against iran. on c-span2, the arrival ceremony for the french president. at 10:00 a.m., the senate returns to continue the debate on the nomination of kyle duncan to be a judge for the fifth circuit court of appeals. on c-span3, more on the french president's visit with a news conference with president trump. and then, a budget hearing on foreign aid and development. at 6:30 a.m. eastern, live coverage of the president trump and first lady asked the host their states and are for the french president and his wife -- host their state dinner for the french president and his wife. >> coming up, kenneth weinstein on challenges facing the current cia director mike pompeo as he seeks to become the next secretary of state. at 8:30, our guest is joshua geltzer.

will talk about tomorrow supreme court argument on president trump's traveled. at 9:00 a.m., tom sancton on french president emmanuel macron's state visit. ♪ >> lots of activity at the white house today as the ranch president meets with the french -- as the french president meets with president trump. a joint news conference will be at 11:45 and c-span's coverage of the president's first state dinner at 6:30 this evening. go to www.c-span.org for more information. the french president will address a joint session of congress tomorrow. speaking of, mike pompeo passed his first test in becoming a secretary of state. he merrily won approval yesterday that she nearly -- he

narrowly won approval yesterday. in our next hour, we will show you comments from yesterday and get your thoughts on mike pompeo possibly becoming the next secretary of state. here is how to let us know, for republicans, (202)-748-8001. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. (202)-748-8002 for independents. you can post on twitter at --@cspanwj and done our facebook page that -- facebook.com/c-span. the associated press has a story about the nomination hearing that to face yesterday. this is the first paragraph -- mike pompeo, president trump's choice for secretary of state, avoided a rare rebuke monday as the senate foreign relations committee narrowly recommended him. us,he phone, joining talking about yesterday's

proceedings is the author, lisa masc good morningaro, -- mascaro, good morning. guest: good morning. host: set the stage for us on what happened yesterday. guest: it was a dramatic meeting yesterday. this is late monday about 5:00 p.m., senators returning from the weekend and have a hearing scheduled. all indications were this was going to be not good for mr. pompeo. this was going to be an unfavorable recommendation or no recommendation from the committee. all the democrats on the committee had come out against mr. pompeo, the cia director, and while republicans had the majority, one republican, senator rand paul of kentucky, has indicated repeatedly that he wasn't interested in voting for mr. pompeo.

he had concerns about him at the cia, and he said he would vote no. president trump had really been talking a lot with senator paul last week. he called him. on monday, senator paul disclosed they had been in conversations multiple times during the day until the vo te. minutes before the chairman, bob corker, before he gaveled the pickering open, senator paul announced he would change his vote and vote in favor. this was what was needed in order to give mr. pompeo a favorable recommendation out of the committee. even though he was poised to have an unfavorable recommendation or the committee could have simply not made a recommendation, it would not have halted his nomination before the full senate, but it would have been an incredibly rare situation.

eight send historians say if you look back to when committee records started being cap, there was no indication of anyone who had been tapped to be the nation's top diplomat, the secretary of state, running into that resistance. he cleared. he got a narrow vote. there was another shuffle because one longtime committee was down ingeorgia his home state delivering a eulogy for a dear rent and wasn't present. -- for a dear friend and wasn't present. so there was a last-minute shuffling. the bottom line was he to get out of the committee. like we wrote the story, this really is a signal to the white house that democrats and potentially some republicans are putting up grave resistance to

the nomination. the president is quick to higher-end fire those in his re andt, who -- higher fire those in his cabinet. some republicans and democrats are not eager to fill the slots and are giving these folks in norms scrutiny and really raising the question of what is going to happen to the other nominees? host: if there was a general criticism of mr. pompeo from the committee, what would it be? guest: right. there was a general sense among democrats that while he may have the ciad enough as director, he did not represent the values they wanted in a secretary of state. many pointed to his critical comments of gay marriage, comments he had made in the past about muslims. senate confirmation

hearing a week earlier, he did not back away from some of those comments, and he also was very hawkish in his foreign policy views, and has the president's ear. they are very of mind.there was a concern -- they are very aligned. there was a concern he might be too quick on the hawkish side and not enough on the diplomatic side. that was certainly senator paul, the kentucky republican, who is not interested in these overseas military campaigns, senator paul is very much a noninterventionist, and he also was very concerned that mr. pompeo would be more quick to sort of engage overseas rather than take diplomatic channels. host: we have about a minute left. mr. pompeo faces a process in the senate to vote for passage

or not. guest: he has an easier road in the senate. there appears to be enough support. several democrats who support him, were not on the panel, that committee, do support him in the full senate. he does appear on track for confirmation, which they are trying to get to by midweek or by the end of the week. senator mitch mcconnell has essentially said we will be confirmed. of theisa mascaro associated press writing about that panel yesterday featuring mike pompeo. thank you for your time. guest: thanks for having me. host: by the way, if you want to see the boat yesterday -- vote yesterday, go to www.c-span.org for that. in our first hour, your thoughts processompeo, the yesterday, the track he is taking to becoming the next secretary of state, and what you think about that. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. (202)-748-8000 for democrats.

independents, (202)-748-8002. you can post on social media, as well. james in maryland, democrat's line, go ahead. caller: good morning. you know, mike pompeo has a background that is impeccable. military men. businessmen. i think he is one of 12's fast -- i think he's one of trump's best picks in regards to nominations. unless someone knows someone better fit, he is the man. host: what is it specifically that you think he brings to the position that would be of benefit? caller: he has a very varied ackground, a business man, military man, his background as a harvard lawyer. basically, he is groomed for the job. i cannot think of a better choice, even as a democrat. host: from upper marlboro

maryland, al on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you, pedro. just a little pushback on your host this morning. ofolid consistent slamming president trump's appointee for the position of secretary of state. what she saw in the committee meeting yesterday is a narrow vote, and having to have rand ontoflip is vote to hang victory for confirming senator pompeo, however, i opposed to her, what was the boat count -- vote count? it was not narrow. i think it was something like vote.nd one present

host: aside from that, your thoughts on what mr. pompeo brings to the position. caller: i think he brings integrity, a level head, experience in the field of diplomacy, and when you compare i think he has been a standing record and i basically say his value is on history ofs his fac performance. yesterday. next up, lexington, south carolina, republican line. hi. good morning, go ahead. caller: yes, can you hear me? host: go ahead. caller: yes, sir.

this whole thing is exposing a section of the body of politics. when you have someone who is a number one -- graduated number one from west point, that should tell everything. that is phenomenal feat. it is not easy to do. that exposes everything. there is an extension of the government and donald trump has to be the antibiotic -- infection of the government and donald trump has to be the antibiotic. host: in tennessee, the republican line. caller: thank you for c-span. pompeiiy, i heard mr. say about -- hello? mr. pompeii yesterday -- it hit me when he said about the muslims. i think it was something about

the military -- i'm not quite sure. but he said it is more of a privilege than the responsibility. i think he got it backwards. me, the responsibility and a desire, and a great, great background check for no matter what race, color, whatever, that he thinksstating that to follow up and everything that started from the trump debates, i had high hopes for trump because we needed so many issues that were so much needed changed. but the words that started coming out of trump from the

debates lost in the early. host: ok, we will go on to sean in new jersey, democrat's line. go ahead. caller: hi. mr. pompeo, i think he is probably intellectually qualified for the job, but he is , who man for the president may be sometimes can get out of order. the oath of office of secretary is not pay loyalty to the president. he is the face of office to protect the constitution. host: when you say he is a yes man to the president, with the jew to believe that? caller: just listen -- what leads you to believe that? caller: just listen to his testimony in front of congress. he has a meeting with the president regarding russia and

the investigation, so i think the senator preston, -- pressed him, asked him, what exactly did the president asking to do? you know his answer? his answer was, i do not remember. that is not true. when the president of the united states talks to you and asks you to do something, you remember, right? that is the bottom line. host: that is shone from new jersey. by the way, -- that is sean from new jersey. by the way, other topics came up on easter pompeo's come from it -- mr. pompeo's confirmation hearing. you can go to www.c-span.org and watch the whole thing play out from republican and democratic senators, asking imperious questions -- asking him various questions.

there will be another a vote in the full senate. getting your thoughts on mike pompeo. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. independents, (202)-748-8002. "the new york times" highlighting his history in the house, saying as a floor term house member, mr. pompeo earned the reputation as a sharp tongue partisan.

host: enter reverse the administration's marginalization . it goes on from there, and from rome, new york, randy is next, independent line. caller: thank you for my call. i am a frequent viewer of c-span, and other media networks. as an independent, which i , itider to be an american saddens me the way that politics has gone today. -- i watched it earlier from 6:00 to 7:00 about the committee vote -- a senator stated that she could name several individuals who were more qualified than congressman

pompeo for the position. i would like to know one. one person that the democrats would publicly say is more qualified than this individual. thank you. host: what do you think makes him qualified? makes mr. pompeo qualified? host: yes. all, as far asf his background, he graduated first in his classroom a military academy -- i'm not sure which 1 -- he also was a member of congress for many years, a successful businessman, the director of the cia -- what better qualifications can anybody give to this country tha n know with the worldview and situations are that would affect our country? host: missouri is next,

republican line, dan. caller: how are you? host: go ahead. caller: i guess according to the pompeo is notmike allowed to have this own thinking? it just seems like everything that we do -- i mean, they are always hacking us. can we not have our own thinking? can we not have her own belief? you get thatid assessment of what democrats thought of mr. pompeo? caller: you know, they are attacking him for saying -- for being against homosexuality? notan, like i asked, are we allowed to have our own thinking? are we not allowed to have our own beliefs?

host: what do you think his inking on things will bring to the secretary of state position? caller: well, personally, i think you will bring strength to the table. host: how so? is for standing up to our enemies. that is why. host: that is dan in missouri. the senate foreign relations committee voted him out, passing the boat, and will head to vote in the senate. we are giving your thoughts on what you think he brings to the position and whether you support him or not. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. independents, (202)-748-8002. you can post on our twitter feed at --@cspanwj, and at facebook.com/c-span. one of those democrats yesterday with senator -- was senator tim kaine, a democrat from virginia,

and talked about issues he had with mike pompeo. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> this is not about policy difference. i have voted for many people with diffe differences. just like i do not want to vote for anti-science people to be the head of science agencies or anti-education people to be the head of education agencies, i do not want to be voting for people who are anti-diplomatic to be the nation's chief diplomat. many people opposed the iran deal. said wenow of one who do not need to worry about doing the deal, it will only take 2000 bombing runs to wipe out iran's nuclear capacity. i only know of one person who said that, and it was congressman pompeo. many people oppose and find legitimate reason to oppose the

regimes in iran and north korea. itnow very few who said should be in u.s. policy to change those regimes. this is a chief diplomat. he has urged us to back out of diplomatic commitment to the paris accord and iran deal.i am on the armed services committee . sittingecretary mattis at the table there, saying, iran video and saysh it is in the national interest of the united states. this is not about policy difference.i voted for people against the iran deal for other positions, but in the chief diplomatic position, to have somebody who got military action was preferable to diplomacy, who thinks regime change should be in foreign policy, and who thinks a contrary position to the person i think it's probably the indispensable voice of this administration on matters of national security, i cannot vote

yes. i will vote no for those reasons. host: george this next, tennessee, republican line. caller: i believed that every president, whether you like him or not, ought to be able to succeed or fail with the people around him with whom he chooses. presidencyegacy, his that will be reviewed 30 years from now. if he fails, let him have the people around him that he wants when he fails. if he succeeds, that is also true. host: you are saying mike pompeo should get the job? well, if you heard what i said, that is what i mean. host: you did not say it exactly. that is what i wanted to clarify. west virginia, harold, republican line. caller: thank you. i am a christian. with aefathers came up

declaration of independence, not perfect from one side to the other from what country they came from, but they got to a place where they could agree and they came up with what they have written, what they wrote. i think god for our forefathers. the thing that i see is as a christian, and i would like to see us all get along, the thing i see this a christian, the wisdom that jesus makes available for us, in proverbs 2 and 6 -- host: because we are talking about the secretary of state, could you directed thoughts to that? caller: that is what i'm doing. i realize most people do not even know, but with god puts in their heart is to the degree that we are in him, otherwise he leaves the understanding of knowledge [indiscernible] available [indiscernible] host: to the point of --

host: so to the point of secretary of state position? caller: the reason we have problems, what god puts in our hearts, they are holding on to whatever they see and how they line up with the word of our laws. host: let's go to jeff in north carolina, democrat's line. caller: i am a republican, not a democrat. host: sorry about that. caller: mike pompeo is the best man for the job. he embodies the attitude of good americans who decide that the iranians have always wanted to destroy israel, and they have lied to the united states repeatedly. said, playingeo with iran is only a foolish game. if they do not obey our wishes, then, yes, we could destroy their nuclear capabilities,

which obama did everything he could to enforce iranian strength. ying them the billions of dollars he did behind america's back, it is incredible we are in this position, but it is at the feet of obama. but pompeo and trump are going to clean the mess up that obama left us. host: that is just in north carolina -- that is jeff. the iran nuclear deal is said to be one of the major points of discussion when president trump meets with resident -- president macron. the of preparing for the formal arrival. 9:00 is the formal arrival ceremony. you see the preparations for it. there is a joint news conference at 11:45, a state dinner tonight at 6:30.

you can watch c-span's coverage of that at 6:30 and you can see it on c-span3 and www.c-span.org . will address a joint session of congress tomorrow at 11:00. you can see that on c-span. with that activity going on, www.c-span.org is the place to go, if you want to go there to keep a close eye on the events and see them later, if you don't have a chance to see them live. jim in fort lauderdale, florida, republican line. caller: hello. i do not think that people should worry as much about the kind of secretary of state that mike pompeo will be. i think you will probably be possibly as great as john foster douglas because john foster douglas was known as expert in brinkmanship, and people get jittery these days about brinksmanship.

yet, we have an airport named after john foster, and he is regarded as one of the greatest secretaries of state ever. i do not know what -- this country is changing a lot or they do not value the same things, but the thing we should worry about most is the political spectacle, the of seeing partisanship -- the obscene partisanship that is going on with everything in our government today. what do the democrats think is going to happen when a democratic president is elected in the future? republicans are itching to lay on them the revenge of what is going on right now. so what do they really think it's going to happen? host: did you have those same lack of concerns with the rex tillerson? caller: i thought tillerson was a patriot. i think he was a great guy.

thing, anded one that is the organizational responsibility of being in line with the president. that is what happened with tillerson. i think he is a great guy. i do not have any concerns about am, but the president needs guy to run a tight ship. i was in the corporate world for a long time, and i was lucky enough to observe some of the greatest executives in the corporate world. the one quality that i admired the most about these great people was their ability to be the right person, at the right time, and that is exactly what we have with donald trump. observe. host: we will have to go on to sherry in virginia. mark, actually, in medford, massachusetts, democrat's nine. caller: my name is mark and i am

a long time democrat but this is the first time i voted republican for donald trump. the reason why i did is donald trump was a businessman, nt had done a lot to the country. the reason why i believe that pompeii's nomination should go forward -- pompeo's nomination should go for it is it is about time the country got to working. if the democrats think they will win the fall election, they have another thing coming. the democrats have been zero for anything. anything that republican wants, they had been zero to help the country. host: how does that relate to the secretary of state's position? caller: because the secretary of state's position is to work internationally with other countries, dealing with foreign matters, and things along that line.

we have to be able to get to working with countries. all pompous.d was all the glory instead of getting down roots. host: your signal is going in and out, republican line from kansas, janice. caller: hello. host: you are on. congresshen is primarily the democrats? i used to be a bona fide democrat until clinton in the oval office. i think it is about time we get back to what is good for our country and not the party. pompeo is from kansas. he has done good. he has showed he knows how to build. he has already made headway with the north koreand.

-- north koreans. why the democrats being so high and mighty when they have a history that goes back to fdr that is awful? scrounging. janice, talking about mike pompeo, who is on track to become the next secretary of state, heading to a full vote. we will continue getting your thoughts the next half hour if you want to tell us why you support or oppose him in the position. (202)-748-8001 republicans. (202)-748-8000 the democrats -- for democrats. (202)-748-8002 for independents. with the papers talked about was rand paul and his influence on building matters yesterday. "the wall street journal" writing that mr. paul said he got a promise from mr. trump to review the policy of american

concern -- host: here are some of his thoughts. [video clip] >> with all of that being said, i have decided to go ahead and vote for director pompeo because he has assured me he has learned a lesson. thoseill tell if assurances are true, and i cannot say with absolute certainty i know his opinions and how they will come out over time, but i take him at his word

that he does and has incorporated the idea that the iraq war was a mistake. i think that is a step forward, particularly for our side, top anyone say that. if we had a vote on my side, i would probably lose that vote in committee. i do think the country understands that the afghan war has gone on for 18 years and they are ready for other ideas. i hope they will let from the trump and -- they will let trump the trump and mike pompeo's have a constructive opinion, and he will understand that the president is his boss and will listen, and i hope the country will we think -- brief how many wars we have to be involved in, where the constructive or destructive. terrell,pennsylvania, good morning. --ler: the government

understand it is between the senate, the congress, the u.n., the united nations, they talk if it is bogus or not or anything like that. bible.s by the israel has no capability or anything basically for tourists. host: let me stop you because the secretary of state is a topic of discussion. your thoughts related to him. yeah, and if it is considered an act of war [indiscernible] host: in maryland, democrat's line. caller: good morning. the secretary of state is supposed to represent the values of the united states of america. what we believe, and how other countries help people in our

country to be treated and how other people should be treated. therefore, if you have a secretary of state that believes people doms -- gay not have rights, and other negative thoughts, and the only way to deal with iran is the bomb it, etc., that is not a secretary of state. that does not represent what americans feel, so how is he going to go over to one of these countries where they kill gay people, when he doesn't like a people in the united states? i'm sorry, he doesn't represent the values of the majority of americans. they areple claim that evangelical, yet, they do not love their neighbors because they are gay or their brother married a white guy. it is crazy. host: cisco to maryland -- let's

go to maryland, independent line, george, good morning. independent that normally votes democrat, sometimes republican. -- i curious why mike pompeo would be a bad choice when the last democratic choice was hillary clinton, whose experience was as first lady and a senator from new york ? i have problems with some of pompeo's diplomatic experience in that it is lacking, but i do not understand how otherwise he is lacking compared with previous choices, thank you. formerse highlighting president george h.w. bush was admitted to the hospital, admitted to houston methodist on sunday morning, after

contracting an infection that spread to his blood and appears to be recovering, according to "the statement -- "the statesman." he was hospitalized with pneumonia in 2017, and before that, he was treated for 16 days for pneumonia and previously hospitalized in 2015 after he broke a bone in his neck. this after losing his wife barbara bush in the last week. marcia in chicago, illinois, republican line. you are next. good morning. caller: hello. i am calling in on the subject. this is ridiculous. of course pompeo is very well-qualified. if hillary clinton was qualified and john kerry was qualified, what were their qualifications? you know the problem with pompeo? sexoesn't like gay

because cory booker -- and cory booker is a homosexual. host: we will leave it there. ross in illinois, republican line. go ahead. caller: yes, i think mr. pompeo is qualified for the korean problem, but in the middle east, it is in shambles. the reason it is in shambles is leduse a few conservatives netanyahu takedown seven countries. syria is near conservative for. host: fractured thoughts on mike pompeo, why do you think he is -- back. thoughts on mike pompeo. whitey think he's qualified to handle that? caller: just a second, they want to bomb iran. that is all this is about. i do not think mr. netanyahu's foreign policy is what they damn. host: ross, back to the secretary of state question, why do you think he is qualified for korea? the man seemsjust

generally qualified to do it, but the principle -- host: the specifics to korea, what makes him qualified? curious on why you think that. caller: well, i really cannot tell you, but he comes across as a person qualified. host: ok, republican line. there is ankorea, op-ed in "the washington post" this morning about north korea -- what to do the talks with north korea succeed. the right --

-- they write -- that and we develop tools have economic benefits. history shows us the answer is yes. as the united states and its international partners develop a strategy, there are lessons to be learned by looking to the 1990's following the break of the soviet union. they go on to make their thoughts and op-ed great if you are interested in finding it, go to their op-ed section. they are both on the board of nuclear threat of initiative, by the way. bob, dallas, texas, democrat's

line. caller: how are you? host: well, thanks. owned, mike pompeo is locked, stock, and barreled by the koch brothers. host: how so? caller: he was put into politics after they financed his start up in wichita, kansas. they then put him in politics. financed every run that he had for office in politics. he is carrying koch brothers' water. now,ll support, as he does all of the koch brothers' agenda, and he is in congress right now to support the koch brothers' agenda. host: frank in lexington, north carolina. independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i am very impressed with the

credentials of pompeo. his west point training. i think we can remember of the ,reat leaders that belonged like dwight eisenhower, douglas macarthur, a very good education where they train leaders, and his legal education i believe for some harvard. i see him as a man of great integrity. , something ier think has been lacking in washington, d.c., and great intelligence. of our finest educational institutions, west point and harvard, and organizational skills. you learn a lot about organizational skills in the arms forces and leadership, so i strongly support him, and i think a senator like cory booker could learn a lot rather than talking that pompeo --at pompeo and maybe listening to him. host: have you think mike

pompeo's experience is different -- he hung up. let's go to miranda, virginia, independent line. caller: good morning. my comment is that i think mike pompeo is qualified. my issue is it really with the jobs that he has done. it is more that he does not have the policy skills necessary to be our nations top of the -- top diplomat -- our nation's top diplomat.i think his work as a senator was representative of the people he represented, which indicates he did a good job. but nothing in his past indicates he would be able to have the skills necessary for diplomacy. his jobin intel, there was a lot different than his job would be at state department. i am not confident he would be able to transition his skills. host: the toronto star this

morning has this after headline rampagect of van identified, 25 of richmond hill, alek minassian. they say he was arrested by the toronto police in the afternoon, 26 minutes after the first call came in. a thorough check through toronto police records did not return any results. he was not previously known to police. that was the toronto police chief who flew in from new york, who supervised the response. a police investigation has not ruled out terrorism. they stressed there is no evidence that national security is threatened. that is from "the toronto star" this morning. , new jersey, independent

line. caller: i would just like to say that the polarization of our politics and united states is doing a lot of damage -- in the united states is doing a lot of damage. people have lost sight of what has to be done. these are important issues. dealing with north korea are is an important issue. cory booker doesn't care about that. he is part of the resistance against trump, basically at the cost of the foreign policy the united states. pompeii was well more than qualified -- pompeo is well more than qualified than hillary and kerry. he is the type of secretary we need right now the way the world is. the thing is i heard koch brothers, this, that, a bunch of baloney. it is all politics, and it is a shame. things have to get done. trump is the president now.

those people on the left have to deal with it. we had to deal with obama for 80 years. they're going -- for eight years. they are going to have to deal with trump for the next cycle and another fou years, hopefullyr. host: you can continue on your thoughts on mike pompeo the next 15 minutes or so. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. a follow-up story in "the washington post" about that shooting at the waffle house in tennessee. it suspect in that saying was last summer that he was arrested outside the white house after he declared himself a "sovereign citizen" and wanted to speak with the president. it put him under the scrutiny of the fbi and secret service, and state and local police in illinois, where he lived at the time. it was in august that they seized his guns and gave them to his father, who agreed to keep them secure and stay away from travis.

that is according to officials. the father has told police he eventually gave the guns back to his son. federal officials said on monday the transfer was probably einklingand the older r might be charged. the family had no comment. that is a follow-up on that story. as we go to the white house, reparations are underway for the french president. he will arrive in a formal ceremony at 9:00 on c-span. that is some of the preparations that are going on currently for that. that is the part of the series of events that will take place this week, including the state dinner. you can see that coverage on c-span at 6:30. some information about it in "the new york times" today, saying that the state dinner guest list was whittled to 120 people, down from 350 or so who had attended previous bipartisan dinners featuring celebrities.

the washington national opera will perform this year. typically, the leadership of the opposing parties are invited to the state dinner, but trump throughout that tradition -- threw out that tradition. there is one democrat on the list, john bel edwards, governor of louisiana. in theout the guest list story, saying it has been tightly controlled and debated, and they were concerns that aids that mr. trump would throw out to mar-a-lago buddies or two, and some tried to keep close watch on the guest list during the prime minister of japan's visit last week. in the end, the list was so small that the most impact american officials in the large french delegation, that there was only room for president people. invite four not all caps and members are

expected to attend, but steve mnuchin and his wife made the cut. there will be subtle hints of bipartisanship and the decor, along with 1200 obama-inspired cherry blossom branches to decorate. it says mrs. trump will use china from the clinton white house. go ahead, republican line. caller: i wanted to suggest a couple of things about people judging whether mike pompeo can do the job as secretary of state. it might be helpful to think back about every secretary of state that i can remember was elected without having any experience as the secretary of state, but he sure does the job and got a good record. the second thing, i would like for folks to start talking about the democrats not voting and helping out to get people elected, so maybe trump could do a better job. i should appreciate you taking

my call. this is my first time. host: thanks for watching and calling. dave in indiana, independent line. caller: i think that mike pompeo seems like he would be a pretty good representative for the united states. host: why? caller: well, because the last eight years, we have took second seat. i think it is about time we take a proper seat in the front. so far, he has not done anything wrong. i know this sounds funny, you mentioned earlier, you show tim ,aine, and he made a comment very logical. he says, well, i do not believe he is qualified because that would be like putting a non-science person in a science position. well, sometimes -- i'm not sure what are we looking for secretary of state? they should represent the views

of the president. i think that is all he does. ugh inlet's go to h north carolina. caller: yes, overall, i do support mike pompeo due to his military background, his legal background, and political background. he does have a lot of qualifications. i also do have some concerns, especially what rand paul talked about, in terms of forever. be in wars we are in afghanistan for 17 years, 18 years, iraq almost as long. i am concerned about pompeo's military comments. he is not moving into the secretary of state role, which is supposed to keep us clear complex not engage in more. the military side of the national administration gets us into wars or the president, but the secretary of state is supposed to try to keep us out due to diplomacy. i hope you can do a good job and we pray that we stop and in some

of these wars. host: rand paul the subject of the story and "politico" over another nomination of president trump's. it is over the replacement for mike pompeo at the cia. the story says that the hastor's opposition to her spurred his opponents to action with a television ad campaign tuesday, accusing him of representing the interest of terrorists and not kentucky residents.

host: little is known about the group behind that ad campaign, called the american exceptionalism institute, incorporated a year ago. this is their first page ad buy. host: here is the ad featuring rand paul. [video clip] >> when terrorists struck on 9/11, america struck back. it was one of america's own on the frontlines interrogating terrorists. 15 years later, president trump has nominated haspel, but rand paul falsely accusing her, and haspel did what our country pastor per. called rand paul -- our country asked of her. call rand paul. remind him he is supposed to represent us, not him.

caller: good morning. i did not vote for trump. he is turning out not to be as bad as i thought he would be. what confuses me is that this president, president trump, has never goddess in anything anywhere in the world. we have got to go back and look at history. obama kept saying time and time again -- i remember the last year he was in office -- he kept saying, i will never put boots on the ground in syria. and then he went ahead and put boots on the ground in syria. when trump became president, there were over 2000 troops in syria. he did not do anything to start that. host: before we go back to far, mike pompeoif becomes the secretary of state, how does he handled the foreign policy and what does he bring to it? caller: the gentleman -- ok, if

i was on that committee. all the democrats on that committee -- that is what i am getting disgusted with my party -- all the democrats on that committee to vote against him after 15 months ago, when they voted to put him in cia. who is more powerful? hey guy that is running the cia to conspire against me, you, and everybody else or secretary of state? host: let's go to robert in indiana, republican line. caller: yes. i think mr. pompeo would make a great man. i think if the democrats would get on board and help mr. trump and the republican party out, negotiations, that is what we need, but if it comes to war, we have to have it. what is it about mr. pompeo himself that you like in

the position or would like to see in the position? caller: well, if he does his job, that is what we want. i am saying if people do not wake up and realize that we have more war in this country between the democrats and republicans, they are fighting among themselves. how can you get the country to run when they are fighting themselves? host: thanks, robert. a profile this morning of president trump and the newest edition to his legal team, rudy giuliani. this is in "the washington post" this morning. it is reported that both men ran across each other the 1980's. -- each other in the 1980's. rudy giuliani entered politics in the president became a booster of his career.

mayorthe criticized the for his silence, but mr. trump asked about giuliani's reticence, said, "i am very respectful of his stance." in maryland, democrat's line. caller: good morning. -- i fully support mike pompeo for nomination. i do want to carry out i am not

a trump supporter. he is the most unfit person to ever have been president. i am not one of those that crossed over, but i think we are establishing a very problematic trend by now proposing everything because that is going to come back. that is not without remember when i was younger during the break-in and h.w. bush years and anduring the reag n hwb she is. east on his time in the house, cia -- the fact was in the old days, this would have been a no-brainer and he would have been confirmed. i will say this. i am against the one woman for cia, but i am retired military, and fully believe that torture was used, so i tend to take the mccain viewpoint of this. unfortunately, she was in the middle of it.

for that reason, i would be against her, but mike pompeo is fully qualified to be secretary of state. host: one more call in houston texas, democrat's line. caller: yes, good morning. host: good morning. calling to sayam -- good morning. are you there? host: go ahead. caller: yes, i do not think that mike pompeo should be the secretary of state. that his comments in the past have been more militaristic than diplomatic, and i also went to make a comment -- comments from say the past, what are you referring to? caller: when he indicated he thought we could eliminate iran poundsopping about 200 -- 200 bombs.

he just is not appear to be one who wants to use any diplomatic solutions. that itso want to say is a little disheartening and disingenuous for republicans to continue to call and say that president obama, they opposed almost everything that he wanted to do. that's my comment. tte fromat is yve houston, texas. we will continue with discussions on the possible secretary of state, mike pompeo, with an outspoken supporter of his, the president and ceo of the constant institute to give his thoughts on foreign policy. and then the spring court is set to hear a case on the president's travel ban.

with us would be guest joshua geltser. all those things ahead when "washington journal" continues. ♪ >> today, president trump welcomes french president emmanuel macron to the white house for an official state visit. our live coverage begins with the official white house greeting for the french president and then the joint press conference with president macron and president trump. tuesday evening, president trump's first state dinner. live coverage starts at 6:30 p.m. eastern with guest arrivals and dinner toasts. on wednesday, president mccrone addresses a joint -- macron

addresses a joint meeting of congress. the official state visit of french president emmanuel macron live starting this morning on the c-span networks, c-span.org, and on the free c-span radio app. c-span to with personalize the information you get from us. just go to c-span.org/connect and sign up for the mail. the program guide is a daily mail with the most updated content schedule an upcoming live coverage. word for word gives you the most interesting daily video highlight in their own words with no commentary. the book tv news letter sent weekly is a look at the upcoming authors and book festivals. anti-american history tv newsletter gives you the upcoming program exploring our nation's past. visit c-span.org/connect and sign up today. -- where history

unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. today we continue to bring unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: kenneth weinstein joins us. he is the president and ceo of the hudson institute to talk about mike pompeo. what does the hudson institute specialize in? guest: we are dedicated to promoting u.s. international leadership in global engagement for a secure, free, and prosperous future. we are center-right.

we do a lot of work on international affairs, u.s. national security, and economics as well. host: when it comes to mike pompeo specifically, you had an op ed talking about the man himself. you called him possibly the most significant candidate in years past to come to this position. why do you say that? guest: he has the chance to be a transformative secretary of state. he has the complete confidence of the president, which is credible when he walks into soggy bottom to be secretary of state, which looks like he will after the senate. he is a strategic thinker and has a very impressive background. graduated first in his class at west point, went to harvard, was a successful businessman, served in theerms in congress house of representatives, served immediately on the intelligence

committee, has an amazing grasp of public policy. his ability to connect with people as a great listener, has strong convictions, but does the president is largely calling the shots. a has developed terrific relationship as cia director. they spent a lot of time together in these briefings. the president obviously entrusted him with the most sensitive public policy delsea with a secret trip to pyongyang to meet with kim jong-un. having watched him closely over the last three years, i have a sense this is a man who has a three-dimensional sense of management and will get into the state department. he has built great relations in the house. he is someone who also thinks not simply about military issues, which he does as a west point graduate and a man who served in our armed forces in europe, but also as someone who

thinks about strategy in a broader sense, what the united states needs to do, what the possible areas are that we can have a real impact. host: those things translate in your mind to those diplomatic skills you have to have? are those demonstrations of that aside of visiting with kim jong-un? guest: there are many first of all. -- as cia built director, he built relations with our allies in the sunni muslim world. he has built close ties as a man whose word who can be trusted. he has a sense of what america needs to do and how to go about doing it. he is young relatively. he's dynamic. i think that he will really be a transformative secretary of state. host: some of the criticism that came up during his confirmation hearing is his views on muslims and the role in fighting the war

on terror and homosexual and gay rights. when you think about those criticisms particular from democrats who brought them? guest: obviously the have to be taken seriously, but at the end of the day, our muslim allies can assure you that mike pompeo ophobe.an islami this is a man who spoke out after 9/11 and said that he wished more muslim leaders had spoken out before 9/11 on terror issues and i think that would've .een helpful on gay on gay rights issues, he is a devout presbyterian. he is someone who personally does not believe in gay marriage, but he has respected gay marriage as an institution at the cia. numerous gay spouses or spouses of cia employees working there and he treated them as any other working spouses.

host: do you know him personally? guest: i do know him personally. host: have you talked to him at all or has he shared with you at all the possibility of coming into this position? guest: i have not spoken to him since he has been nominated. i think highly of him. institute areon fortunate that he has taken part in numerous workshops that we had held. what i find most remarkable about him is the ability to balance the strategic focus and the knowledge and detail, which is really rare and a policy leader. he is someone who has an immense grasp of global affairs. he has just a detailed oferstanding of the way foreign leaders and how they think. we had a workshop at the hudson institute where we do various workshops with international partners. we had a workshop with our partners from brussels in the european union.

there was a workshop that we did in july 2015. the two presenters were now president of the european parliament and congressman pompeo on transatlantic intelligence cooperations, long before he was considered for the cia. 's insights were impressive -- his insights were impressive. as the workshop came to an end, he said i have to leave early as i'm heading to yemen with my friend senator tom cotton. we are going to vienna to talk about the iran deal. we found out after that trip that senator cotton and representative pompeo had uncovered the existence of the iran deal that did not need to be submitted to the u.s. congress for approval. that's the kind of person he is. ofis a skeptic in some ways these kinds of international agreements, but exactly the

person you want if you want to get agreement with north korea. if there's a possibility to get this kind of agreement, mike pompeo is the guy to do it. if you want to save the iran deal, this is a guy who knows the tough questions to ask and knows the standards to set for what a good deal will look like. continue our conversation with kenneth weinstein of the hudson institute. if you want to ask them questions, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, democrats (202) 748-8000, and independents (202) 748-8002. you can make your thoughts and questions on twitter available at c-span wj. i want to play reaction from the hearing before the vote. this is senator bob menendez discussing some concerns and criticism about mr. pompeo and what he brings to the position. here's what he had to say. [video clip] >> i do not have a satisfactory answer on the question. which mike pompeo am i voting on? during hisly hearing, director pompeo offered contradictory statements.

he was less than forthcoming when he was pressed on a number of issues. given the opportunity to outline the strategies he would advocate to the president and to the country to deal with russia, with iran, with north korea, with china, or with venezuela. he failed to exhibit the death of knowledge or forthcomingness. any nominee knows those are hotspots in the world. the truthfulness and the willingness to be forthcoming to this committee are essential in my view for a secretary of state nominee. on both his interview with special counsel mueller about russia and his nondisclosure of his trip to north korea, even in a classified setting where he would've had that opportunity, both critical issues before this committee, both of which members on both sides of the aisle peppered him with questions about. he exhibited he was more suited to be cia director than

secretary of state because he wanted to be clandestine i'm at the end of the day. i don't expect the cabinet secretary to publicly disagree with the president. indeed it is his or her duty to carry out the president's agenda, but as policies are being worked on, i'm skeptical of the time of diplomat -- kind of diplomat pompeo would be, whether he would push back on the president's worst instincts, whether he would be able to say no, or he would simply be a yes man. host: what do you think critically about that last comment from senator menendez? guest: i have to respectfully disagree. beenirector pompeo has involved in some of the tough decisions that the administration has worked on. increasing troop presence in afghanistan where the advice went against the presence instincts. director pompeo is someone who has got a personal relationship with the president where he can go to him and say, with all due respect, mr. president, this is the direction

we need to go. with russia he has proven to be tough and has had it must -- a much tougher policy than the , who administration did was so obsessed with getting in iran deal that we ended up not enforcing the red line with syria and allowing russians to go into crimea and not arming the ukrainian opposition, which were ukrainians fighting russians on the ground. this is something that's very important. diplomats of expelled from the united states is remarkable in this administration. i think director pompeo is someone who will work closely with the president. i think he is someone who can be trusted. the issue of the north korea trip, that was a highly classified trip. i suspect the reason that was not disclosed is

fears that it would leak to the press and might create both expectations and problems with the negotiating process that is really quite sensitive. host: our first call for you comes from chicago, illinois. rudolph, you're on with our guest. caller: good morning to you and your guest. if anyone takes a real good look at the adults or the backgrounds of the candidate for secretary of state, they will find he is very conservative, almost a neoconservative. what has happened and how they refer to the previous diplomacy,ion on relating to people with dignified fashion, as opposed to getting in these unfunded wars and these unfunded obligations that existed. this administration has gotten to power from innuendo, personal attacks, racial attacks. this individual is in line with the president and the rhetoric

that catapulted him to the presidency of the united states. i'm very cautious because this articulate point in time, you have to re evaluate a relationship with nato because we have been with europe almost 50 years to stabilize the european countries. when we get into the notion of what is happening in the world of the arab world and the onslaught of nuclear weapons and the international relationship with china as well as russia, you need someone who is balanced. host: thanks, caller. guest: he notes rightly that this is a challenging time with world affairs with resurgent russia, the challenge from china, the situation in the middle east, particularly with syria. i would have to submit the president's worked in a very multilateral fashion with our allies in france and the u.k. to take action against the syrian chemical weapons

facility, which we destroyed a little more than a week ago. this was a very multilateral action. his action with regard to expelling russia diplomats was an conjunction with our european allies. this is the kind of action that needs to be done. he has worked very carefully on the north korea dossier with our japanese allies and south korean allies. in terms of the president's rhetoric, the president is the one saying it is time for us to leave syria. he has rethought that a bit now. he thought it was originally for leaving afghanistan. has been tough on our nato allies, saying man they need to step up and spent 2% of gdp on national security. the kind of person mike pompeo is someone who understands the president agenda and knows how to work well with partners around the world.

he will come in and help smooth some of the changes that really do need to take place in global affairs and to move things forward in a positive direction. host: virginia on the democrats line, james, good morning. caller: i think pompeo has his nose so far up trumps the you know what that mike pence is going to have to move over. that is what trump needs -- another yes-man. that is why comey got fired in the first place. he was not a yes man. at least obama had michelle to answer to. elania, but she knows nothing about politics or anything. host: the idea that pompeo would not push back on trump over issues? guest: i'm offended by the analogy that you used about the vice president, as someone who

has an excellent relationship with the president. he gives advice and does so quietly behind the scenes. as director pompeo has done the same, the president does not only want yes-men around him. he has shown that already. he is someone who listens to his advisers and changed his policies and taken steps he has not wanted to unlike president obama, who refused to take action in syria in the face of widespread evidence that action needed to be taken, military action i'm talking about, after the syrian weapons attack. the president has taken action twice, going against his own instincts. he is increased troop presence in afghanistan. president trump has exercised an independence of judgment and move away from some of his stances during the campaign as well. host: let's move to specific issues and the way you would like to see pompeo perform as secretary of state.

you mentioned the iran deal could what is your stance on staying in it or not? guest: it's a tough call. the deal is a very imperfect deal. there are a number of major problems with the deal. the sunset clause that allows iran after 10 years to theoretically go out and develop weapons. secondly the fact that ballistic missiles are not included in the deal. thirdly the fact that the president needs to certify periodically that iran is in compliance with the deal. the fact that it does not deal with regional issues as well. growing regional efforts have increased since the deal was signed. a large amount of money given to the iranian regime, so the deal is fundamentally flawed. it's a terrible deal. if we speak to our european allies off the record, they will all tell you that. they were not happy with the deal. it was a deal they felt they had to go along with because president obama wanted it. it was a deal he was willing to

sacrifice syria and ukraine for. it was not the way to negotiate a deal. the question is what do you do after may 12? is that if the europeans don't come forward with major changes to the deal, including the possibility of inspections of other military facilities in iran that were left off the original deal where weapons could be developed, i think we are going to be in a situation where the president may give the europeans another few months to say show me some changes before we fully exit. think that is probably the right policy. they have now got the message with the nomination of mike pompeo as secretary of state, who is skeptical of the deal. john bolton will continue the skepticism of the iran deal. europeans need to step forward and do something. the iranian regime is a regime facing major protests at home, wildly unpopular. there's an economic crisis going on.

asre is a klepto theocracy bret stephens of "the new york times" has called it. this is a regime that has taken money from people to fund overseas excursions in syria and lebanon and yemen. it's a very unpopular regime. it's a regime that there are protests every day. we see protests throughout the country and protests that come from the base of the regime. the lower middle class and more religious people. my sense is we should increase pressure on the iranians. we ought to do more to get the word out about the assets that the regime holds in both the supreme leader and mr. rouhani hold and get the information out there. also put pressure on the europeans and let them know that things will not continue as normal. if you want the deal to remain in place, there's got to be changes. host: we will go to jim.

caller: good morning and thanks for taking my call. pompeo'sall, i think boss is not a good president, but the alternatives were i think worse. he hadction is because such poor choices from the parties. think he is really a smart guy obviously, but the thing that personally i find troublesome -- and i heard this on cnn or maybe one of the other news channels -- i think it is sending a bad message to our that are former head spy at the cia is going to be our secretary of state. i think that sends a bad message to our allies. host: jim, thanks.

guest: i think it's a fair point. i think our allies and governments around the world no mike pompeo and they trust him implicitly. they may disagree with him on issues, but they know he is a man of honor and strategic de pth of real understanding. certainly the fact that he was cia director could be used against the united states in terms of public diplomacy, but this is a man who served with great honor at the cia. he is clearly well-liked and agency and brought a number of critical transformations in in a short time there. george h.w. bush was also cia director and went on to be elected president. as we have seen by the incredible outpouring of support for him not just after the death of the first lady this past week but over the past few years, what a beloved figure he is. the fact that someone is cia director, that can be used for propaganda purposes, but that

does not imply anything necessarily about how they will be viewed by governments or people around the world. when he goes to foggy bottom and starts making speeches, i think that with the mike pompeo is in knowing his character, i think that this is a man who will prove skeptics wrong. host: from baltimore city, maryland, gregory, your next up. caller: yes, in reference to pompeo and germany, germany did not participate in the bombings in syria. how does he negotiate with germany? because germany is in our nato alliance. what is wrong with germany? there is something wrong with this picture whether u.k. is involved and you have france, but germany is not participating. you answer me why isn't germany participating? because of germany is not participating, something stinks in this whole picture.

answer that and i'm off. guest: thank you. that's a great question. the reason why germany has not participated is that germany since world war ii has had a much more pacifist strategic mindset. that's obviously in reaction to the not the regime -- nazi regime. willing to much less engage militarily on issues particularly outside of its own country and the immediate nato's own. -- nato zone. it also has a coalition government now where chancellor merkel, who did not fare particularly well in recent german elections, as a coalition government, she is not the person who makes all the policy decisions. the social democrats have a number of key ministries and they are deeply skeptical of military action and deeply skeptical also of reaching the the nato summit for

military spending. the germans at this stage started some action could they . they are helping the french in mali,, but they are generally skeptical and they will remain this way until the end of chancellor merkel's term, particular given the coalition government they are in. host: kenneth weinstein of the hudson institute joining us. he is the president and ceo. the german chancellor visiting later this week. the french president visiting today over the iran nuclear deal. -- much do these leaders sway do these leaders have over the president? guest: he's a very multilateral leader and the japanese saw this one from minister -- when prime minister abe went to mar-a-lago early in the presence terms --

the president's term whether north koreans launched a missile test. the president got up and said we stanwood hundred percent behind our great ally, japan, and yielded the microphone to the prime minister to talk about reaction and what would come next. he has built an incredible partnership with emmanuel macron, whose a dynamic, young leader. when you look at the surface, he is very different from president trump. president trump is a populist. he is someone who is not had government experience, but both of them have really challenged the establishment. macron built his own political movement in france that has taken over and essentially pushed the major political parties aside. he has come with a message that france needs to reform and france needs to get its economy growing again and that france needs to assume its rightful place around the world.

this kind of willingness to challenge the conventional inzo abe andh should go o emmanuel macron has, he is willing to listen to leaders and talks regularly to leaders around the world. he has a very strong bond. his relationship with chancellor merkel is different. he respects chancellor merkel and they speak regularly. they have yet to develop the kind of personal close relationship that the president has say with either the japanese prime minister for the french president. the president has also developed close relations with president xi jingping of china. the president has this ability and listens skeptically, but he is willing to take their advice and their reaction to the syrian use of chemical weapons was actually guided by

president macron. i think chancellor merkel is going to come this week and there's the big state dinner tonight. he has a big welcoming ceremony now. it's a big event. the merkel event will be more low-key, but there are critical issues they need to work on together. host: from gary and baltimore, running short on time, go ahead. caller: i will keep a quick. i was wondering your opinion on mike pompeo's ability to deal with trump and how sometimes he becausep-flop on policy he has to communicate policy changes to his advisers. how will he deal with the situation that nikki haley was involved in, rex tillerson was also involved in,, a couple of trump snafus, but may have tweeted something different? guest: sure. another great question.

pompeo understand that donald trump is president of the united states and mike pompeo is not. he will defer to the president's judgment. he has a close relationship with the president where he can be frank with the president and speak regularly. he is not the kind of person who i think is going to get caught off guard by these kinds of decisions. we are still waiting on the russia sanctions announcement could i think in the end nikki haley will be proven right about what she said. i think it's just a matter of timing. he knows clearly how to deal with the president well. he understands what motivates the president and has seen them up close. if anybody can handle what might be tactical moves where the president may seem to depart from policies but really doesn't, it is secretary designated pompeo. host: kenneth weinstein, thanks

for your time. we will continue on with our discussions. the supreme court is set to hear a challenge to the presidents travel ban wednesday. to help preview that, georgetown law professor joshua geltzer about what's at stake. tom sancton will talk about the french president and the meeting with president trump. that's coming up on "washington journal." ♪ times" versus the united states, the pentagon papers case. president next and is using his executive authority to prevent the new york times from publishing these top-secret documents related to the vietnam war. lower court judges actually stop the presses. for the first time in american history, the presses were stopped by the fear that the

exposure of information might be dangerous to national security . another judge refuses to stop the president and his rate proud of that. >> the pentagon papers case is a narrow one. i've not seen the movie, but it's a great story. it always stands with the proposition that the government cannot stop the presses in advance, but the court acknowledges the possibility that once "the new york times" and "the washington post" publishes is that there could be ramifications afterwards. >> it has created a local atmosphere where in hugely broad bounds that we do not go after the press for publishing things even where the statutes seem to say that we could. >> watch landmark cases, new york times versus the united states, with guest floyd abrams, who represented "the new york times," and the former solicitor general under george w. bush

live monday night at 9:00 p.m. eastern c-span. >> c-span -- where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies . today we continue to bring unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. announcer: "washington journal" continues. serve ashua geltzer the former counterterrorism senior director at the national security council under the obama administration and currently at the georgetown university law school, the institutional constitutional advocacy where he served as director. guest: thanks for inviting me. host: the supreme court

discusses the presidents travel ban tomorrow. can you set up what will be debated and what is at stake? guest: this has a complicated history. this is the third attempt by the president to deliver on the campaign promise of this travel ban. the first time, it is actually reaching the supreme court on merits and full. the first two were temporary bans. the third one is indefinite and has made it to the court. when it was issued, it was called a proclamation. it applied to a countries. six of them were muslim majority countries. in his third attempt at a travel ban, north koreans were added as well as venezuelan diplomats. chad was just removed a couple weeks ago. seven countries at stake and big picture, this has been tied to the white house back to a promise donald trump made when he was a candidate to deliver on the total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states. those were his words. this is his project now finally getting to the highest court in

the land. host: as far as the position you take on it or at least georgetown university, where do you stand on it and did you contribute anything to the supreme court? guest: i'm proud to be a signatory to an amicus brief in which i was joined by 51 former colleagues, national security officials of both parties. our view is that this doesn't really address and national security threat. it holds up national security as a pretense. when this proclamation went into 150 millionept people from entering this country with the stroke of a pen. that is not the approach that i or my colleagues are fiddly with. we have a vetting system. keeping out whole countries is bad for counterterrorism and bad for america's standing order. host: when the court debates this tomorrow, what will be the arguments not only from the government standpoint but the state of hawaii, which is bring the counter?

guest: the challenges brought by the state of hawaii and other plaintiffs. what the government says initially is that the court has nothing to see here in essence. there's nothing for the court to get into in the substance of this case. that's a pretty bold argument given how controversial this is. in my view, doesn't accurately capture what the court has done in the past and similar challenges where they have reached the merits of the case. getting past that, the government makes the argument that the president deserves and courts to defer to him because he's acting in the name of national security. that is where we have waited to say that this is no national security. ultimately what the challenger say is that this is inconsistent with immigration law is given to us by congress. congress sets immigration policy. congress says he cannot keep out people based on the

nationality. both of those things are what the president has done here. the challengers say this violates the first amendment of the constitution. host: the travel ban being debated by the supreme court is a topic for this segment. if you want to ask questions, it is (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 for democrats, and (202) 748-8002 for independents. i am no lawyer, but some of the people who defend the president's actions reference the code, which reads in part, the president made by proclamation and for such. as he shall deem necessary suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. why does that not cover this case? guest: that is the right place to start. start with the text of the statute. there are a couple things we are

hearing on. the first is for whatever period he deems appropriate. this third ban is indefinite. this violates something finite. it exists in perpetuity if the president has his way. another key part of that language is the idea of a class of aliens. part of the argument here is that there is nothing definable about 150 million people. classes mean something you can put your finger on. they pose a particular type of threat. maybe they were exposed to a particular type of disease. that is the thing that congress had in mind when writing carefully those words. 150 million people across eight countries, there is nothing you can say common across a set so why. that is what hawaii is challenging. host: some say this is a religious ban. does religion come into the argument that the government makes? guest: religion comes in by the way the white house frames this as a whole. after the present issues a third attempt at the travel ban, the

one called approximation, thereafter he retweets and you may remember this three. lately anti-muslim videos posted to twitter by a british far right politician. the press secretary was asked what is the president doing and what his i view? the answer was that the president has already addressed this issue, most recently through the issuance of the proclamation and travel ban. that is the white house saying that this travel ban delivers ultimately on that campaign promise to keep out one particular religion from entering this country. that is part of the argument before the court. host: is it fair to take things made during the campaign as a candidate and not as a president and apply them to someone who makes policy as a president? guest: it's a good question and a tough question. we law professor spent all day on it. i don't think you need to get back to those campaign statements. you have enough after this president was president. you have when he sits down to

sign the first travel ban, he looks up and says, we all know what that means. that he has surrogates like rudy giuliani go on television saying the president told me i want a muslim ban and i found rat a way to write it. those were not videos of national security. those were videos of islamophobia . you can put aside what he said on the campaign trail and still see the problem with directing a religious test and our country's borders. host: did the previous administration apply any of these tenets for keeping people out of this country? guest: they did not and i appreciate you asking this is there is confusion on this. the previous adventures assertion double something called the visa waiver program. you can think of that program as extra credit, the bonus countries get if they have really excellent betting systems and excellent ways of sharing information about their nationals who may be coming to this country.

if they do a great job of that, their nationals can enter this country and travel here more easily. that is supposed to be adjusted depending on how well other countries are doing. is a carrot and a stick for the present. the previous administration did use it for those purposes, taking those countries who received bonus credit and moving back to the baseline. what the previous administration never did is go below the baseline and that is by law and statute. it was a change and it made the law say country by country is not the way to keep folks out of the united states. host: joshua geltzer is having this discussion about the travel ban debated before the spring court. the first call is from baltimore, maryland. you're on with our guest. caller: good morning. first of all, i find it interesting that a district judge in hawaii has more power than the will of the american people as representative by the

vote that we had in 2016. -- if then is establishment clause of the constitution for bids establishment of religion through immigration policy, why was the lautenberg allowent permitted to jewish immigrants specifically from russia in 1991 i think it was? guest: let me start with the first part of that question. you raise an interesting point about how judges and justices are dealing with this case. ultimately judges and justices are not there to intervene in ordinary politics. they are not there to overturn the will of the voters, but they are there to patrol the outer limits of what the executive committee. judges always the job of whether it's one district judge

hearing the case of the beginning or nine justices hearing it at the and. that is their job -- to patrol those limits and make sure that congress and the president act within legal boundaries. to go to your other point, this is not something presidents have done before to keep people out. not on the basis of nationality said no to those trying to enter this country since 1965. some people point to one counterexample when cubans were kept from entering. violatedne cuba had treaty obligations. those entering the country at that point where themselves manifestations emperors personifications of a treaty violation. that incident also never made it to the supreme court. it is clear that the president has violated the change to the law enacted in 1965. host: from maryland, matt, hello. caller: thanks for taking my call. this comes up every once in a while that the president can

enforce a travel ban. here's the strange part of this argument. when he referred to it as a to -- ban, you refer it when you refer to it in wars come you never say it's a muslim majority country that we are at war with. are you saying you are at war with a muslim majority country? forget a muslim majority ban. are you saying your for bidding travel from countries you are at war with? guest: to the extent that we are engaged in armed conflict with countries affected by the travel ban, we are really not at war with those countries. we are in a state of armed conflict with the terrorist groups threatening us and others from those countries.

it is something i spent a lot of time working on in government. some of the countries covered by the travel ban -- we are using military force against terrorist groups like isis and individuals linked to al qaeda. it is not the country as a whole. even when we are using military force, we are doing it in an individualized way. our military work to make sure the target of military actions are lawful targets. that individualized approach taken to a very different context is really what i am urging here and not alone. it is what congress is urging. this issue has come up before and it's worth pointing out. this is something congress has debated after 1965 and even after 9/11 whether there should be an approach to regulating immigration done on a country by ca country basis decades ago. congress has consistently said no to that.

if president trump wants to revisit the place to take issue. that is what the court is being asked to look at. host: does the supreme court take a strict look at the law or look at the larger implications? guest: the court tries to grapple with what difference is appropriate. courtarting point for the and you hear justices and lower court justices say this when they talk about the art of judging, it begins with close readings of text. that was part of justice scalia's legacy. it is important to start with the text of the ina and then go from there. host: are guest not only served in the obama administration, but he was the law clerk to justice stephen breyer. he served as a law clerk to justices. he is also the georgetown law

school. jack, go ahead. caller: good morning. first, i would like to make a comment before i asked mr. geltzer a question. we already have a million people coming to this country and needless to mention we have 10 here, notgal mexicans to count chinese and all the different ones. the bottom line is, ok, we need , weo under this travel ban need to go like australia and put a merit system. we should select exactly who we want to come in. this travel ban is sort of like that. we decide who comes in here. my question is to mr. geltzer. what would you do -- and i'm sure you have any part of your family like an arizona here --

we have had illegal immigrants deported murder people. what would you do if one of these people got in on the thing that you are fighting for murder someone close to family? host: we believe that there. guest: what the caller points out is that this is obviously an issue that excites people's passions and it's in the realm of political debate as to how we should approach immigration. that is something a lot of us have been urging for a while now , to have a debate on immigration beyond this travel ban. that's a debate that has to involve the president and the u.s. congress. it is article one of the constitution that puts the authority and really be responsible be to set what the constitution calls a uniform rule of naturalization. it charges congress with that responsibility. if the president wants to take a different approach, whether that is country by country or

nationality by nationality or otherwise, he has had over a year now to engage with congress and appears to have done nothing to try to change the law. in terms of those who come to this country, like the rest of us, the criminal laws must be enforced against them. overgins with the debate change in the law and not the stroke of a pen. host: the previous cases suggest how the court might act? fort: there's a lot there different justices who bring to the case different interest. there are some who will start with the text. they will find it interesting to put together these pieces of the immigration and nationality act and how it changed in 1965. yup have justices long interested in the question of how much of congress's constitutional authority can it give away essentially to the president. if the president is really able to do what the government says he can do, it suggest that congress has given away too much , which may be the reason not to read the law that way.

other justices may hone in on the establishment clause question. there are some of the ways and i'm interested to see which justices take which pieces and go with that for oral argument. by june, we will see which justices come out which way. host: how to justices like anthony kennedy, who tends to be the swing vote, how does he respond to cases like this before? guest: it is so hard to read tea leaves at the court. not just the current group of nine, but their predecessors have often been deferential when it comes to national security. the caseamples include during the korean war and some of the guantanamo cases during the past couple of decades. when the court chooses not to accept that framing from the government and not engage in the difference requested by the executive branch, they feel the national security justifications just don't hold up. that is what a number of my former colleagues and i are urging the court to take a hard look at here.

l t: republican line, lorne for minnesota. caller: i think trump is doing an excellent job on immigration and i wish they would allow him to do more. i am 74 years old and i've never seen so much different people in this country. they want to live the american dream and then go back to we don't do that in america. as far as hawaii, we should maybe drop them off the map as far as a state and let the judge have always immigrants come there. host: let's go to arthur in louisiana. go ahead. caller: good morning, john. -- gentleman. it's interesting to hear people call in and they are constantly beating up on the people who are trying to migrate to this country. this is a country of immigrants. one of the things that people are failing to look at is

that there is what is called a bigot factor of the people who they want here and the people they turn away. the people coming from south america come here and they want a baby and instead they come from russia and its perfect for them to have babies and their living and trumps property . something is wrong with the whole picture, don't you think? guest: i think the caller has put a finger on why this case is so important even beyond the legal arguments and those of us who are law professors and they tend to focus on those. beyond that, this is in many ways a case about the soul of this country. this country is overwhelmingly a country of immigrants. to the extent that there's a political debate over what that should mean, that's a debate to be had within the bounds of the law. it's also want to be had recognizing what this country is and who we all are. i think the caller has put his

finger on why there's a lot to watch for. host: democrats line, missouri, this is john. caller: how are you doing? host: five thanks. go ahead. caller: let me give you a little history. i am 73 years old. i voted democrat for 50 years. i even voted for obama the first time he ran. firstr, after obama's time in office, i switched to republican party. my problem with the democrats is that you have lost touch with reality with the people in this country. you what these immigrants here and you think it's fine for them to be here, but every time i walk out the door, i see somewhere in the city homeless veterans. icc your citizens that can't eat. you are spending millions and millions of dollars on these immigrants so that they can survive. you are giving them food and utilities. you are giving the money to live

on while the senior citizens are struggling to make ends meet because some ass in congress says i cannot live on $200,000 a year and i need a raise. host: on the travel ban, make your point toward that. caller: how can you tell the market people it is fine for these immigrants to be here and be against what trump wants? you do not invite someone to dinner who is trying to kill you. what about your homeless veterans and senior citizens? host: we believe that there. guest: this does not strike me necessarily as a partisan issue . it's a congress that has worked in different manifestations and with different presidents to give us the immigration law that we have now and as the backdrop for this case. it was president bush who was engaged with congress after 9/11 about immigration policy. and it was president bush who

helped frankly improved the individualized system of vetting that is currently the hallmark of how we do immigration in this country. among those of us who work on national security and feel strongly that this case is one in which national security is being held up as a pretense by the government, that is also a bipartisan group. it is not just folks like susan rice, who worked for democrats. it is folks like richard lugar who has chimed in on this case. host: "the wall street journal" this morning in the editorial section talks about the travel ban. the editors make this argument from previous cases saying it was chief justice john roberts who explained in the holder versus humanitarian law project that the judiciary is ill suited to make national security judgments since "information can be difficult to obtain and impact of certain conduct difficult to assess." the lack of confidence on the part of the courts is a

appropriate. guest: i believe with the chief justice spot on. thee need to defer to executive here? i don't think so. it's reading the first amendment as interpreted that says the president can't do this. the president has also not articulated a good national security reason that would get him into the land of that quotation mentioned. the ninth circuit court of appeals said in its opinion that the statute requires findings. if the president wants to try this again, he should write down at least a little bit. maybe some of the findings will be classified, but something more to articulate what is the national security basis. the government has not done that or even offered something at the most general level the on saying initially we need to keep people out of this country.

a shipping rationale, saying we need to incentivize better information sharing with certain foreign partners . host: mark from silver spring, maryland, go on. caller: i wanted to agree with one of the callers saying -- i work on national security. i love this country and i feel that if we are going to be anti-immigrant, then we don't have any values left as a country. for?is left to fight what does this country stands for? what makes us better or different than any country? guest: that ghost of a heritage issue and the legacy issue i mentioned before, which i think this case is so important beyond the legal bounds of it. it is the tradition of this country founded by immigrants to welcome immigrants. i believe the national security as well. i believe in keeping this

country safe not just from terrorist threats that the whole range of very real threats to this country. i just don't believe what the president has done here is responsive to those threats in any meaningful way and that it goes beyond what the president has the authority to do under immigration law and the constitution. i'm all for keeping this country safe and i all for if this president is concerned about how the individualized vetting is done and people coming to this country, him working with those across his intelligence community and law enforcement officials to improve that system. it's an ongoing process. it has been improved since 9/11 repeatedly. if there is more work to be done, that is where the president should be focused and his efforts. host: if the court goes for hawaii, doesn't limit the president in the future to place bans? guest: it depends on the court

writing down its reasons for reaching the result. let's say for example that the court says nationality was taken off the table in 1965. whatever the president can or can't do, he can't do it on the basis of country or nationality. that would yield an interesting possibility. it would yield the chance for this president to go right down the street from where you and i are and talk to congress about that. it is something other presidents have discussed with congress and has not been changed since 1965. that would be where the conversations take place because that would be in the shadow of knowing that the statutes passed by congress really do set meaningful constraints on the president. host: here is still in texas on independent line. go ahead please. caller: i'm calling about the obama administration and what were the percentages of christians that were brought over compared to the muslims? guest: i don't know the exact figures on that, but i do know obama

administration and approaching the immigration issue try to do at least two things. one was to stay within the bounds of the law and utilize the tools given by law. that is where the visa waiver program came into play quite prominently. at the same time, to work on the individualized betting site. -- vetting side. those to make sure all the holdings i'm hoping that as a senior dvisor to president on terrorism, answer for this off the top of your head. countriesing how many that the trump administration they ded to the list inherited from the obama the istration that was countries since he's been in how many muslim countries there are actually? thank you.

there so to be clear, were no countries receiving this sort of treatment before president trump came along. his first travel ban applied to seven muslim majority countries, one to six, iraq was removed. and the third one, the one its way to court now, applied to six muslim countries, plus north korea, and to a diplomat.enezuelan chad, one country has been a oved, that adds up to in sense five muslim majority countries consistently in play, of this project and venezuela piece. joshua geltzer georgetown case.g about the muslim at the white house, the french president, emmanuel macron and to start ill be there a series of meetings with president trump. as you can see there,

that formal for arrival already in place. we'll show you a little bit of be back to talk about the visit.

host: those are preparations for the visit of the french president. we'll take you back to that once he arrives. entinterested, we're in your thoughts on the topic. your want to talk about thoughts on the visit. it's 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats.

independents, 202-748-8002. the ll take you live to proceedings when they take place. until then, joining us on the tom sancton, writer for "vanity fair" who just put piece looking at the french president and his influences. good morning. good morning. host: thanks for joining us. ould you describe or give a sense of mr. -- president macron and his relationship with it currently p as stands? guest: sure. emmanuel macron is a very young man. he just turned 40. in neverbeen involved electoral politics before. him, led me to intelligent, a very articula articulate, determined, focused leader. and he's actually trying to put ambitious reforms back at home, not without provoking

protest.mount of his relationship with president trump is very interesting, i you could call it a friendship, but excellent personal rapport. goes back, cutrace it back to macron's invitation last july to attend the ump to vestile day.de on bysident trump was flattered this attention from european leader, particularly at a time ost european leaders were looking at trump with i would macron icious eyes and realized if he would reach out o trump, he could establish personal rapport, because lot into trump puts a personal relationships. macron his succeeded in winning confidence and certain friendship with president trump. don't agree on many

ssues, but personal rapport is allowing macron at least an opening to try to convince to change his positions on certain number of the iran rticularly nuclear deal. host: the piece that -- go sorry. i'm go ahead. guest: also the steel, putting tax, macron minum would like to see exemption for the european countries. you wrote in the piece about how the president macron handshake of president trump, i imagine that would apply to the visit, come and give context. uest: well, you know, when resident trump first elected the foreign leaders, it was quite clear he had this trick, handshake, he would hand and pump and jerk the f his -- and macron was made

aw aaware of this by his ambassador and macronied videos practiced his handshake on consisted of vice-like grip and refusal to et his arm be jerked by president trump. when they did meet in brussels last may for the first time, the videos of the handshake went viral because the young french his own and it actually succeeded in making handshake k off the first. then probably a painful handshake at that, it looked white-knuckleer. host: how did the people of here perceive this visit in the united states with our president? presidentl, you know, acron is now facing a lot of criticism and protests at home,

quo, his up the status popularity ratings are not much now.r than trump's right so i think there is a sense that the french president has a certain amount of influence on resident trump and that he may be able to win certain theessions that would be to advantage of the french, particularly -- got you. -- stay on the phone with us, we'll atch a little bit of the proceedings as they take place, we'll be right back. ♪ ♪

♪

♪

host: the events at the white house, president trump and many vice including the president, visiting with the

french president emmanuel macron. "vanity fair," wrote a piece about the french piece, joining us. before we got interrupted, we talking about the similarities about mr. trump and president. go ahead and continue that thought. electedes, both of them on their first attempt, macron electoral ious experience, trump of course did not. they are both outsiders, in an way, both products of the same phenomena, populist quo and of the status traditional parties in their respective countries. in the u.s., that rejection ave us president trump, who's politically very different from president macron. and france, you had rejection of the traditional parties, which young e leadership to a man who had, as i say, never run been briefly ore, finance minister, but he was

rained, he has a degree in philosophy, got a degree in public administration, his first job is an investment banker. both outsiders from the private and they both, macron stressed this in our interview, hey are both trying very hard to carry out the campaign romises that they were elected on and of course the promises themselves are very different. but, i think there is a sense in their told macron meeting, we're both outsiders. host: stay with us. guest: interesting similarities. host: we're about to hear from the french president. >>meeting, we're both ladies an french anthem of the republic, followed by the national anthem of the united states.

[french national anthem] ♪

[national anthem] ♪

host: tom sancton of "vanity fair" joining us on the phone. do you get a sense for the president's willingness to press issues, particularly as he'll meet with our president issues like the iran nuclear deal, which you entioned and other topics, as well? guest: yes, i would say the iran uclear deal is foremost on his agenda and the reason being, deadline for 2th president trump to decide and announce whether or not he's the deal and france thinks this would be a move.bad and he's also joined in that opinion by his fellow europeans, merkle. g

nother issue, steel and aluminum tariff president trump threatened to impose on importers. the european oint of view to obtain tariffs if they are imposed. presidency macron said in a t.v. interview a couple days ago, you don't launch a trade war against and it is very important that the u.s. and of course allies in macron's view, close allies last 250 been for the years. that is going to be an important agenda item. and of course, the climate, climate that president trump that is an f, personality issue for macron and he will try to encourage the the fold to return to on the issue of climate control.

host: because you interviewed im, do you sense him as a forthcoming negotiator, a charmer when he makes his points? is his style? guest: both. he's forceful, determined and he of charm.a lot i think the charm is certainly substance, he's, one of the remarkable things about him, his determination to programs and his his policies and i mentioned policies is reform have triggered a certain amount, resistance at ho home, but unlike french to back ts who tend he wantsopular unrest, to continue with these reforms through.ly carry them a challenge because in the

tran transport and aviation area, hurt the country. he's facing a big challenge at home. a determined is practicingmatist, very results-oriented and i think he will follow through reforms.se host: give us a sense of write nt macron, as you about, deep in the world of culture. if you could tell us how that the influence he bringsbrings on how he manages his presidency? guest: culture is very important to him personally. he calls it, he even used the word obsession, his private obsession. educated, has advanced degree in philosophy. one thipg he's done along with wife is to bring french the rks into the palace, presidential palace. hey brought modern artworks by

artists like picasso and deberse, into the presidential palace. i think that is important for as showcase for french culture, for french art, but his policies, f one thing he's trying to do is reak down the barriers that prevent, as he sees it, prevents some communities, some sectors the french public from having access to the french cultural admired which is around the world. he's trying to get more access people, like in more underprivileged areas, get more culture, with a culture"c," and musical coming from different, not just music, but culture from of the world.s france is a big melting pot of lots of heritage, different communities in france and i think president macron is cultural bring all the

heritage of the different tent ities under the big of french culture. ulture is a big deal for president macron. brigitte, tell us about her. guest: that's an interesting story. macron was his theater teacher in high school. him.s 24 years older than while he was her student, they developed a very close relationship that over the years developed into a romance and she family, her eft her husband and three children and macron i think about 10 years ago. as i say, 24 years older than him. interestingly, melania is 24 younger than president trump. that 24-year age gap is another thing the two presidents have in common. thing i should say about brigitte macron, she, too, is

interested in the cultural rea and been to some extent a curator in this effort to bring works intoive french the palace. host: tom sancton wrote a piece, profiling the ce french president, the issue of "vanity fair." want to read vanityfair.com, is the website to go to. thank you for giving us your time and talking about this. guest: thank you. thank you. there is a little bit of the proceedings you saw, those will continue on, if you watching that,in do so on c-span2 and then you can monitor that there. lot of events with the french president with the meeting, a dinner, coverage about that starts at 6:30, if you want to watch that tonight. go to our website for more information. until the end of the program, open phones.g to if you want to give us your comments and thoughts on the

and h president arriving other topics discussed today, now is your chance to do so. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats and independents, 202-748-8002. also make your thoughts known on our twitter feed at on our , and do so facebook page at facebook.com/c-span. turning to politics. the "wall street journal" rofiling the arizona senator, martha mcsalley. revelations by her, christina peterson for the "wall treet journal" this morning salley alleged sexual abuse during her school years, saying mrs. mcsall y said she attended st. mary's in

island, her ad father had died when she was younger and to escape from exercise, turned to including swimming and runging. track.n cross country and one of her first running coaches became a father figure for her, succeeded him,ch she put the same trust in him. two decades older than her, the coach pressured mrs. mcsally into having sex with him. grew increasingly uncomfortable with it. mrs. mcsally, he didn't physically force me, it manipulation. the book identifies the track spokeswomank diear, aid she declined to comment further mrchlt mcdyer denied her allegation, "i believe she's that girl is the most scheming woman i ever met," he "he came to the home few times uninvited with and without

people, but they never had sex," he said. that is one story we'll read in phones. until 10:00. give us your thoughts on the topic. for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents, 202-748-8002. social media sites are available to you, as well. another senate race being looked today, this going on in west tryinga, six republicans joe mangz nator so manchin. democratic incumbent and popular in his own right, posted numbers in recent months and one of the least liberal voting records among democrats. the presence of massey don

blankenship, who served a year in prison in connection with the which plosion of 2010, miners.9 bel speak ship was asked to about the explosion. prevent itm going to from happening again. annie, first from pennsylvania, line.at's good morning, go ahead. caller: hi, good morning. your show very much. i was watching the ceremonies of french t trump and the bans and reviewing the i guess the service people there. is this properw, protocol for all president when is they receive somebody from state department and have other presidents done the same thing? comments on o the

t.v. host: similar instances have same lawn on the with various leaders over the years. in fact, if you are interested seeing the events, this is going on with president trump, ut if you visit our c-span video library, we've documented many of these similar type of have taken place over the years, events at the hite house, state dinners, other similar events. you can see that at c-span.org website. jerry from line, michigan. hello. caller: good morning. host: morning. caller: yes, i was hoping to comment on the airstrike that was done on syria. and i'll advise that american 11-year-old boy diab, name of hassan h-a-s-s-a-n.

last name, di-ab. in the oy involved he's fine douma and and his story has been going internet and we haven't heard anything about the staged about attack. aven't heard from president trump, president macron or theresa may. know about the boy. pedro. hey, hect hello, good morning. caller: the guy was right yesterday, you are the best-dressed man on t.v. lafrance, welcome to president macron f. not for the

france, the united states would not exist. thank the french people for all they have done for us. host: state dinner taking place 6:30, writing ng a little bit about food that will be served at the dinner. menu for tuesday's decidedly lettuce featuring young and spring lamb for the entree. ontemporary with buttermilk biscuit into a salad featuring and a sauce enhancing the main course. served with be jambaylaya, lovely nod, the side carolina gold iel hue and tomato jam will link color to the aforementioned goat cheese gatu.

nectarine tart comes from ice cream flavored with creme fraiche. will the president get his extra scoop? indications he might be cutting back. frances from georgia, democrat's line. ed ha. caller: yes, how you doing? thank you, you're on. caller: i'm trying to say about the location that was going on. president w if the -- really comfortable with by assad. looking at both of them, i think they can achieve something, but bringing this country back to normal place. right now, i've been in this ountry for nine years and i know the difference of american america right now and then. it looks like to me that the the value, lost

america has lost its value. say to the going to president, if he's going to listen to me is to try to keep closeness between us and france okay, let's hear from joy, missouri, you're next up. caller: hi, pedro, thanks for discussion on immigration. immigration format of 1965, was mistakes everggest made. it threatens the very existence of the united states. repealed. be the u.s. is overpopulated and more immigrant. if everybody was to live the way need five would planets. so keep up the good work. ost: the "washington post" highlights another one of confirmations,'s people confirmed to a position into some be heading

trouble. this is for the veterans ffairs, senate lawmakers postponed hearing of jackson, to top veteran affairs, after republicans and democrats raised concerns about qualification in white house h the medical staff. white house and other officials were told on monday. the development came two days white house n, the physician, was scheduled to testify before the senate affairs andn veteran looking at a difficult confirmation process and further in addition to experience, k of following annual physical in january. from tom.a, next tom is on the independent line. caller: good morning. so much for c-span. i use you as a resource all the time. back and look at old videos site.utube and on your

i can't praise c-span enough, goodness i can't get a good story out of anybody, too too left, i am tired of it. that woman just mentioned about immigrants. grandparents came over from canada, i had an uncle that warht for the u.s. in world ii. ncles that fought on behalf of canada rural air force with the u.s. world war ii. they pretty much built this country, real issue when people keep talking about immigrants that, we're grants all immigrants here. campaign going on in west virginia. near the quarter there and i saw a billboard on sunday, out to this event in west virginia and a billboard for this guy, i think blankenship. i am curious, his billboard was unusual, it was pretty, kind of nasty. i had my kids in the car. i went and looked him up and man

get to the point where we're electing people like this, we are in big -- be in trouble, you know, they had the e, this guy, how in world is this guy still got a job. his guy was working for me, he would have been suspended five months ago from the stuff he was doing before he got in there. now he is doing the stuff, he should be out. him out. host: okay. e'll go to ron, ron in ohio, republican line. ron from ohio, good morning. caller: good morning. just would like to wish the president macron and his wife, them to our country. nd i -- host: what do you think the visit will produce, a lot on the agenda, including the iran nuclear deal, what do you think about the president discussing issues with the french

president? caller: yeah, it's a serious matter. i mean, if i was listening to a watching r when i was the president arriving and the is, and esident, that he said that the french the dent may pull out of iranian deal. and he's a little disappointed about president trump pulling ut of the deal, you know, situation.he climate host: and reportedly the iran uclear deal is one of the topics of discussion between the french president and our not only with both french president, but the german later lor who will visit in the week to encourage to stay within the iran nuclear deal. probably get more discussions and how they played ut as the press reports on

those over the next few days. again, open phones, 202-748-8001 republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats and 202-748-8002. one of the things that stemmed rom people coming into the united states, particularly with a travel ban being discussed, an extreme betting center, desire from the administration. miroff, with the headline, the president's new center, the extreme enter, will be enough to end the travel ban. the story goes on to say in about the questions center's future role, u.s. custom and border protection fficial said the new center will use and expand upon physical infrastructure at the training center will also use virtual relationships to save cost and logistical challenges that require colocation presence. on official who spoke anonymity said the center was ot intended to replicate

efforts by other federal agency, improve dding, it will connection between information about potential threats and the u.s. officials who have the use that to information to make their own determination. closely r will work with the national terrorist creening center, and the intelligence community to ensure appropriate minimize duplication effort. when the president toured national targeting center on theuary 2nd, before issuing order, homeland security ecretary said it stopped 70 terrorists per day from entering the country. franklin, republican line, go ahead. good morning. great conversation, as always. ceremony a beautiful from the white house. i always thought that the french didn't help us throw the british ceremony h because rom they loved

freedom and -- threw the french out of canada and the king of saw a good opportunity for revenge. ood things can come from some not so good motives sometimes. have a good day. on the io is next independent line. hear from dave. dave from ohio. ahead. caller: yes. in regard to current events in investigation, i would -- i think this is a to entice president mueller because arrows in them two their quiver. if mueller finishes the investigation and find somes wrongdoing, which it appears now, nothing is going to actually attach to the president. if the president would fire him is re the investigation over, mueller and the democrats could claim victory, that trump

something to hide and that is why he fired him. so they must let mueller go on and finish the investigation and dribble out, whatever it is they have, they need to let it be complete. therwise, they play right into a charge that he was guilty and they fired him. -- op ed hill had recently from slayed gordon, out lican of washington, today, which goes under headline, let robert mueller do his job. former senator saying as former senator and state concerned neral, i'm with basic rule of law from the president of the united states. what statements the president is firing the special counsel robert mueller and possibly other senior leaders at department, time to call a halt. allowed to be continue his investigation and facts lead.here the

this began amid concerning evidence of foreign interference elections after f.b.i. director james comey was removed justice leaders selected mueller to lead the investigation. he has capacity to make effective, domestic intelligence functions r terrorism of the f.b.i. highly regarded veteran rosecutor and law enforcement official has right experience for this important government role. his investigation is authorized standing justice department rules, no evidence he's abusing legal authority. he goes on from there, if you ish to read this op ed by laid gordon you can find it at thehill.com. georgia, democrat's line. you're next. rosetta from georgia, good morning, go ahead. rosetta, and i'm calling about immigration.

indians would have known what was happening the way they doing things now, they would put a ban on peep they'll came people fromrish and other countries. everybody came over here was looking for a better life. nd why is -- are they saying now that these people is not over here?uldn't be everybody was dressed different they hey came and when were o the new york, they treated bad, a lot of people was treated bad when they came here people didn't even ask to come. immigration is kind of strange. host: okay. if you are calling in, if you ouldn't mind turning down your

television sets as you wait for us to get to you, keeps the conversation flowing in a smooth manner. mary in fort washington maryland. hi. caller: good morning, everybody. would like to say, start with telling the republicans, no, we losers.s are not sore that will encourage us to get to be more faster and educateod who we choose. everyone please do your homework. and every since -- slithered down his escalator at his towers, i'm done with that. what he's done all year is turn a swamp of into racism, what we need to do, have to million people go down the white house with fists in the air and bats and tell him, your t to go and take swamp team with you. this country is in deep doo-doo makes no sense. host: okay. we'll leave it there. this is the washington times this morning. be party congressman to

of an election that effort being thwarted. denver, colorado supreme court rocked by state political by turning t monday oug lamborn off the primary ballot, citing problems with signature gathering. lamborn fell short of the thousand signatures required to republican the primary after excluding petitions collected by not a colorado resident. ecause of the challenge circulator was ineligible to serve, the signatures he invalid and may not be concerned. with two congressman choices if he wants to retain a seat. federal al with the court or run as a writing dannedidate. we realize the gravity of this colorado law does not allow us to conclude therwise, according to the

court. special election taking place today in add, it is the eighth election today in that state. joining us on the phone for a about who iso talk in it at ronald hampton with rizona republic, congressional reporter. good morning. guest: good morning. host: could you set the stage to us when it comes candidates involved in this race? guest: sure. o this is the special election to replace trent franks, the congressman who resigned in after being linked to office.misconduct in he was said to have offered be a surrogate mother of his child. the republican in the race who endorsement and financial backing is debbie former state legislator opponent is aatic physician in cancer research political novice.

host: who does the race favor?ly guest: this sdikt voted for by 21% two years ago and didn't have a democratic congressional races since 2012. his is a very red district, probably the second reddest district in arizona. things, you have to advantage the g.o.p. has had. candidate and has really run a fairly sharp and there's some sense hat the g.o.p. in arizona as we've seen else. where in other elections, less voters thisamong the year. so it is a little more competitive than we would expect it to be. when it comes to then, the cases they make or what they ampaign on, give us a sense of

what both women are campaigning on? guest: sure. debbie wescoe has embraced the agenda, advocating building the wall and she wants to see immigration reform. issues e two of the big in her campaign. he wants to make the trump tax cuts permanent and really has (lesko)be he idea of replacement for trent franks, member.reedom caucus she has been fairly conservative advocate in add, this legislature and would continue this kind of work in washington. and the democrat talked about things like the healthcare, universal coverage through ublic option to compete with private insurance markets, she ensuring that ut and earned benefits as she describes them like social

that thosed medicare are there and preserved for eople who are in those programs. she has also talked openly about evidence-based policy making, especially as through o gun violence common sense gun reforms. as somewhat of mainstream democrat or epublican in fairly conservative district. host: when it comes to fundraisi has advantage o groups much has outside played in adding to cofers of the candidates? outraised est reports 360,000, i 00 to think it was. s is often the case in these races. outside spending is greater than raising. like rnc and ink

nc put in a million dollars so far. equivalents haven't invested in the race. money put in in elatively small amounts from emocratically democratically aligned groups, such as people for the american way, but the democratic organizations have not invested in it the way republicans have. really been, though, a sense that republicans are seat, i'm keep this slipping into another upset from march. host: that depends on turnout experience oes your tell you as far as potential turnout for today? turnout ll, we expect to be relatively low, as we see with all special elections. know in arizona, we're pretty aggressive early voting ballots by ack the day-by-day party on

basis. what we've seen so far republicans have ballots early, so mean they oesn't voted for the republican or democrat, but it means these are people who primarily consider themselves republicans so far. hansen.n thank you for your time today. guest: thank you. to open phones. steve, thanks for waiting. silver spring, maryland, line.rat's go ahead. caller: yes, i really not sure, of not sure why the leader the free world, our leader, rump should be meeting with the -- france macron. years to ed two to -- -- he is not qualified to

to this country or speak about the free world. he should not deserve that. to macron.ot listen he's killing everybody. in cameroon, to kill -- in open phones. 202-748-8001 for republicans. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. rachel in orlando, florida, republican line. yes, good morning. i think what is really going on here with the immigration issue, it is just another thing that has been told down centuries, or any sort of empire country that causes its citizens on ight amongst each other issues like this, it is really about the danger of its downfall, because just like now ith the rcpe, trump is allowing, it is a gift to china and its communist era.

now they are putting in a by causing us to there oopg ourselves and is rcgp thing that trump is the g gifts to china and communist government and not everyone knows about this. is -- hat caller: i think that is what this is really about. think, why are we fighting amongst ourselves, when we are a nation? how many people can go back and say they were actually born in this country? to mike in go on nebraska. republican line. caller: hi. good morning. morning. caller: yeah, i was just ondering if anybody ever investigated if any of the democrats, the governors or oliticians in the white house were taking bribes from the cartel? would like to hear if anybody has investigated that. up?t: why do you bring it

caller: well, it just seems to me that all these democrats want in here and to me that seems all the illegals work for them, but, not all of good majority of them. that way they can spread drugs country.r host: the white house approached abstinence program, the topic of the "new york times" this morning. saying that the trump administration issued new rules programs to prevent teen pregnancy favoring those abstinence and not supplying effectiveness. friday uncement issued by health and human services does not excludeprograms that cont information about contracepti contraception. abstinence and sexual risening voidance, other programs that promote sexual risk reduction, on supportd emphasis afraid many involved in teen pregnancy program interpreted as sexually active teenagers

to stop having sex, new rules requirement most organizations receiving federal one rigorous ist, evaluation to be effective at hanging some sexual behavior, reducing pregnancy rates or rates of sexual activity. democrat's line? caller: good morning, pedro, ta -- for taking my call, as usual. taking my call. immigration, the thing is, we as a country, we are a country -- what we need to do is we don't have to give the president it.ry bit of congress has to make some rules for the immigration because the resident cannot do anything without the congress. it seems to me that congress is want to do don't anything and that is why they want to divide us f. we have of immigration law, they need something to be changed, they need to change.

go to the have to court, i think that is my whole problem. i don't know where the congress all about this, they divide into peop people. blue and red states, it is very ad that the congress are playing games with us. host: story that broke a few ago george h.w. bush dmitted to a hospital to treat infection that had spread to his blood. according to a spokesman, the resident appears to be recovering. president bush was admitted to medical hospital yesterday morning. bush spokesman spoke of that monday evening. he is responding to treatment and appears to be recovering. updates ue additional as events warrant, according to the spokesperson. springfield, missouri, independent line. hi. caller: hi, pedro. wondering why it always is

you are on when they come in and network and cnn, i appreciate your calm. to seehings i would like congress look at more importantly is the tax bill. the tax understand ill, they come behind us and pass another bill that puts us further into debt. back, i should look ever understand trump's position on healthcare. i believe in universal more care and would like emphasis on the e.p.a. and i of the out the future world and the way we are treating the environment. your calm k you for when you sit there and listen to some of these people, i'm sure you must go home with a headache some days. healthcare, ters of "wall street journal" responding on a story taking a look at incur by and cost they

melanie evans. he cash flow margin monitored by moody's investor services, 9.5% a year from earlier in preliminary analysis f 160 nonprofit and public hospitals and hospital systems with credit ratings from the agency. points new ine challenge for u.s. hospitals as more patients seek medical care settings and enrollment surges in medicare, ypically pays less than commercial insurance do, electroneds are squeezing hospital revenue with tight driving expenses higher, according to moody's, same time gains the expansion realized, moody said, hospitals see more unpaid uninsured parents after included in the tax overhaul, repeal of the

mandate.e new york is next, republican line. elizabeth, go ahead, you're on. caller: yes, yes. i don't understand the big problem with congress and the president. the president is right, we have many illegal aliens here. not that we don't want them, if they ome in legally, like did years ago. they had to take tests, learn the english language and pass things, no problem. 0,000 of them across the border, most are in trouble, let's be honest about it, what they get licensed thatut taking the test and people alovely n people. they come in illegally, that the country, they e don't want the rules of the world. take the guns away from do that, do this, because people are mentally ill. the right route. host: okay, laredo, texas, independent line.

alexander, hello. caller: hello, sir. i would like to comment i think democracy is dead. i think trump should cross the rubicon and dissolve congress just it.is host: why do you think democracy is dead? he's -- he hanged up. rob is in new york. democrat's line. rob, go ahead, you're on, thanks for calling. c-span, hank you for you do a great job, pedro. hey, a guest suggestion, pat chote, guy who wrote "agents of ago.ence," years host: uh-huh. caller: who really the wrote the back in the day, considered for vice president with ross perot, i would really like to know what what is king about happening now, 40 years later, think s later, i don't the same rules apply and i think

just mimicking perot, i ould like to hear 30 years later, what a guy like chote is thinking. democrats have to use more simple language when sue them on en you cable t.v. they need straight-forward talk, to understand language and the -- they have to call the out on these cable shows who have atactic, it is it day over, i notice after day, all the different shows. apologize, i do apologize, we have to end the that's only because as of couple minutes we take you agriculture committee. they are having a hearing today, sonny perdue, that topic, will agriculture and also how that impacts in rural america. place in ng will take a few minutes. we take you to it now.