. let's take a step back in time, all right. clinton summers and and greenspan decided to go to wto, let the trains in. now,d surplus of money and ould have paid off the debt of social security with that money.

instead we have 20 trillion just deficit, it's astounding. i used to work in high-tech 20 there is no skills gap, just high-tech companies hire people from other ountries for cheap wages, just basically that simple. somebody comes your says we're shipping job overseas and it is good for tell me you know, you that is good for people. is not. host: michigan is next, raymond, go ahead. thank you. were -- but this. republicans -- ryan are

is no way thatre trump would try to follow mueller. okay. nd the attorney, the lawyer said no, he will not do it. but he has already tried. steve, t's go to pennsylvania. caller: how are you? host: i'm well. to talk about e the ood shepherds, which c.i.a., the f.b.i., the ones outside ect us from kgb, which like the still exists and very strong and hack into our

system and right to vote and we seen that on the news on acebook that, is how they did it. we need congress, republican congress, and the democrats to shepherds and protect us and people must stop and g the f.b.i. is this the c.i.a. is wronga that. right on everything because they protect us. sure we have freedom in this country. to say.all i have host: matters of the media world time magazine reporting guest appears on fox news, ralph lieutenant -- saying technology is a thing, anyway,

bit, show you that in a about ralph peters saying he's a variety news for of reasons, i'll pull that up. go to minnesota. hello.dent line, joan, caller: hi. i'm just wondering why the are so angry and i'm listening here today. it's it's -- it doesn't make sense. is off the air and they are all calling in. what the plan was is to split the united states, people, they are doing it by splitting the democrats and republicans. happening.t is we're just kind of going along they want, and beyond what we want dictator ship, do like russia?ve that is what is going to happen

if people continue to do this. whohould want the president love, like in the old days. it is not like that anymore. in there,e a democrat you hate the president. if you have a republican in the president. you know, we have to look at this, what if russia decides to democrats next time around? i mean, are the republicans or g to be happy with that say, well, now it is our turn, blah, blah, blah. host: okay. caller: let the russians help us. host: got you, joan. ralpresident dlshgs had the peters, "he's ashamed to propaganda he machine for destructive and ruinous administration. the colleagues obtained by buzzfeed, i took oath to newly officer and swore to support and defend the

constitution and that oath did took off my en i uniform. i feel fox news is insulting the while fostering paranoia among viewers, over my proud with fox i was long of the association, now i am ashamed, that story on the time magazine website. clarence next, clarence in ringgold, georgia. independent line. for taking my ou call. i really wanted to get in when he last congressman was there and started off by showing utrage about trump calling putin congratulating him on winning the election. when obama on e arch 9, 2012 called putin and congratulated him on winning election.tri i can't imagine the outrage if meddev, hed have told would be more flexible after the election. left has outrage the and hypocrisy is evident to all

the people and thank you for my call. host: mike from michigan, democrat's line. h hi. doing? hi, how you calling to speak about illegal immigration. but i've been watching trump lately and i'm going to be republican from now on. and i live in a the people, i and got a bunch of illegal living in the trailer park with me. they are trying to run everybody think here and i don't it's right. trump is on the right path, that is all i got to say. thank you. from north dakota, republican line, roland is next, roland, the house is about to in, go right ahead. this mess h, all going on and the back and forth in congress and they don't do a well over time we