of possible military actions. in the >> tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two, the memorial service marking the 50th anniversary of the assassination of robert f kennedy from arlington national -- cemetery. watch the rfk 50th memorial service at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two, c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app. coming up next, on a look at results of tuesday's primaries in eight states. about, rep. gosar: talks -- decisions on

immigration policy. then, talkingmessaging going in8 midterm elections. ♪ host: this is the "washington journal." later on the program, paul gosar of arizona and david cicilline of rhode island, however across the u.s. yesterday 8 states voted in primaries and we will spend the next half hour discussing who one and why -- won and why. joining us for that conversation, leah askarinam of inside elections, she serves as a reporter and analyst, good morning. looking at what happened yesterday, what does it tell us

or suggest about november? starting with california, probably the biggest race of the evening, we now know there will be a republican at the top of the ballot in the governor's race. that is important, not because we expect the republican to win, i think we can expect gavin newsom, the lieutenant governor to actually pull through in november, but it affects turnout down the ballot when you have a republican at the top. host: more about john cox, tell us about him. guest: he has support from president trump, who tweeted about him several times in the last couple weeks. which is important because, the is basically tweeting about somebody who probably will not win in november, and it shows you how important it is to the turnout down the ballot. he is not originally from california, he is a real estate investor.

and he is a little bit further right than we would imagine the state to be at this moment. host: according to the los angeles times, 700-6000 plus votes compared to gavin newsom, 936,000 plus loads. guest: that tells you what you need to know about what will happen in november. if you look at those numbers in the senate race, dianne feinstein is going to be -- she won the most votes in california, so expect her to have a relatively successful run, just because she did so much better than her democratic opponent, kevin deleon. so there will be two democrats at the top of the ballot in the senate as well, so we know that the next senator from california ut it isa democrat, b important that you have two

democrats at the top of the ballot in the senate race, that could affect turnout for house races, which will determine the majority. host: we will continue with california and politics from the primaries, but if you want to ask our guest questions about what happened in these estates and the overall impact. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. you may want to explain about how california does elections, particularly the top two idea. guest: it is not like most states where you have a democratic nominee or republican nominee, with two separate ballots. it is whoever gets the most votes, the top two vote getters in a district or statewide race, those of the ones who progressed the november election. which creates intricate dynamic, which means he could end up with two democrats or republicans at the top of the ballot, which is

something that democrats especially were concerned about this cycle. there are seven really competitive -- where republicans are representing seats hillary clinton carried in 2016. and there are fewer, it looks possible that the democrats could be cpletellocked out. it is looking less likely this morning, votes are still being counted. in the 10th district, last time i checked, a candidate who was kind of under the radar seems to have -- a republican, might make it to the top two against jeff denham, the republican incumbent. but it is looking less likely and democrats have avoided a disaster there, because the takeover opportunities are so keep the democratic majority in november. host: the lieutenant governor gavin newsom, now at the top of the ticket, and it looks like a

democrat for the governor's race. how does he compare to jerry brown, the current governor? guest: gavin newsom has been around democratic politics in california for a while. former mayor of san francisco, and it is no supplies he decided to run for this. he has been raising money for quite a while now. and he has been leading the polls. that thewas a chance mayor of los angeles, a democrat, could end up being the or would get the second-most votes. and that did not end up happening. so it looks like gavin newsom is going to be facing -- host: on the senate race, you mentioned dianne feinstein beating daily on -- deleon. what were the questions surrounding that? guest: kevin daly on, he is a

state senator who is running from the left. dianne feinstein has created what is perceived as a pretty moderate democratic record. and that is a lot of progressive energy following donald trump's win last year, also following bernie sanders' performance.so there was talk about a resurgence from the left. kind of like what you saw with the tea party a few cycles back. but we are just not seeing evidence of that in this cycle. there is not enough money on the far left. the kind of candidates. and it is unclear of those kinds of insurgent left candidates will make a difference. host: 1,000,001 at 48,000 votes and 200,000 for kevin deleon.

guest: voters are looking for a sense of stability, diane feinstein has been there since the 1990's, and especially in this political climate, she is the candidate voters are turning to prudent host: in the other primaries -- to. primaries, isther a politics because of issues or president trump? guest: i would argue more on the side of president trump at this point, in this election. what you have, at least for the democrat majority, are a bunch of districts that demographically, based on recent voting history should be turned into the democratic zone. so you would think, especially given enthusiasm from president trump's win, that you would see kind of an acceleration of those trends, but you have a lot of strong republican incumbents coming into these races. mimi walters and a few others.

in colorado we have kaufman. hadso many who have difficult races before and are prepared for the challenge of a lifetime. so i think it is a combination of kind of getting, or making sure voters know that you are separate from the president, you are your own person who is separate from party. host: we will cut about the races. we started with california. robert from marina del rey, republican line. go ahead. caller: i wanted to make a couple of comments. i think it is a good sign for the republicans that cox is second. it will help those house seats where the democrats are doubling down on picking up congressional seats, especially in orange county. the republicans are also able to recall the state's senator, knight, which is another good sign for republicans.

i am curious as to what will polling so deleon, badly but finishing second regardless, will he pull out of the race and indoors dianne feinstein? where will he continue as the second place finisher? guest: your first point about coxshing, about john finishing second and helping turnout down ballot. that is basically the reason why this is an important race, not necessarily because john cox is going to be the next governor from california, but rather because in a race, especially in orange county, these could be determined by a couple thousand votes, maybe less. so if you have somebody at the top of the ballot turning out at least some enthusiasm, who is paying for ads to turn out republicans, that is a big deal for the congressman further down the ballot. as for deleon pulling out of the

race, i mean, i have not heard any reporting that would suggest he would do that. a lot of these candidates, if you look for example at the near governor's race with cynthia kaufman, i am sorry, with cynthia nixon. a lot of it is about pushing policy to the left by being a stable in those races -- staple in his races. inpaying for ads and being debates, you have an influence over the way policy plays out, erences voters' pref will change. host: is it possible he will endorse dianne feinstein in the end? guest: i have not heard any reporting that would suggest that. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. from san diego, james on the republican line. caller: my question goes like

this, with the state having such a large amount of illegals in the state, and being able to have drivers licenses, how does the state verify that everybody who votes is legal to vote? how do you do that in the state of california? guest: i think one of the issues you are pointing to, especially in california, the idea of immigration and ice and the border wall, these are prominent issues that affect a lot of people personally. you will see reporting about families feeling that they are at risk of being deported. so that is something where you can see it as a motivating factor for people to get out and vote. it is unclear kind of how it will affect turnout, which i think is part of your question, but i do think it is important to kind of dry attention to the fact -- draw attention to the fact that deportation and ice

are all major issues in california. host: there was a story reporting the los angeles times said about 2.2% of registered voters in los angeles county, 118,000 plus were missing on the list for the primaries on tuesday. guest: the air -- things are still early in california right now, so i think we need to follow up on that as the votes come in. host: susan on the republican linehost: -- host: susan on the republican mind, go ahead. others my son and two were some of those people, two of the republicans and my son did not have their names on the ballot. or the register. they had to get a provisional vote. and also, i am glad we have cox in there.

i am a strong, strong republican. it is not that republicans are against immigration, we are against illegal immigration and we are for the law. host: how much did immigration plan to these elections, whether it is john cox or others, how much did it play into it? guest: as i mentioned before, in california immigration is a big deal, especially with a growing hispanic population and with the president's comments on a border wall and immigration policy in general. what you see across the country though is democrats taking a variety of positions on immigration. i spoke with one democrat who did not necessarily oppose the border wall. and the, one of the orange county districts, i spoke with a republican who said the messaging that the way donald trump has been, the words he has been using, that is what is turning off voters and his

policies are not the problem, it is the term "border wall." so you have seen republicans tried to figure out the message, how to message in policy about immigration, whereas democrats are trying to figure out what the policy is across the board appeared host: turning to the senate -- board. host: turning to the senate race in montana, what was at play? guest: the democrat will be running in a state of president trump carried in 2016 and it will be a tough race for him and he will be facing the state auditor, matt rosen do. he has support from ted cruz. he was in a competitive primary. we did not know the results until last night and early this morning against a district judge in montana. that will be one of the key races starting in november that we will be paying attention to. there will be 10 states where

democratic incumbents are seeking reelection that donald trump carried. that is one of those. all of the states will see democrats with populist messages, saying they will protect state interests from the federal government and from outside forces. so we will start to see those messages in a -- and a pretty conservative one from matt rosen dale pretty soon. host: so why is tester not doing well? guest: his, the national environment is not on his side. the same way it is not on had a hand cap's side in north dakota. in ordera lot of -- for these democratic incumbents to get reelected, they need to have donald trump supporters vote for a democrat. on the 2018 ballot. that is something that is hard to do. that said, a lot of these

incumbents have done this before. they have outperformed barack obama in these elections, so they have to tell voters, i am the same person i was six or 12 years ago, even though the environment has changed. host: tell us about matt rosen dale. guest: he is the state auditor who lost for the open seat in montana. a couple of cycles back. stick his ground as a conservative in the race. he will probably bring in high profile figures. rand paul, ted cruz. you can imagine, if you live in montana you will be seeing ads for a lot of candites, b especially matt rosendale. host: does he he support directly from president trump or one of his surrogates? guest: president trump has been vocal about the fact that he will get involved in the general elections, and there is no reason why donald trump would

not support matt rosendale. host: baltimore, maryland. john, you are next. caller: sean? host: go ahead, you are on. caller: the previous color after about what california is doing to make sure that you legal's -- illegals are not able to vote with drivers license and you completely different did it, so i would like the answer. guest: if you are going to talk about the policy about who is allowed to go to the voting booth, that is, you probably want to talk to an expert on that, but what i can tell you is based on the research there is not a lot of evidence that people who are not documented or people who are not allowed to vote, have been voting in these elections. this is obviously a concern the president has brought up, and people across the country have been bringing up, but that is not evident to that at this point. host: one other senate race to look at, new jersey. bob menendez at the center

because of his experience before. remind viewers was surrounded him and how did he do? guest: he was on trial recently for bribery. and ended up being a mistrial, greatis hard - -it is not when you are running for office and you are facing charges for something, especially something like bribery. so menendez was running against a candidate who had a very low campaign structure, very little name. somebody who i do not even think about an f i c report and only got 60% of the vote at the end. usually if you win a primary with 60% of the vote, you would not notice. but if you are running against somebody who had no campaign structure, what that tells you is voters likely went to the voting booths and picked the

democrat who was not -- that is what we think happened. host: what sense do you get that menendez is trying to change the script on what happened to him? guest: he has been very clear he does not feel the charges were fair. and he has been clear he wants to remain public and active, active in public office. so i think we will see him continue to stay strong, but you also have a strong political machine in new jersey, so if there is any chance that a democrat would not win the senate race, i am sure there would be a replacement somehow rolled out so democrats could keep the seat. host: the republican eventually running against menendez, how much of a machine does he have? guest: the one without a good structure with a democrat running against bob menendez. the republican does not have the funding to get it done. the republican, unless something drastic changes in the next few

months, a republican will not win the senate seat in new jersey. what it tells you is if bob menendez does one, people will not be excited about it. host: again, our guest is leah askarinam, a reporter and analyst breaking down the elections that took place yesterday. we will look at other states as we go along. we have a map. if you want to ask questions about what happened in a specific state or the larger political aspects at play, republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. a little bit about inside elections, what is it? guest: we rate and analyze and handicap federal and gubernatorial elections. you can take a look at our ratings at inside elections.com. we meet with experts and we try to get a sense of how these individual districts and states

are trending and what it means for november. host: you talked about california's governor's race, focus on new mexico a bit. who are the key players? guest: the republican is term limited, which means there is an open seat. a few congressmen from new mexico will be running. steve pearce and michelle lujan grisham. and it looks like considering hillary clinton's performance in the state, the democrat will come in with an advantage. i think we can expect a woman will be holding that governorship, which is a big deal because there are so many few women governors, but there will be money spent there by the republican as well. host: focus on the house race, because one question will be of the house maintains power after the elections. what is the likelihood? guest: i do not know how much yesterday really changed the dynamic for november. i think we know the house is

still in play, california could have changed things if democrats had been blocked off of the ballot in the top two primaries, but they weren't. in new jersey, one of the topics or a republican -- for a republican open seat, steve monaghan who has run for office before, who carried the district he is running in before, did not win his primary nomination, so they will be evaluating that to how het john mccann -- could fair in that election. it did not indicate that he could run as a strong of an election as monaghan. host: a lot of them, by virtue of the state, -- is retiring. what happens? was a formerkim assemblywoman and she will be the republican nominee there. it looks like she will be facing

washington, d.c. is really excited about. he is hispanic, he won the lottery so he has money for his own campaign. when you are looking for a candidate, that is an example of carrying one's own, winning the lottery. that is one that we will be watching because it was a seat that hillary clinton carried. and not having that incumbent advantage could really hurt democrats. that said, ed royce is behind young kim. she has won elections before, but not while president trump was on the ballot. host: and a tossup in california, the seat for darrell issa, 49. guest: another one with a republican woman. she will be running at the republican candidate. last i checked, there were some different democrats in neck with each other -- neck and neck with

each other. it looks like there will be a republican and a democrat in the race, which was unclear to what it for hours ago. host: a tossup race there in california. and another california caller, tom from los angeles. caller: one of the things i would like to know, if you took into consideration -- i am a republican and i have seen theblicans who - -- democrats have a foot of 4% majority when it comes to voting -- 44% majority when it comes to voting, and republicans have 45%. i do not know if that has been taken into consideration. number two, in los angeles county, orange county and ventura county, we have 1.4

million illegal aliens. that is a concern. we are extremely concerned about the voting and i would like to know your political affiliation, just for the heck of it. and i would like to say that i but theam pleased, two-person vote was put on the ballot and we stupidly voted for that, because the top two, you automatically disenfranchise the republican party. the democrats put it on and the people voted for it. and we were disenfranchised. at least it is coming back to bite them a little bit and hopefully we will do better. can you respond to the questions? thank you very much for your time and consideration. guest: thank you. so the top two primary, i will start with that. i heard your frustration with

that. democrats are also frustrated with the system, that is something that across the board people are frustrated with. i saw a tweet the other day that suggested that maybe the fact that everybody dislikes it means it is the best way to do it, but there is a lot of frustration and hand wringing about what it means, because it is unclear if the top two system accurately represents, or will end up with an outcome that represents the district's. it does look like in california, this cycle you will have when republican and one democrat most likely on the ballot in the key congressional districts. avertede have kind of frustration that could've been caused there. in terms of your question about illegal immigration, again it is a question that is brought up throughout the country and one of the things that struck me

was, with your question, it is one of the most polarizing issues right now. so what you are seeing is candidates having a hard time trying to balance getting to a base that is concerned about the issue you brought up, but then the same issue can just turn democrats the total opposite way. especially in places like orange county, where you have a handful of both, where you have to have support from democrats and republicans. and it is a really hard dynamic for the candidates to figure out. host: a publication put out the other day about independents in california, more of them than republicans now. guest: right. independent voters are something to watch in this election, in general, because we know democrats will be voting for democratic candidates, because president trump is in the white house, we do not know if republican voters, what they

will do yet, but independents are more of a? mark.stion we are trying to figure out what they will do. host: nick, good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. the current primary actually does not surprise me. i live in illinois and we have over 110 counties, hillary 12nton for example, won and won the state. it does not surprise me that there haen a republican wave there has been a talk about a blueave and i have yet to see it in illinois. but california and these other states, it does not surprise me. it actually saddens me, because america's oldest political party is the democrat party and it is

going by the wayside over donald trump, who is a democrat, and the russians. there is no evidence on anything, you are spending all your money on these districts, and you lost. you guys are losing in the will continue to lose. you had a candidate who ran for president who called half the country deplorable. called theand she republican party irredeemable for foot over donald trump. -- for voting for donald trump. guest: what you're seeing now throughout the country, different democrats trying different things to try to get democratic voters back. like you said, there are democrats who are sick of losing and it is part of what you saw ean, across the board you see democrats supporting medicaid for all, others who are not supporting that option at all. and you have a bunch of kind of,

you have to have a petri dish right now for a democrat to experiment with what will work best for a 2020 message. you also have a lot of voters who are strategically voting, especially in california, based on who they thought would win rather than following their heart. so you bring up a dynamic of people across the country are also feeling, and people in bc are totally aware of. host: jack on the independent line. caller: thank you. so i am hopeful that the democrats would win in november. i am doing volunteer help for a campaign, because the believe it is everybody's duty to stop trump. that is why we are organizing a protest against trump in canada over this weekend when he attends the summit. and i encourage all fellow canadians to join the protest. thank you. host: aside from the race we talked about, what other

notables do we have from yesterday? guest: i think my takeaway was you are seeing more divide at this point on the republican side. isher, the democratic divide not playing a huge role in the election. at least this year. martha roby, republican congresswoman in alabama will be in a runoff later this summer. republican congressman earlier this, just if you months ago in north carolina, who was ousted by a primary challenger. so i think you see the divide in the republican party magnified, where as the democrats have different positions on single-payer and on different issues, but they are united in their opposition to the president. host: our guest will join us on wednesday throughout the month of june, she will be wrapping up primary action leading up to the road to election 2018.

of insideinam elections. she is a reporter and analyst. coming up, we will talk about immigration with representative paul gosar of arizona and it later on a look at democratic strategy going into 2018 and beyond. representative david cicilline, democrat from rhode island. we'll be right back. ♪ announcer: this weekend, but tv will have live coverage of the printers row lit fest in chicago. starting saturday at 11:00 a.m. with jonah goldberg and his book

"suicide of the west." carol kennedy and "robert f kennedy, ripples of hope." crossedrlman with "we the bridge and it trembled." "c roger biles, author of hampion of race and reform in chicago." and with the former president of aclu and her book "hate, why we should resist it with free speech and not censorship." " everything you love will burn." and pulls her prize-winning author jack davis with "the gulf, the making of an american sea." of apollon the book and the first journey to the men.""rocket

watch, starting on saturday on c-span2's book tv. in anticipation of the upcoming u.s. and north korea diplomatic meeting set for june 12, but tv will feature authors with books about the region. this sunday, starting at 5:00 ..m. eastern with young me park, and "without you, there is no us." "north korea and regional security." thomas hendrickson and his book "america and the rogue state." watch sunday at 5:00 p.m. eastern. announcer: washington journal continues. host: this is representative paul gosar, republican of arizona, who serves the fourth

district and is a member of the freedom caucus. guest: good morning. host: there is a debate going on within the caucus on immigration, can you give us the characterization of that debate? guest: we are trying to come up with a solution that looks at what the american people wanted, they wanted border security and were promised border security. they want to have a conversation about illegal immigration, why is it taking so long for people to come to theountry the ritay, and border enforcement, as well as interior enforcent. that is what they want to see. we have seen a conversation in regards to daca, but is not exactly what everybody else thinks it should be. i think most people want to be fair, but fair across the board with everybody, not victimizing one group over another. so i think we are try to find that line to help that debate. we have great people.

we have an immigration attorney that has been very forward with ideas, that are forward thinking and incorporates a lot of that thought process that maybe there is a way to mitigate this, not just on the daca recipients, but also other children who may be here accordingly. but also looking at some of the quotas as far as the visa lottery program, chain migration, we need changes. host: when it comes to the daca recipients, what threshold can you accept, is there debate about the threshold? guest: there is debate, because at least from my standpoint and some others, we do not want a special process just for those recipients. if we are going to look at children who may be victims, where we give them an opportunity to be part of the legal immigration process with

that more value of -- valuation, i think then there is something there that people can buy into, saying we are not putting one group over another, victimizing one group over another, and we are enhancing legal immigration. host: how do they square with mark meadows, how much is he willing to give in and does he share your views? guest: you know, none of us have 100% same views, but that is the beauty of our group that we have that conversation. what is missing in congress is the debate. having to share those ideas. listen to your point of view, taking and extrapolating it with my point of view and seeing if there is some way to come up with a solution that is good for both of us. it follows the process of the

law. that is the beauty of our group. mark has worked hard to try to get to a solution that mitigates some of the groups who have looked at the discharge petition, as well as hardliners in our group, and i am one of them, you know. so i think he has done a good job. host: our guest will be with us until 8:00 a.m. you can ask questions. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. the discharge petition that you spoke about, explain that to our viewers, particularly about republican signing off in that. guest: it is a means in which you can force a legislation to come to the floor without the consent of leadership, or through the regular committee process. so it is parked on the floor and once they get that what is up

happening, this is dependent upon when it is available, it is brought to the floor into voted on. in this case it is a queen of the hill aspect, where there will be a number of bills inside there, like the senate did with the king of the hill, to see if they can get one with the most votes that passes. that can go away, if one of the pieces within the construction bill that is sitting on the floor is brought forward, the one we are talking about is the good life bill. if that would come up before that time, the discharge petition is no and avoid, you can start all over again, but that is something that we have talked about. we have been promised that since last year from a cr aspect that we would get a vote on the bill -- chain migration, border security, and we are looking at renewal for daca recipients.

that is where the discharge petition is. host: what about carlos cabello who started the process, bringing it to the floor this way and republicans who signed onto it? guest: all of us want to have a debate on immigration. it is debatable. but do not think the discharge petition is the way to do that, jurisdictionede from current leadership and you give it to nancy pelosi for that day. that is not the way we ought to be doing things. i agree with him the conversation needs to be had. but that is a problem with our leadership, we need to go through the proper process, the good politics, that is key to everything. we have no good process here. we should have made leadership the market and say, listen, bring it through the committees, move it. trust the promises kept.

if you are not keeping promises, there is no trust in congress with leadership. host: the fact we are at the state of a discharge petition, is that a failure of speaker ryan? guest: it is. i have been the one person who thinks that we are allowing an emulation of the feelings of the previous speaker. the export, import was a discharge petition. you look at speaker boehner, and now with speaker ryan, the process is wrong. know, they are good people, but leadership comes at a price. rulesve to follow the and you have to make sure that you are not usurping that process. we have to get back to good process, because once we have it we will have good policy. and immigration is so important, this is the fabric of this country. we cannot do this behind closed

doors, it has to be done publicly with the american public. piece by piece by piece, and explain it, allow them to chime in. host: our first call from ohio. gary, independent line, you are on with paul gosar of arizona. caller: how are you doing? guest: i cannot complain. caller: i am so glad. i have two questions i have trying -- have been trying to get asked and so far nobody has the decency or character to answer them within a reasonable amount of time. illegals it cost for aliens to become a u.s. citizen, and what is the cost for legal immigration to the dollar figure? will you start taking care of american

citizens? we have homeless people on the streets. we have people out of work. we are paying people not to work. and nobody has the guts to do it long, say you are for the but then you turn around and you are against the law. guest: the cost for illegal immigration is over $100 billion in a yearly application, so legal immigration, i do not know how you define that because i think the rewards are over and above. we are coming to that aspect when you see that our job market, we have more jobs employed than two is -- who is employed. if we needed when million people to come in, i would rather go to legal immigration. in regards to the border wall, i have been one of those stalwart

people who has brought new solutions to the table. for example, in mexico and arizona, we are low ground and when they get water we get flooded, so there is a perfect opportunity to share a border facility with a water infrastructure aspect, called lower santa cruz, where mexico would pay their fair share, 50%, and in the u.s. pay 50%, and you have something that both sides need and want. it takes care of waste that is coming into the u.s. because of poor septic systems. there is an opptunity that we have put forward in regards to border facilities. you are right, our printable instructions are to take care of the citizens of this country, absolutely. that is where i stand. we should not be able to take and victimize one group of heree that are illegally over people who are try to get here legally. host: jim, go ahead.

caller: thank you for taking my call. i will start with, steve bannon on immigration, they open up to the illegals to call. i am a blue-collar guy. we should open up the line for these americans who have to compete against these people, the owners of cavities that are stressed because of people hiring illegal aliens. i have moved across the country twice. i am a veteran and my wife is a veteran. i work and i am in construction. i compete against people from ethiopia. and central and south america in my job. so i am not -- i show up on job sites and nobody speaks english. and i can communicate with only one guy to get something across. it is disheartening. i have a hard line on the immigration thing.

daca, i do not care if it takes the 50 years, they do not get full citizenship. and if they do, it might take 50 years. guest: i feel the same way. you came into this country illegally, even though it was not up to you. that is the crux of the conversation, that when you go back and you look at what ronald reagan was promised. law, was a mistake, but no no border security. ing the saying -- see same facade, where we allow people to come here as refugees, political asylum. we have to close the loopholes in regards to enhancing legal immigration, that is where we need to put people into that position. not victimize one group over another. that is what we are constantly doing here. this is a perfect time to get this right.

we should have the respect to speak our english language in this country, that is something that our forefathers that was so important in the communication application. and we also have to be as a fille, looking at how to those jobs, getting people off of welfare and enjoying the opportunity of bettering their lives, and their families' lives. i empathize, because we ought to be looking at enforcement and embracing legal immigration, that is exactly what we ought to be doing. we ought to be taking care of our citizens, which is our constitutional duty. host: your colleague in the house, jeff denham wrote a piece taking a look at the need to force a daca vote. never punished charger for the actions of their parents. we should not start now. no other country is home for these children. some of them were the ones who passed background checks, they

are part of our workforce, graduates of our high schools." what do you think about that argument? guest: i applaud jeff for his comments, but how do you take in people from indian descent who are forced to go home? shouldn't we look at this in an applicable light? we enhance and support people for legally come in here, not application. i find it really offensive that in the first action when you want to come to this country you violate the law. what made this country great was nobody was above the law. i forgot, we of hillary clinton out there who bypasses all these processes. we have to get back to it. everybody has to be held to that accountability. i do not a victimize children. not at all. but these are not children anymore. where was the stalwart in this

of them to come forward? i think everybody would like to help them. citizenship is the big stretch. the second part, family unification. we are going to allow parents to come back, that were original lawbreakers? that is the problem. you cannot have one without the other, and that is the conversation that jeff is missing, is that, can we do something with children? i do not want to do something just what the daca recipients. what about the children who are here from india and other places, where this is the only country they know? we will put daca recipients in front of them? i think not. that is the dichotomy we are finding ourselves with as the american people, we are victimizing legal immigration on behalf of people who came here illegally. host: congress has taken attempts at a broad immigration reform before.

approach isow better? guest: no, immigration is a conflict piece of legislation and it covers so many other pieces. you have to share each of these pieces, take them one at a time. you cannot just put a comfort sense of -- comprehensive bill forward, when you put comprehensive behind anything, it is a crap sandwich. do it right. webster, my good friend from florida, understood this very well. take it in pieces, give it the light of day, let it have open debate and bring that policy forward. i am not going to get everything i want, he will not get everything he wants, but because you have a conversation you build a process and policy that people can go, i had my say. i see their point of view. i see how this is interrelated. and you put america first,

bingo. host: republican line, tina. caller: hi. good morning. my comment is, i wanted to know, what are they doing about the problem we have in the white house about the overpopulation in schools, in jobs here in texas. they are refusing to speak english. there is no other -- working on businesses, stores. we are overpopulated. and it is very hard for legal americans to get jobs here. and i feel that is very unfair to americans. and that is my comment. guest: was again, we ought to be looking at our laws are sovereign to those individuals here in this country legally. we ought to be looking at citizens first.

how do we empower and embrace and support the citizens of this country? and an immigration process that rewards people for doing it right. that is key. one of your problems is similar to one we have in arizona, a lot of are in flux is people coming from california, because refugees in california now -- the cost of doing business in california is ascending businesses and people streaming into arizona and texas, so that is also part of that problem as well. this has to be a unified conversation on a solution. you do not do it by discharge positions. that makes it worse. because what you will do is you will take one group of people and put them in front of another. and without due process of a good conversation, a deliberate

conversation, you are going to have hard feelings. and immigration is the biggest key that we should be doing this the right way. host: from california, larry on the democrats line. caller: good morning. my mainning, yes, thought about the daca people is they need to be returned to their countries. and they need to apply to the embassy or consulate nearby for legal entrance into the united states. and about immigration in general, i would like to see a hugeorium so we can -- the number of immigrants, legal and poural, that we have had into the country over the last 50 years. tina hit the nail on the head when she said quality of life for the tax paying u.s. citizens

is going down the tubes as a result of all of the legal and illegal migration that has occurred. guest: you are right. most people now believe that you are starting to see a majority of americans saying, we ought to just not be capping the number of immigrants, but maybe we should be lowering them, instead of bringing one million people into this country. maybe we ought to be looking at reducing the application of those folks coming into the country, and taking care of the cracks and fissures and problems we have in this country. you cannot help anybody unless you help yourself and you have a solid foundation in this country. i agree, there is a mayday here because this is the core fabric of this country, immigration. but it is also the core fabric that will tear us apart. that is the problem, if we do

not do it right, i keep coming back to it, good process builds good policy and good politics. this is something the american people really deserve to have a conversation with, and have their voices heard, instead of special interests. that is vickie -- is the key. we are all immigrants. even native americans came from other areas. how do we fabricate that following the rule of law and enabling and empowering, keyword, empowering, instead of victimizing solutions. remember when you are a parent and you have kids and they do something wrong, sometimes there is a thing called tough love that makes you the better person, that makes you understand your role in life and that you have to be part of a solution. so i think that this is a case where we need to have tough

love. is their inability to have the - ability for the daca children to stay here, but not with citizenship? that is where i stand. i do not want to violate the trust of the american people by saying, listen, i am not embracing legal immigration. that is all i want, legal immigration. host: what about the possibility of streamlining the process for those who would go back to their countries and apply -- guest: he brought up a perfect scenario. a have these political sideways -- coming through mexico. they should tbe going back to their consulate and embassy to apply their. re. aren't they given a status

already, so we can turn around and give them back with our ws. citizenship here is not a right, it is a privilege. it is a privilege. once again, it is not a right, it is a privilege. i love the matrix of our fabric, it is so diverse it is unbelievable, but there has to be a better way. and i think the american people are starting to rise up and see this. host: the house speaker announcing that he will leave office, who should take his place? guest: i am a fan of jim jordan. once again, i bring a backup, good process builds good policies builds good politics, we have not seen that from this leadership team. i am outspoken about it, i did not care for paul ryan's first run. and i voted for him because donald trump wanted him in the speakership last time, but now i

am saying i cannot do this anymore, we need to go back to good policy. host: one at kevin mccarthy or steve scalise? guest: they are part of the same cloth. john boehner, bad process, bad policy, that politics. we get paul ryan, who follows the same old. so i need a clean sweep. i need a whole new leadership team that reinvents this process of listening to members. here is a great guy who has been an immigration attorney, who has this insight, these are people who should be leading the discussion. we have people like mac the military, we need a speaker that builds on that process so we have great policy and all of these different facets. and start listening to the america people. we are a representative

republic, constitutional republic, we are not a democracy. no, we are not. we are a replic. get back to your roots and find out, how do you get back to good policy. host: what convinces you that jim jordan will take in the scope of the republican party and not just the ones you represent? guest: the more you listen, the american people are coming back to that process, saying, we like the freedom caucus. ok? they may have ideas we do not care for, but they are getting back to that process, they are asking questions that create debate. is this really where we want to go? is this how we should be doing it? shouldn't we make a solution that lasts instead of a quick fix? you know? yhy is it that leadership's wa is the only way? i find that offensive.

leadership, what they ought to be doing is listening to the 435, in this case the 535, and empowering, empowering again, those with expertise to come to the top top to have that debate. host: but scotus to indiana, jim on the republican line. i applaud you for bringing up e-verify. i never hear about that from anybody. i would like to get to take on it. if this is made law of the land and they would find an employer $10,000 foremployer every illegal immigrant, these people would stop coming into the country. second, some of the stats on daca recipients this a 21% of not graduating high school and 26 to 28% have been documented

as known gang members. which i thought would make them ineligible to stay in this country. that's what i would like to say. you bring up e-verify, absolutely. that's one of the key contentions by close doors is that that needs to go away. and if it stays it has to have an exemption for the agricultural. that's totally wrong. you've got to have it across the board. youpresent a state that if have a valid when the end of october and and of april, the e. coli came from a spot in the yuma area. that comes for my district. so i understand the agricultural application but once again everybody has to follow the laws. there are no exemptions here. we had the subtest conversation with the district and one of the processes was they wanted to

have immigration process. my staff and i went back to those individuals inside instead of washington building it, how about we build it back here in arizona, so we convene some meetings and guess what they gone, something that has by the wayside that had accountability in the workforce, was flexible but also empowered american citizens. why not return to that? e-verify has to be applicable across the board. it is not hurting businesses, it's saving businesses. if you're going to follow that e-verify process, it's very important. are individuals that say once you start a database on that, you're not going to like its that push me, pulled the type of progress. we have to have somewhere to orient the status of equal application of the law.

i wanted you to respond to the report between you and members of representative desk mccain.mccain -- sen. opponent mademary a comment that he would not appoint cindy mccain. of left field,ut as been reported number of places. the governor's response to ken bennett was inappropriate and the reason i say that is that .as ken bennett's opinion it wasn't going to be someone he considered because she did not fulfill his idea of that role. we involve ourselves because of the way the governor responded to ken bennett. is that i'm not a fan of having

cindy as well. we ought to have that open discussion. anybody that plans for anything in life has a plan and if you're not doing that, you are shirking that responsibility. do you have to have an open conversation with the governor on who you are thinking about and who he will pick? probably not. the demagoguery has got to stop. in.uldn't of had to weigh arizona,ublican of serving the fourth district, thanks for your time. we will talk about policy issues with a representative of rhode island. we will be right back. ♪

>> this week marks the 50th anniversary of the assassination of robert f kennedy. >> these last few weeks, robert kennedy was enjoying himself. he really enjoyed getting out among the people. desk oyed the he said all the people want to do was touch him, not to hurt him. >> this weekend, on american history tv. watch the cbs news special report from june 6, 1968, the night he died from gunshot wounds. >> they decided to transfer him to good samaritan hospital where the facilities were better for delicate brain surgery. the suspect now identified as was led by police

back to the ballroom and hotel. some of the officers had to protect them from the crowd. there were several reporters close to his dairy at this point in it was concern for safety. >> thursday mowe are live in michigan for the next stop on the c-spanus0 capitals tour. the state senate president pro tem for will be our guest during washington journal. >> washington journal continues. host: our guest is representative david cicilline, democrat from rhode island. talk a little bit about the

title you do, what's your job? guest: i was elected by my job -- colleagues in the democratic caucus to develop the house agenda and a strategy to communicate our agenda to bring us back to the majority this year. we have been doing that work and we have been focused really on addressing the core economic anxiety of the american people. it's an agenda that focuses on raising family incomes, reducing the costs from health-care childcare to prescription drugs and making sure folks prepare for jobs in the 21st century. better wages for a better future and we been contrasting ideas with the raw deal of what the republicans are offering. what would help democratic leaders do about that? we think what the

republicans did was a real scam. 86% of us tax cuts went to the top 1%. 83 million working families will see a tax increase. the rest of americans will see their premiums go up. they make more generous to tax breaks that companies get to ship jobs overseas. we would provide a real tax cut for middle-class families that taxpermanent and get rid of provisions that benefit companies that ship american jobs overseas. we would also do it in the right way. there were no hearings or instances, it was jammed through at the speed of light in the dark of night. i think because the more people learn about it, the more they wouldn't like it. we would have hearings and witnesses and testimony and we would craft a good tax bill that provides relief to working families struggling to get by. rebuilding on that wouldn't shape the current tax cut? guest: you could repeal and

replace to use it republican term or you could modify. we would want a tax cut that would grow the middle-class and create more consumer demand. working families have more money in their pocket. we have a different infrastructure plan, with a $1 trillion plan to invest in roads, bridges, ports, transit systems and schools. the federal government will be a partner in that. it will create 16 million good paying jobs. basically a public-private partnership with tolling and user fees and basically saying states and local communities we need to do more infrastructure, that's not really a plan. host: our guest is with us for a little bit. for republicans, 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8002 i suppose republicans would say look at

the --202-748-8002 for independents. i suppose public and it's a look at the latest job reports. guest: we have to recognize that. we still see too many americans not making enough money to make ends meet who are paying too much for child care and prescription drugs and are worrying about whether they will keep their job or lose it. the prescription drug run is another one. it's a contest between the better deal and what republicans are doing. a plan that will drive down prescription drugs will of the government to negotiate prices with medicare, bring greater transparency to the drug pricing economy and prevent price gouging. there has been no interest in the republican party to do any of these things to bring down the cost. host: the president himself has said -- guest: he said he is for bringing down the prices but the plan doesn't do that at all. the day he made that announcement, the pharmaceutical

stock went up significantly because they thought we are safe. it doesn't really affect them. democrats have a better plan to do that and this is another example. what we are focused on is what we know from our constituents. they want to hear what you going to do to make my family's life better and we have been focused like a laser on these economic issues we put forth a better deal for the american public. i think as we are seeing in these elections when people hear democrats talk weapons they will do to impact people's lives in a positive way, to bring down the cost and waste does raise family incomes, make sure they of job training so they have the skills necessary they respond positively. in the end they want us to get things done. i think that's what our agenda does and a real contrast from what we've seen from the republican party. host: we will start with a democrat line, raymond in maryland you are on. morning, thanks for

taking my call. i'm wondering why democrats don't talk with the national debt. the republicans used to run around with the debt clock, maybe bring that back and show thatmerican people borrowing is increased about 80% i read in the newspaper. and how are we going to pay for it. let the people know the place you party social security and medicaid to pay for that. also to bring in independents and some republicans. guest: is a great point and i should mention he is right. the tax scam the republicans jammed through as $2 trillion to the debt and a speaker ryan said part one was to make this tax cut to the richest people and

biggest corporations and now to pay for it they are talking about deep cuts to medicare and social security. also do things that will matter like pell grant and infrastructure. people should understand the republicans gave way to trillion dollar tax cuts to the richest in the country, the biggest corporations in to pay for it they want to make cuts to social security and medicare. they have added significantly to the debt. this wasn't a tax cut that was paid for and now they will try to pay for it by making cuts on programs that people will really rely on, working families and middle-class families rely on. host: this is jim off of twitter asking about the infrastructure plan. where does it -- where to the $1 trillion come from? guest: we put forth a range of possibilities. there are a number of ways to do it from an increase in the gas repeal , what we decided was there are a number of different ways to fund that and when we go to the

majority we will have to have a regular order and debate on the best way to pay for it. we are committed to making sure that infrastructure plan is paid for. we give a range of possibilities of how to generate $1 billion. the easiest way would be to repeal the tax cut that went to the top 1%. it won't pay for the whole infrastructure bill. when we are in the majority will have our bill to debate about. host: public-private partnership possibly? possibly, but it can't be the heart and soul of the infrastructure bill. the federal government has to be a real partner. cities and states just don't have the resources alone to repair infrastructure. is a role for the federal government and the tolling is not such a great idea because than the taxpayers pay for it twice. they pay the bill for it and then to use it. host: republican line, ban is next. guest: thanks for taking my

call. -- caller: thank for taking my call. i remember right democrats held the levers of power in america for two years in the obama administration and they didn't propose once to reduce taxes on anybody, including middle-class andigher earners or anyone had they propose this two years before trump took over, the republicans would've taken the deal with full hands and reduce taxes for middle-class people. once wees you think give you back power in the congress or in the presidency that all of a sudden democrats are going to be for middle-class tax cuts? guest: there were middle-class tax cuts in the obama and clinton administrations. we have made it clear that we think we need to do tax reform, we've had a tax code that's complicated and unfair and last time there was tax reform it was

an 18 month process. hundreds of witnesses and lots of hearing because it's complicated stop. the way was done this year with no hearings or witnesses, just brought to the floor. the senate had no tatian's handwritten by lobbyists and the bill as it was being debated. that's not a way to do tax reform. i think democrats understand that have always been -- we believe the best way to grow the economy is to raise incomes and grow the middle-class because the way you grow the economy is for middle-class families to have more money to spend to buy goods and services. you go to any small business in any state and say how do we add a job for the company, they will say give me more customers, have more people by what i make and produce. that's the middle-class tax cut would be the focus. we have is the want to make the tax code simpler and fairer, what the republicans did was a big huge giveaway to their donors and the richest people in the country. now they will try to make working people pay for it. host: from new york, this is al,

independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. congressman to define in dollars middle-class because they think middle-class is like 150 or 250, i'm talking about thousands, which is not true because the median income in 50,000untry is probably dollars, $55,000. here's another thing. you need to keep students in school safe. my suggestion is metal detectors in every school. a police officer at every entrance and exit. host: thanks, caller. guest: i think the caller is right. we have to focus on working people who are in that range as he described. there are a lot of families who have two incomes in that 100 and 150 range. the point is you want a tax cut

that spans the greatest number of working americans. the school safety what is a really important one. we have a responsibility to keep children safe. i met with young students from parkland who basically said the adults need to do their job and keep us safe in the schools. we did some work already on school safety in my home state but we need to do more and i think a part of it is making schools -- when i was mayor we had school resource officers in the school which became part of the community. those in very successful model. often school districts need resources to do that. to makea responsibility it more difficult for criminals or two young to have access to firearms. we need to work together in a bipartisan way to keep our young people say. host: secretary devos talked .bout that in a commission

gun changes to the laws were not on the table. guest: it is a shame. we have a gun epidemic in this country. those who are sinners the mental ill or -- those who are seriously mentally ill or -- inals or two young we have dozens of bills pending in congress that would significantly reduce gun violence in the country. we have been unable to get a single one of those bills to the floor for a debate and keep urging republican colleagues if you oppose these bills, make your argument and let the american people here you and then vote on them and be held accountable but they haven't so far. host: we have if you are off of twitter asking about your to fight underse daca. were you part of the discharge petition? do you think it will go anywhere? guest: i think it well. overwhelmingly the people believed young people who came here as children and young

adults with their parents who know no other country but americo who are working and going to school, serving in military and making incredible contributions should be allowed to remain here. i think 90% of americans will believe that. only place the dreamers a controversial is the house republican caucus. it's time for congress to catch up and make sure these young people can stay here who are making enormous contributions. the district just start -- the discharge position was to force that to bring it to a vote. we are a couple short and my expectation is we will get the votes. people should vote and be held accountable. if you think the dreamer should be kicked out to a country you don't know, vote that way and be held accountable. if you think the dreamers belong ase and our is every bit american as i am a separate piece of paper, vote for that and be held accountable for it to. host: at from california, independent line. truth, facts, results.

most of all results. don't call somebody when you call them a liar. no tax cutity, i saw during the obama administration. i observe nixon and reagan ruin and so it took to republicans to destroy the economy and it will take a republican to fix the economy. as far as me personally with my paycheck and tax cut showed me in seeing a lot more money my paycheck. as far as i'm concerned the , all you see is impeach, impeach, impeach. but as a bible thumper, far as i'm concerned you -- all you see of me, a white christian male is hard cash for your agendas. is some think there americans received a modest tax cut in this tax bill.

the problem is for many of those americans, the tax cut will expire and will go back up. the real benefits went to the top 1%. what we want is a permanent tax cut for middle-class people like the caller that is real and permanent, not temporary. -- i forgot what he brought up about being a bible thumper. host: how you perceive them. guest: he also said the suggestion about impeachment. i think we what we want in investigation is robert mueller to be able to be protected and completed his investigation. these are professionals doing their job. what democrats are focused on is what we can do to benefit the american people. we understand this investigation will continue and come to a conclusion. we all want to be interested in that result. republican, democrat an independent.

if this is about him -- this is about an in -- a foreign adversary interfering in the election. our agenda of how we improve the lives of the american people, it sometimes challenging to get coverage of that because is a lot of between of the day, the president's antics and he benefits from this chaos because i think he understands of the people focus on what democrats are opposing, we will go back -- if people focus on what democrats are fighting for, they will go back to the majority. solvency of medicare is also security, making college more affordable, rebuilding infrastructure. we have a better deal than the raw deal the republicans are giving -- getting from this congress. when people see that contrast we will win and we saw it last night. we are seeing good enthusiasm for democratic voters. they understand what's at stake. democrats virginia, line, last call for our guest. caller: good morning.

have anything specific to say, i just need to make a comment about the democratic party. i've listen to the congressman takeng about how democrats their time it passed bills and they have hearings and stuff, that's what the problem is with the democratic party. republican see this as a war and i think you guys need to fight like it's a war. and promiseto go in of his tax cuts for the middle class and help poor people, that's what you should do. you should use the same tactics republicans use. through, we'vel already seen for the last eight years that they do everything in their power to keep you guys are doing anything and then once they've got theirs in office, they roll everything act -- back and we are on the same road that

all must had us going towards a depression. guest: is a great point. i take the caller's point. we are in this fight in a i think what we want to show to the american people is that not only are we on their side is desperate what we are fighting for a we believe the process where people's voices are hea and tre's real debate, where there's an opportunity to offer amendments anhave real debates produces a better product. we have great ideas but we recognize people can make improvements so we want a process that's open and transparent. congress is celebrated the most close congress and the history of the u.s. congress under republican leadership. that's not a good way to do business. the american people expect us to be deliberate and i get the fact that sometimes you wish we would behave like them, but democrats are committed the responsibilities of -- if we are able to take on leadership, that we will conduct business in a different way.

open, transparent, collaborative process and i think it will produce the best results imaginable. i think we will get the job done in the right way. host: a headline this morning i want to show you about facebook offering data deals to those in china. does this concern you considering facebook issues before? guest: very concerning. i've asked the chairman of the judiciary committee to bring this before for some weeks ago and now it's very urgent. when mark zuckerman testified before congress he said there should be users having complete control and decide who has access. turns out that may have not been because theyent are allowing these companies, device manufacturers and chinese companies to access the data facebook users have. it may well be without their consent or knowledge. we really have to get a handle on this. people have a right to control their own data, the road information.

they ought to be able to decide who gets to see it into dozens. i think is a very serious issue. host: will be ultimately see mark zuckerberg in front of your committee? guest: i will continue to press that. i've a lot of questions. the ball the right to understand and know what is going on here because people -- millions of need to have an understanding of what's happening with the information they are sharing when they use facebook and their friends and photographs and all the other things. we could have a vibrant, wonderful internet and still respect the privacy of users. in the end i think it's absolutely the case that people ought to have complete control over their data, who gets to see it and what they get to see. host: representative david cicilline, thanks for having us. for the remainder of the program we will take your thoughts on that event to the white house yesterday concerning what was

scheduled as a visit by the philadelphia eagles changed to another ceremony. plus a larger topic of the president can't let that visit from the white house of the philadelphia eagles. you can comment by the act itself, larger issues at play. if you support the decision by the president to cancel the visit, 202-748-8000, if you oppose the decision, 202-748-8001. if you are an eagles fan, 202-748-8002. you can post on our twitter and facebook feeds. we will be right back. ♪ >> this week marks the 50th anniversary of the assassination of robert f kennedy. >> these last few weeks robert francis kennedy was enjoying himself. he really enjoyed getting out among the people. ,e enjoyed the physical contact he refused police protection because he says all the people want to do was touch him.

not to hurt him. >> this weekend on reel america on american history tv. watch the special report from june 6, 1968. the night robert kennedy died from gunshot wounds. [inaudible] they decided -- >> they decided to transfer him to good samaritan hospital where they were better -- -- the facilities were better for him. the suspect, now identified as her hands her hand was grabbed -- sir handsome hand -- sir han sirhan. police had to protect them from the crowd. there bystanders close to hysteria and it was concerned for the suspect safety. sunday at 4:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span3.

>> washington journal continues. host: the philadelphia eagles were set to appear the white house, president trump canceling that because of the number of eagle set to appear. we want to get a reaction to the situation. larger issues at play. we will show you a bit of the ceremony at the white house. that's the focus of the remainder of program today. here's how to let us know. 0 if you support the decision i the president to cancel, if you oppose the decision, 202-748-8001, if you're an eagles fan, 202-748-8002 is how you can let us know. let us know on social media as well. this is the front page of the philadelphia inquirer this morning. not a green day is the headline.

of washington saying hours after the canceling the white house celebration for the eagles , president trump accuse the philadelphia football team the backing out as a political stunt. the players and abandoned their fans for a routine event. instead of gathering the players , the trophy and smiling team executive, the president spent about 15 minutes on the white house south lawn with republican party faithful listening to patriotic songs from the marine corps band and army chorus in an event billed as a celebration of america. love our country, we always stand for the national anthem." trump said in a brief remark. we want to hear the reaction from you about this event and cancellation of the other issues at play. you can let us know on social media too. we will start with calls. dave, you start

just supported the decision, go ahead. caller: good morning. i support the president. i personally don't care if they stand on their head in the dressing room. host: why did you support the president specifically in this case? caller: they supposedly work and theye 80 players -- supposedly were going to have 80 players and a thousand fans, then at the last minute they had all the players canceling. host: so why did you think it was appropriate? caller: you vardy got people there the white house, they have the fans there and people -- i guess it's going to be a good day for philadelphia. but philadelphia is philadelphia. from matt is an eagles fan reading, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro.

when it boils down to it, as an eagles fan all my life, diehard eagles fan, this is -- it is personal. the amazing thing to me is none of the eagles players knelt during the season, i just don't understand why -- why the would make stuff up like this and i've been on the fence with some other stuff politically since he was elected. this is the last straw for me. host: when it comes to the eagles themselves, when you heard the news about the certain amount supposed to come and then reducing it down. what you think is behind that? caller: i kind of thought that was the right move on their part. rather than have people and try to create a situation, tell the guys were going to create a problem don't come. i wonder if trump is just thinking i don't want to have a scene here where it doesn't look

like everyone celebrating being here, but i feel at the eagles handled it well by telling them just don't come if you'd are going to cause a problem. they apparently didn't cause a problem with the national anthem all season long. the eagle loyalty runs deep in philadelphia. this is the last straw for me. host: so this will be it as far as your support of him? caller: i honestly think so. i was a little -- i voted for him but i was a little on the fence with some weird stuff over the past year that isn't completely in line with him. and -- i'vedonald been eagles fan all my life. it's the most personal thing. it may be a stupid reason to drop support. host: that was eagles fan matt in reading, pennsylvania.

bob, norristown, pennsylvania, hi. caller: i'm a registered republican and i'm pretty much disgusted with this guy trump. everything he does -- he is a 70-year-old man baby. host: what was it about the cancellation the bothered you most? caller: he is confusing the issue. the players are protesting these police shootings, they shoot somebody in the back eight times. and in the report comes out well i felt threatened. and they get off and that's what the players are protesting. they are not protesting the flag. but trump confuses things so he can play to those people. host: the white house response this event, this is from the press secretary. saying the white house

nonetheless attempted to work with the eagles over the weekend to change the event format that could accommodate a smaller group of players. sarah sanders going on to say unfortunately the eagles offer to send only a tiny handful of representatives while making clear the great majority of players would not attend the event despite planning to be in d.c. today. in other words the vast majority of the eagles team decided to abandon their fans. that was from sarah sanders leading up to the event. president trump talked about in herenot only why they -- is the president. >> i wanted this opportunity to explain why done americans stand for our national anthem. maybe it's about time that we understood. we stand to honor our military and honor our country and to remember the fallen heroes who never made it back home.

we stand to show our love for our fellow citizens and our magnificent constitution. we stand to pay tribute to the incredible americans who came before us and the heroic sacrifices they made. america is a great nation and community, a family. america is our home and we love our home. host: you can see that event on our website by the way. that was in part to talk about what we will talk about the next hour and a half or so, the idea of the cancellation of the event and what to think about. three lines to choose from. if you support the decision it is 202-748-8000, if you oppose the decision of the president, it is 202-748-8001 and if you are in eagles fan, 202-748-8002. michelle is an eagles fan from atlanta, georgia. pedro, i'm glad the

eagles decided not to come to represent that klansmen in the white house. i'm glad the eagles decided not to bow down to this dictator and nazi in the white house and i'm so glad all the nfl players, black especially, decided to and show that we are not on his plantation. he wants us to be on there but we are going to burn him down and burn it down in front of him. if all the nfl players had taken turned aroundl, and pull their pants down and kiss where the sun doesn't shine. chris in rhode island

supported the move by the president. i support the president and his decision. cnn angelaator on ray said tuesday she believes the national anthem is problematic in and of itself. this type of undermining of basic values of the united states is looking problem is. what we need in this nation is which mr.on, cicilline represented by constantly going after the president on disruption issue. he traveled to the czech republic -- host: the president's decision to cancel the event. the whole issue here is division. host: was the president's act yesterday divisive? caller: why won't you let me speak? host: only because -- caller: i'm trying to answer

your question but your screeners block calls. host: instead of making accusations, answer the question please. caller: it was a political speech he gave while it was on your show. it has nothing to do with news. under fccal time regulations. you are denied equal time to candidates and given time to those who support the issues that you support. mr. cicilline is a democrat whose positions are -- a president clinton and the uranium one deal. host: let's go to steve in indiana. he oppose the president act, go ahead. first of all, chris, get a life. president, i'm tired of him talking all about how great he was for the military, he is a draft dodger. host: to the topic at hand about the president's cancellation, why do you oppose it specifically?

because the eagles never kneeled all season. host: do you think they should've shown up or not? caller: that's a good question there. not many people were going to show up and that's what got to the president. he likes big crowds. they said they were going to conquer, they should've came. if they said they were going to come, they should have. host: from the washington post this morning talk about the president's decision. no eagles but one turkey. before theaying event the white house but a statement saying the vast majority of eagles team decided to abandon their fans, but the 1000 or so came to the event were a suspicious group of football fans, almost all wearing suits and only a few wearing eagles memorabilia. members were invited

to attend the event over told to hide their credentials. one of the few eagles fans who showed up was a heckler. showing some of the crowd that took place yesterday via tweet sending it on twitter say not exactly sure who these eagles fans are but i counted one item of clothing with an eagles long test logo on it at the white house. saying i pulled six of the fans who was the eagles cornerback during the super bowl and not one person knew. an eagles fan from frederick, maryland. say with have to everything going on with me to present in the nfl in the eagles , it's another form of president toor our get his fingers into. ,he eagles never took a knee this is just more -- for the

president to appeal to his base, just like the guy saying c-span doesn't give equal time. these are the types of people he's appealing to. it is over the top. i've been eagles fan my whole life and i've never been in support of the president because i know well enough he is not the businessman he says that he is. he's like a turtle on the lamp, you wonder how he got there. host: a supporter of the president's decision come along.co, north carolina. i used to love to watch the nfl and everything and i and they need to stand for the flag and and not last year, but when it all started they did.

it's good that they didn't last year. they drag a bunch of politics and junk and try to switch the meeting with the president and everything else. and try to get it set up when he was out of town. they have to realize that man is smart. this president is real smart. so why do you think the president comes out a winner in this case for canceling the event? caller: i don't think nobody comes out a winner. the football league needs to get back to football. if they want politics they can get on different channels. in the washington times this morning, his column looks at the issue. particularly appealing to a plea to pro athletes, stop politicizing the games. richard nixon via sports teams of the white house, did every player agree with him? do they all do the same for

ronald reagan, george bush, barack obama? of course not but they went to the white house because the president invited them. when the president invited to the white house you go. here's the big point. there's no place in politics for sports, none. , ands is for the viewer escape from the real world where we can watch finely tuned athletes play a game at the very highest level. whether bryce harper agrees with the president on trade tariffs, nor should they. it's a game, just play it and make millions watching. field.ke it off the that's joe curl in the washington times this morning. martha is next from bloomington, indiana who oppose the president decision. caller: thank you. is what most of the callers today, the president has been touted as this great negotiator and yet never, ever

does he seem to reach out to negotiate fixing this. he doesn't want to fix this. .t's the exact opposite he wants this division and that's what his big plan is. the plan is let's keep this divided and your reference on that -- host: a going to the white house they tried to negotiate some type of event that all these players came to and at the end they cancel. what do you think about that? caller: this sort of thing has been going on forever and just one statement could say even knowing when you call someone sob's and they need to leave the country for not agreeing with have atest, he could meeting about that and say what is the deal, what do we need to work out, just like he does with

china and these others. host: so you are saying he could've negotiated at least in ofs case to solve some type medium between the parties involved? caller: he could've negotiated it yesterday and right now. he could say how about we fix this. have another meeting tomorrow. let's try to fix this. host: gotcha. this is right off of twitter's saying the eagles are right not to validate his charade and then another viewer saying glad the president cap the eagles home. i'm back to hockey, i need sports for sport. that's in all capitals with the next commission mark. this is patrick in bethlehem, pennsylvania, an eagles fan. caller: i wanted to say i was really disappointed with the president's decision to basically politicize the philadelphia eagles. i'm a republican and i served in

afghanistan multiple times and did a lot of things before people had to sit -- for people to have the decision to sit or stand. people have to understand this doamerica, you are free to whatever you pretty much are legally allowed to do. a lot of my buddies that are veterans with me we agree that they are not disrespecting us. they are doing what they are supposed to be doing. when it comes to the eagles themselves, did you get a sense of disrespect by the fact you had reportedly this large number that was supposed to come and then it shrunk dramatically? caller: i don't feel disrespected, i feel if you think you're going to be disrespectful to the white house and the president, then yeah you probably shouldn't go. ultimately the people that are hurt are the wounded warriors that work at walter reed and some of the philadelphia eagles were supposed to be there, but they didn't come because the president didn't allow them to

come. host: when the white house says that those who are most disappointed or those seem disappointed are you the fans, what do you think about that argument? caller: i think it's really disrespectful and i can't believe i'm on this. -- i think this is one of the lines that i have to drop the white house even though i believe in what they are doing. i can't accept that statement. host: if you go to our twitter feed there is a poll we have put on their to express your opinion on it when it comes to this event. showinghose currently they oppose this move and 38% are supporting it. , this is to twitter mark stone's statement saying what i watch sports i expect what a good game without bringing in politics nobody wants to tune in and watch political protests. you may share our oppose those

as far as the cancellation of the event with the philadelphia eagles. if you support that move, 202-748-8000, if you oppose it, 202-748-8001 and we have heard from several eagles fans this morning, 202-748-8002. the mayor of philadelphia on cnn yesterday talked about the decision by the president and the larger issues at play. here's part of the interview. >> so what do you think did happen? to go from 81 to 10 is a huge decline. was it something you are aware of that happened were so many members change their minds? >> the premise of your question is based on their assertion that 81 people responded. -- i think it was all a stunt and the president is playing the nfl like a fiddle and these players are caught in the middle. no one philadelphia eagles took a knee and not one state in the

locker room and he's making it up as he goes along. in an effort to divide the country. is chuckyland, this who supported the president's decision. caller: this is a very unusual situation. i support trumpet a lot of inclined tod i'm agree that 90% of these eagles decided not to come because i think they are basically falling into the trap that they've labeled our president is a racist. with putting your hand on your heart, i'm a veteran, but people have the right and prerogative to choose what they feel is right for them . they should not be dictated by anybody. pointr, it is come to the -- it has come to the point where people like the president are going to be labeled a racist whether this any proof of it or not. i don't approve of a lot of his decisions, but in this case we

are 90% -- were 90% of these eagles declined to come, it's like when golden state won last year. they made up a mind they don't want to go anyways. wrong when hewas deflected the question away from colin cabinet. they have a right to go to their knee and say what's in their heart and express it. i understand that completely. when you're labeled a racist, there's not much to do to get on that. because the media is all over that and unfortunately even though i voted for trump, he is in a really bad spot with people in the media. so chock, going forward to the president cancel all types of these sports events at the white house? caller: no, he's the president, he is supposed to represent the united dates.

right or wrong in some of his decisions, he is the president. he is the man with what into office to represent us and lead us. somebody has to do the job. i believe he's trying to do the job but he is faulty in some of his decisions. taking a stand against the eagles was not a bad decision. when you have people committed to coming there and then decide for whatever reasons, if they're being compelled by other forces outside through the media, not to show up, the president makes a stand. i will give him this one credit. he stands by what he says. he's not a flip-flop artist, he's not a two-faced. right or wrong he is the person he represents and i'm hoping things get better for the long run for us. in maryland. chuck vivian saying maybe the layers didn't want to get politicized by the president and other

people saying is a citizen i don't want to pay for any sports visit to the white house, it's a waste of money. julius in north carolina on our oppose line. caller: good morning. i think it's time to get this dictator out of washington dc, he is trying his best to get the united states like russia. it is time -- host: let's start with the decision to cancel the event, what did you think about it? caller: i think it was wrong. , we need to get this dictator -- host: tell me why you think he was wrong. why would you not want them to come to washington, d.c.? i'm telling you he is a dictator. we don't need a dictator in the united states -- host: what about the argument

the white house poses that you started with so many deciding to calm and ending up with only 10, why keep it going? caller: if the 10 want to come, let 10 come. host: let's go to monique in west virginia, an eagles fan. caller: hello. i do not agree with president trump, he shouldn't have canceled the meeting. he is politicizing sports. on the nfl,sing president trump should be trying to figure out why the majority of the american death real americans out here in the --eets living hard lives especially millennials are not nearly or no longer respecting america. illegal immigrants in this country getting jobs, they are trying to allow daca people to stay in this country illegally. black people being victimized on

camera and the justice system is rates. this is why -- president trump should be focused on why people no longer respect america. i understand the message is shouldto say, americans want to and have the desire to stand for the national anthem, usually trying to figure out why america no longer has that desire. host: let's go to william, shelbyville, kentucky supports the president's decision. caller: personally i think he made the right decision. always that play a game for an insane amount of money think their opinions -- these overpaid boys that play again for an insane amount of money think their opinion matters. to hear their opinion. same thing with hollywood. i haven't gone to a movie in over five years because of their opinions. they are paid to give me entertainment, not to tell me their opinion. i think the president did the right thing.

the events cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and they don't want to respect that, i think they ought to cancel every one of them. host: one of the columns in the new york times offer some context in the sports section saying mr. trump has been fighting the league since the 1980's when is the owner of the new jersey generals in the usfl successfully sue the league for violating laws. victory was hollow as he won three dollars in damages and the usfl collapsed. mr. trump is try to buy nfl teams over the years but has been spurned. he has made friends with several owners most notably twnerf the patriots. he is quoted mr. caddell and taking glee in the league's lowering ratings. even floated the idea of removing some of the league tax exemptions. have the other owners listen to , things might've turned out differently.

mr. trump would continue to attack the league with a protest which only involved a handful of players by the end of last season might've diminished on their own. a significant issue and contentious talks with a collective bargaining agreement looming and said players are angry the owners and the president continues to attack the league, not that they weren't warned. and he is one who opposed the decision. caller: good morning, thanks for the call. i disagree with the president. first of all, it's the philadelphia eagles couple of the original football teams that was first created. this was the first -- this was their first super bowl win and was historic. there if have been nothing else the owner would've shown up and congratulate the

city for their first super bowl win. it's ironic, it's philadelphia. that was our nations original capital. , sports triests to teach is good sportsmanship and i think mr. trump was a very poor sportsman. host: let me just taken apart. don't you think the team then was a poor sport for not showing up? caller: they were invited, it wasn't mandatory, it was an invitation. i'm sure they could've worked out something with someone to show up at least contingent with other activities they had planned. but at least for the fans of philadelphia, if barack obama can show up at trump's inaugural speech and sit through that, the least donald trump to do what if you just met with the owner as a sign of good sportsmanship and congratulate them on a great season and for the city of philadelphia.

and not be petty about it. host: mark is an eagles fan in frederick, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning, thanks for taking my call. thank you for taking my call -- caller: thank you for taking my call. i opposed the decision to this invite the eagles. the eagles is one of the class organizations in the nfl and i truly don't believe that 80 players and/or members of the organization confirmed to come to the white house. there were players that said, the night of the super bowl, when, that if they were invited to the white house, they would not attend. about thenk it's more president fanning the flames in terms of race and ethnic intolerance. here's our plan for the

final hour of this program. we will continue on this topic of the president canceling this event, the eagles holding another event in its place. you can see that by the way it c-span.org, if you want, but we want to get your thoughts on the cancellations and the larger issues at play. if you supported the president, it's (202) 748-8000. if you oppose the president and his decision, (202) 748-8001. if you are an eagles fan, (202) 748-8002. you can post on the twitter feed and facebook as well. we will continue on the calls with this topic and we want to show you some other news that has taken place, including a hearing that took place with betsy devos, the education secretary. remember, she was tasked with the president to take a look at the issue of school safety, particularly in these gun violence situations that you have heard and read about.

in the new york times this morning they said that the education secretary told the senate committee on tuesday that the federal commission on school safety set up this year after the parkland florida school massacre will now focus on the role that guns play in school violence. "the comments provided the testimony perplexed senators -- him host: that hearings available on c-span.org. here's a portion of it. [video clip] on theare a chairman school board safety commission that was formed after the shooting in florida. educatorsudents and dead. our country is now averaging a school shooting each week. they mete day after last month, another 10 students and teachers were killed in santa fe, texas.

i understand that your commission intends to release recommendations by the end of the year. will your commission look at the role of firearms as it relates to gun violence in our schools? >> thanks for that western. it is an honor to serve and lead this commission. we are focused on the 20 some different provisions -- >> i understand it's a lot, but i'm also thinking the chairman difficulties. i'm trying to give you a question that will be answered yes or no. will your commission look at the role of firearms in our schools? >> that is not part of the charge of the commission, percent. >> icy, so you are studying done violence but not considering the role of guns? >> we are studying school safety and how to make sure our students are safe. you are studying things like how much time they spend on video games and all of that, but you could go to lots of other countries where they spend just as much time but have only a

tiny fraction of the shootings that we do. the gun of choice for mass shooters is ar-15. do you believe that an 18-year-old high school student should be able to walk into a store and minutes later, out with an ar-15 style and hundreds of rounds of ammuon? that this body and your counterparts on the other side of the capital have addressed a number of these issues and i know that you will continue to debate -- >> i'm trying to give you questions that can be answered yes or no. let me repeat it in case it wasn't clear. do you believe an 18 euro high school student should be able to walk into a store and minutes later come out with an ar-15 style assault weapon and hundreds of rounds of ammunition? >> i believe that is very much a matter for debate and i know that has been debated within his body and will continue to be. our focus is on raising up

successful, proven techniques and approaches to ensuring that schools are safe for students. >> are you looking at the countries where the students have just as much time on social media and video games and everything else, but have much, gun violence in their schools? >> we had a very important meeting last week in maryland at a school in a district that has employed an approach called pbi -- for 16 or 18 years >> maybe i didn't make my question clear. are you looking at the countries where the students do just as much time on video games, just as much time on social media as we do, but do not have the gun violence, are you looking at those at all. that's a yes or no. >> not per se. >> enqueue.

-- >> thank you. host: the senate is where that took place. if you want to see all of that, the shooting of the education secretary about this commission, you can go to our website, www.c-span.org. we will your next from fred about the president's canceling of the eagles coming to the white house. the beginning of nfl games and stuff, don't they say that thing is owned, the exclusive rights to the nfl, and that no one is allowed to use that? these protesters going down on one knee are using the nfl to promote their own agenda. so, to the president's decision, what did you think about it? caller: well, he's the president and they are just a football team. should this be a thing that's canceled altogether? caller: yes. host: why? caller: talking about going to

the white house? host: no, -- yes, sir. caller: that's ok. if they don't want to come, that's cool, and if he doesn't want them to come, that's cool, too. host: but here from danny, charlotte, north carolina. hi. caller: trump needs to reach out to minorities more. it's also at the point of the eagles basically canceled on him at the last minute. i would like to raise a couple of points. or whateverpeople in america. there's a scattering of shootings by police doing the wrong thing and they are protesting, making it sound like it's happening all the time. of the facts, though, with african-american communities that i think that the nfl players would do better in protesting is the fact that 73% of all african-american women who have babies are having babies without ads.

people, which don lemon has pointed out on cnn, 44% are in poverty and i think that football players should stand up for staying with women and supporting african-american women. that would be a much better use of their protest. jack, blackwood, new jersey, eagles fan. hi. caller: hi, pedro. can you hear me? host: go ahead. caller: sorry. thele of things, i support decision, the controversy that would have caused. , we have nothave had a true discussion of race in this country. for some reason i can't hear you. clarify, when you say you support the decision, you say you support the decision to cancel the event or by the eagles not to show up? cancel thery, to

event. i'm on the president's side on this one. the whole thing that transcends this, the country has not had a true discussion on race. i think that each group of people, just like any country, they can settle their own situations. you had a show a few years ago with jc watts, the congressman at the time, who's now a senator, and a bunch of very prominent people who were discussing the race situation in america. i feel like c-span, who is funded partially by the government, should do these kinds of things to pull us together. host: let me stop you there. we are not funded at all by the government. funded byt, we are cable. funded by the cable industry. caller: ok, i'm sorry. host: it's ok.

tim scott the prominent individual. tim scott is a common individual, bringing together people like lebron james and others, sitting down and asking about the problems and what we have to fix, let's get congress involved and have them make some decisions. i really feel that the president's trying to bring this country together, unlike previous presidents. him beforeo impeach he's inaugurated, it's ridiculous. host: that's jack in new jersey, eagles fan, mentioning lebron james. ,his is a story from people.com lebron james was asked to reflect on the president's decision to call off the tradional white house visit the eagles. "it's typical of him, i'm not surprised. no matter who wins the series, no one wants the invite anyway erie it -- anyway. that is what we're talking about, this cancellation.

dayton, ohio, this is sarah, who supported the decision. hi. caller: i think that it's going to be soon that there will be no nfl. they are digging a big hole for themselves. i know, i was a democrat and now i'm a republican. i will support the president and my country. why do you support the president in this decision of his? caller: because they should have all showed up. it's something for them. instead of making a big issue out of not showing up. host: from fort worth, texas, evelyn oppose the move. yes, hi, pedro. thank you for taking my call. feel, i feel that president and stopds to grow up

behaving like a spoiled, rotten child. people have a choice in this country to go wherever they want to go and if they don't agree with some of the behavior of , he has been treating people that she's really mistreating a lot of people and they have a right not to go. for those of us who, you know, support the players, good, we don't have to stand up to a dictator. couldn't the players have come, even couldn't the playerse come, even amidst the issues that you brought up? come to the white house as they were invited, usually? couldn't they look past of the other issues and come for the ceremony itself? caller: some of the players wanted to come, even if it is just a handful, even if there were only 10 of them, why this disinvitese -- those? it doesn't make sense. host: a couple of other stories to show you.

this is from "the washington ," confirming that the aid the joked about john mccain's death is out, though it remains a mystery as to why. host: if you go to "the wall street journal," this morning, story saying that a white house contract employee, wanted on an attempted first-degree murder charge was arrested tuesday when he came to work at the presidential compound. martin edwards, 29 years old, expected to face extradition to maryland, according to the officials."

host: from south carolina, j, eagles fan. go ahead. caller: how you doing, pedro? host: fine, good morning. caller: i've been an eagles fan for 30 years. i believe it was 88, i had probably been to games before that, but my first memory of them was 1988 seeing randall coming him play. -- randall cunningham played. jerome brown, reggie white. as much as i love sports, i've called in here a couple of times about politics. the decision by the team,

was it a political move on their part? caller: i'm so glad you said that. the first thing we have to do is get some transparency. one of our former players, torrey smith, when he went on twitter he made three points, basically saying that it was more a white house decision. now, you have the white house saying that it was more a part of the eagles and they're constantly rescheduling of the events. now, this is what we know is true. there have been players, such as was one of the patriots, by the way, and they have players in the past come you know, whether it was they didn't go because they didn't agree with something obama said or they didn't go because it was something that mr. trump said. that's why have brought up chris long. but the whole team, they still

have the opportunity to go. something else i like to bring was watching another -- i'm just going to say it, i was watching fox news. they were accusing players a basically kneeling in protest, but that's not true. they were kneeling in prayer circles. no one took in the through the whole season. now you have brothers like malcolm jenkins and others that, shownow, as far as to solidarity with what other nfl players spoke up about not just, not just inequality as far as economic inequality, but the thatant police brutality has been affecting our communities. that i definitely get.

more right in is this situation, if there is even a way to categorize it is that? the president or the eagles? caller: these are excellent questions. it's not so much a case of right and wrong. it's a case of basically getting -- because there were meetings. you had another player, mike wallace, who talked about it, since he was new to the team, they had meetings, super bowl meetings. it was discussed, like i said, how many players would come, whether it was staff or faculty. that's definitely true. but like i said, on the side of arewhite house, they telling, like i said, a conflicting story. it's basically going to come down to fact, number one, and two, what is the motivation

behind that? is it political? is it a personal opinion? basically from both sides. that's j, south carolina, mentioning players giving their thoughts and expressing them on social media. mentioned,that he corey smith, the points that he made, not many people were going to go, no one fused to go simply said folks president didn't stand for the anthem. three, the president continues to's red the false narrative that players are anti-military. malcolm jenkins said this --

host: that is impart his statement about the events. from waldorf, maryland, a soup order of the president's decision. james, hello. you're on, go ahead. caller: [indiscernible] apologize, james, your signal is really not a strong one. give us another try and we will go to larry. who opposed the decision in illinois. larry, go ahead. caller: just out of courtesy of going to answer the question, i oppose it because the president probably could have let the people that wanted to come, and if he was worried about an empty

state, bring up some of those philadelphia fans. but i would like to comment or on the underlying message that has been lost in all of this, that colin kaepernick made and to a certain extent, if you go back to the 60's, even muhammad ali made. the mistake that they made when they protest, and in colin kaepernick's casey protested the national anthem and the flag or whatever because he said it represented a country that , that oppresses people. what he forgot is that the flag also represents millions and millions of people in this country, be they police officers or not, citizens, military, that never oppress people or don't oppress people. they forget about that. they only concentrate on the minority that, yup, we have people that try to oppress others. muhammad ali made the same mistake. i'm old enough to remember, i used to sit in front of the

radio to listen to muhammad ali fight against sonny liston. before they televised it. muhammad ali protested the war and he was morally correct to protest the war, but he made the same mistake and nobody likes to talk about it. he made it about himself as well and concentrated on the minority and when they asked him why he didn't want to go to vietnam he said i don't want to shoot at vietnamese people because they never called me the racial slur. he forgot about it -- again, he forgot about the millions of people that cheered for him and never called him racial slurs. ok, ok, that's larry in illinois, eagles fan in arkansas. mike? nobody wins in this, nobody loses, it's nothing but politics versus sports and i wish you all would quit being emison be c-span -- msnbcspan. host: i don't understand, this

is an event that was canceled i -- and he hung up. joe, kansas city. season ticket holder for the kansas city chiefs. after everything last year i decided not to go to the games, i gave them to people that wanted to use them. i didn't get rid of them, but you know, they announced a couple of weeks ago that they were going to have to stand for the national anthem and i'm like, that's fine, i think it's the right thing to do to honor the country. and then everything happened and , donest done with the nfl with watching it on tv, i love college sports. there are two things i would like to bring up. the first is that all of this kneeling was supposed to be about the police brutality and it's like -- you go to any other job, you wouldn't be able to do that. your boss would say that you are here to work. work, be a good employee and all

of that. can you tell me, i'm an avid sports fan, i never hear of any of these layers make all of this money who are actually out in their communities doing something about it. we just actually showed a tweet from malcolm, i forget the guy's last name, sorry, i'm not a sports guy, admittedly, but from malcolm jones i think -- jenkins, thank you, that was talking about that, just to let you know. you can find it on his twitter feed. about all that, the president's decision, what you think about it fundamentally? why do you think he did that? >> because if you listen to what sarah sanders said, and they withouty would say it something behind it it went from 80 people and within a day or two, it was supposed to happen and go down to anywhere from seven players to two players showing up in that was just done so that they could embarrass trump. the only thing that i could sit

there and say, there are -- where is the love for the country, the respect for the military and for first responders? it's just not there. you know, if obama had come out and say that we stand for the flag at all times? all of the callers opposing it today would be on the we supported line. is joe, from missouri. ryan costello, saying that the eagles are the favored team. host: democrat donald more craft said -- host: and then sheila jackson lee --

host: michael is next. michael, harrisburg -- think i push the wrong one. michael, harrisburg, opposing the president's actions. high. caller: yes, i do, but i was also looking for the fourth phone number option. the eagles also made a bad move. was known to be a situation coming out of the super bowl win, i'm sure that their office and their staff must have talked about this, discussed it, talk about it, known that the players were going to be coming up with something not to go. but i don't think anyone is surprised by the president and his antics, continuing to be

divisive. i think this has a great trickle down, even to young people who are fans of the game. it's really a no-win situation for all. it should have been about the ball. and you know, just all of the arguments over the stance didn't come out. the season of the nfl ended without any kind of answer to this problem. moving forward this puts a real spin on the early season and this is far from over. i think that trump is stirring the pot and i also think that the eagles did the same thing, to. a couple of economic stories to show you, writing on the front page of "the wall that economic -- that job openings had hit a

high. host: that was in "the wall street journal" this morning. matters ofes to trade, china is offering to buy $70 billion in goods if the u.s. halts tariffs, saying that the offer that came during a meeting this week between the commerce secretary and the chinese economic advisor would only go partway towards the initial demand that china reduce its trade surplus with the united ,tates by $200 billion annually leaving out other american requests, including china allowing more access to markets

with an end practice and the trump administration saying that it forces companies to transfer valuable intellectual properties . "the washington post" talking about retaliatory tariffs from mexico. $3 billion worth of u.s. products, saying that with its presidential election 26 days away, the mexican government imposed a 20% terror on u.s. port, apples, and potatoes, with a 20% tariff on cheese and bourbon. host: beni, north carolina. go ahead, you are an eagles fan. i am angood morning, eagles fan. i've been an eagles fan for a long time. one, i'm a veteran. i've got nothing against anybody that wants to take any. that is their privilege. donald trump refused to go in the draft.

i was drafted. i had a job but i went when they called my number. if donald trump has so much respect for the flag he should have been man enough to go into the military and serve just like i did. that's my comment. yankee. from illinois, robb, who supports the president on this matter. caller: yes, i'm bob, from barrington. host: bob, sorry about that. caller: this is d-day, june 6. i protect the flag to the death. if they don't like what's going on, don't go to the ballgames. it's not a sport, it's a business. that's the way it is. caller: that's bob, stash host: that's bob, -- host: that's bob, supporter of the president's actions. if you want to continue and calling in about this cancellation, (202) 748-8000 if you support

if decision, (202) 748-8001 you oppose the decision. for you eagles fans, (202) 748-8002. a decision from the senate majority leader that largely affects the august recess. joining us for that discussion, neil, good morning. by mitch mcconnell to cancel a good portion of the august recess. walk us through what led to this decision. >> right. there have been pressure on mcconnell from members of his own conference, a group of led perhapsenators by david purdue of georgia, but also from the white house, from president donald trump, from mark short, who runs the legislative affairs shop over there, to keep senators in town bothontinue to work on processing laminations and also

to try to get the approach relations process in some withance of on track president trump saying pretty declaratively that he's not going to sign another omnivorous spending bill that packages all the bills together. in some respects, they may need than the calendar will allow. there is also politics at play. the number of vulnerable democrats on the ballot this november far exceeds the number of republicans. in fact there's only really one vulnerable republican. in the mitch mcconnell explanation he turned this to democrats and talk about them slowing down the process with the judges. >> this has many familiar with refrain for observers of mcconnell, who complains regularly about the number of cloture motions that he has had to file on fairly routine

nominations. judges who end up getting confirmed, 96 to zero we had one the other day. so this is sort of part and parcel of where we are in the ,ra of after the nuclear option with only a simple majority of senators being required to ,onfirm the federal nomination the we see is that democratic party in this case, the minority party has lost most of its ability to block things. so, there is a little bit of a slowdown, but it really is a procedural slowdown that doesn't have much of an imct. host: how much ofhe aual break is canceled? well, what mcconnell has decided to do is, the first week in august is going to be basically a one-week reprieve.

that's a think the week of august the sixth. then they are going to come back for the rest of the month. they are basically going to do on, one week off routine that we see during much of the rest of the year. ins also going to be in play august. which means that the second week, the second full week of august, senators will be back and probably voting, if i were to guess at 5:30 on monday or have the usual sort of work week and it will be as if nothing has happened. in mind, whatt was the reaction not only from republicans, but democrats? guest: the democrats are trying to parlay this into saying it it is an opportunity to work on issues that are important. the democrats feel that they are important issues to ordinary voters. chris van hollen, the chairman of the democratic campaign committee was telling me

yesterday that he is going to be pushing for some sort of legislative action on lowering the cost of prescription drugs. we saw a letter this morning from chuck schumer, the minority leader, similarly saying to mcconnell that we should do health care in august. if you look at mcconnell's , there'sr the summer not really going to be re-visitation of health care on the agenda as mcconnell had drawn up at the moment. host: was there some concern because this is a time that legislators use for other activities that is now going to be curtailed? caller: that is obviously -- guest: that is obviously the concern. i think you will find that the are vulnerable themselves, as well as dean heller, the republican from nevada who is probably the most vulnerable incumbent of all, who

i talked to about this a little yesterday, they are going to say that they are happy to be in washington and doing the people's work and that as long as the senate is doing important business, i think the real test here is going to turn out to be whether or not when we return that second full week of august, whether mcconnell has anything moreon the agenda besides judicial nominations. if in fact we are seeing the some sort ofsing significant legislation, like appropriation bills or the faa reauthorization or the farm bill is still kicking around at that point, i think if theres gnificant legislating, people will be not happy to be in d.c., because it tends to be particularly sweltering in the summertime, we don't generally leave for nearly as long as the senators do. but i don't think -- i think it

would be happy to be here but i think they would be more content being here if there was actual legislating going on rather than just learning the clock on more nominations. , who niels lesniewski covers the senate for "rollcall," joining us to talk about the planned cancellation of a part of the august recess. as always, thank you. guest: thank you. host: back to your calls on the decision by president trump to cancel the event with the eagles at the white house, instead holding another event yesterday at the white house. from michigan, and eagles fan, this is from alan arc. linda, go ahead, good morning. caller: thank you for the call. for the first thing, the president needs to know the words of the national anthem. that's patriotic. he doesn't even know the words to that and he's a draft dodger. host: why did you support the decision by the president -- sorry, opposed -- really just

ask you, where do you stand specifically on the cancellation? that theh, i'm glad eagles didn't go. he doesn't respect the players. he doesn't know the national anthem. how disrespectful is that? the president doesn't know how to sing the national anthem? host: let's go to willie in clinton. caller: apologize, they didn't have a line i could call in on. they both show equal blame of getting in. describe what you both think they share equal blame. caller: the nfl team plays for the people. the trip to washington would have been for the people of philadelphia and the fans that supported them. they had the time to protest and they did so. there's a time when you have to lay down the sword on neutral ground and discuss things. maybe something will come out of this.

all the people matter what their opinion is. even the president of all the people. let's hear from kathy in orange, virginia. i can't believe i'm using my 30 day limit on this, but simply -- trump will be on and the nfl will live on. that's all i have to say. what you mean by that in relation to the cancellation yesterday? caller: the cancellation just goes in his bucket with all the other things he's done to america. i'm not an avid nfl fan anymore, but i respect the fact that if they don't disrupt anything and d.c. makes a big deal out of some of the simple things that happen out there in the -- in america, it disturbs

me. that's all. today this morning takes a look at south korea, particularly the u.s. bases that part -- that exist right there saying that theumbers of those troops can get to about 27,000 or top off at 33,000. that is according to the army colonel, a spokesman for the u.s. forces. host: more on that analysis from

"usa today," and on our oppose line, northampton, massachusetts. caller: hi, how are you? host: fine, thank you, go ahead. when was it that going to your knees was something disrespectful? is the first thing. and this president continues to be wrong. you know? men out ofed those their names, all of the football players. they have not forgotten what he has done. they have not forgotten the young men in the park. they have not forgotten that he didn't want to rent any kind of apartments to black people. they have not forgotten that he called them son of a b's during the campaign because one of them yield. kneeled.

he expects that with his white privilege to come to the white house? no, no, no, no, no, they are too much men for that. lebron james put up $183 million to put 100 children through college. each one of those basketball players has done magnificent things. but the media refuse to let white and black people hear about the hidden figures and what we have done in this country. host: ok. donna, hampton, virginia, on the support line. i'm just appalled at how people are so hateful and have real, the of what the real thing behind all of this is -- trump has -- trump wants respect back for our country. it isn't that he has anything against the eagles or, probably, any other team, but we all

forget how this started was with : and his socks that he wore with patients, it all started with police brutality. it has nothing to do with football, actually. i think that what people are missing is our president is trying hard to bring back respect to our country that we have lost. horrible i think it's that they condemn him for things like this. it's just ridiculous. i'm curious what's going to happen tomorrow. when the sponsors meet with goodell. have you heard anything about that? host: nothing on that front, but i'm sure some other outlet will report on it. the hill reporting this morning that there is a new senate republican author group or that

alleges that two top officials in the obama administration secretly authorized around of covert assets to the u.s. dollar after officials repeatedly assured congress that no such financial transactions would take place under the 2015 nuclear deal. newportman unveiled a report on wednesday, claiming that the top government officials were granted a license that would allow the conversion of iranian assets worth billions of u.s. dollars to the u.s. financial system. senior officials repeatedly testifying to congress that the iranian deal was not on the deal or a part of any deal according to the report and despite these claims, the u.s. department of treasury at the direction of the u.s. state department was granted a specific license that often the conversion of assets for billions of dollars using the financial system the report goes on to say. going to "the new york times"

this morning, going to the associated press, it's as a judge that advice that could make a president answer things under oath next year in a former defamation suit. host: from clarence, and eagles

fan and charlotte, and north carolina. -- charlotte, north carolina. caller: a couple of points. i'm a black man, and eagles fan, but i agree with what the president did because i think eagles, they was wrong the way they did it. say, i'mings i want to military and i work in the black community. they really want to do something in the black community, there is so much to be done. if they were to come into the black community like i do, helping the people that really need help? not to get on tv? i think a lot of these guys are just talking because i really, if you come to south central los angeles any large city and you see the number of people that don't have food to eat? don't have the things that the kids need, there's so much to be done. host: back to the issue of the cancellation of the event, what do you think about the eagles,

expand on that, the eagles and how they reacted. i'm a vietnam veteran. i have some close friends of mine that were killed. i take it very important, it's very important to me that they respect this country and this flag because i know friends of mine that died, that died for it . just being a black man raised for. host: you think that the eagles should have shown up? caller: you should have. it's not that you support him, but you support the country in the flag. these a lot of young guys, these football players. they've never spend hardship in their life. they've never experienced nobody shooting at them and killing their friends. you will see that this is the greatest country in the world. i have friends that died for it and i appreciate what he did. that was clarence, north carolina. vicki, on the oppose line.

caller: i oppose what the president of the united states did. captain of the ceremonies for the eagles? the reason why i oppose is i feel like the majority of the players are african-american and they work hard to be able to become professionals. they sacrifice a lot. like the previous caller just said, they don't understand about shootings, going home. most of them come from areas of ghettos, different places like that, raised by single parents. i also believe that we as american citizens, you go to the football games, you don't really go for the players to have to stand for the anthem. to me that's a form of slavery and halladay. and that is a form of

suppression. what you are saying to the individual, the only way that you can come up to them is you must obey this. we are not in slavery. so vicki, -- host: what about the actions of the eagles? should they have shown up yesterday? caller: no, they have a right not to show up. first of all, they don't want to go to the white house because our president -- and it hurts me to say this, our president, as an american this hurts me to say this, but our president is rude. he treats people wrong. twitter --guage over maybe he's not even doing it, but someone is keeping up confusion. if that's the case, if the eagles were right in your case, what is wrong with the present canceling the event the eagles were not going to show? the president was wrong

because he uses it as a political toy, he uses it to keep division. the eagles do not have to come. the majority of the main players probably had already decided they weren't going. and as african-americans, if they are in a position to make a statement, we are dependent on them to make that statement. that is a biggie from houston, giving her thoughts this morning. that event yesterday, replacing the eagles coming to the white house. you can find that on our website. here is a portion of that event with president trump. [video clip] country has never done better than it is doing right now. never. record numbers at every outpost. you take a look at what's going on. lowest unemployment numbers we have had. lowest african-american unemployment in the history of our country.

lowest hispanic numbers in the history of our country. women in 21rs for years. trillion ofd $7 value in our country since the election. inare the largest economy the world, and getting a lot larger and fast. it's happening very quickly. actually quicker than i even thought. we are doing great. and all of those people that we many of them are looking down right now, some of them are right here, but many of them are looking down right now at our country and they are proud, they are very, very proud. forwe stand together freedom. we stand together for patriotism. and we proudly stand for our

glorious nation, under god. host: again, if you want to see the whole event, you can do so at c-span.org. the president sending out soupy -- supporting tweets for the gubernatorial race in california. saying great night for republicans. congratulations, it's a big adding thatan win, even fake news cnn said that the trump impact was bigger than i thought possible. so much for the big blue wave, it may be a big red wave." websiteant to go on our right now, or later on today, you can see from earlier on this program the analysis that took place in the first half hour. i will point you to the website. in watertown, south dakota. supporter of the president's actions. hi. there are 75 players and

coaches on the eagles team. all champions are invited to the white house. four players, six coaches and the mascot were going to show up . the rest of them were going to blow the president off. ,f you would have had that deal cnn, msnbc, nbc would be there in droves, taking pictures of the empty seats. there's a lot of -- i voted for trump, there's a lot of things i don't like about him, but he's not stupid. philadelphiayor of , taking a shot at trump because the eagles are being jerks? president is right. can i make a quick comment on the other subject that you were covering on hold? about the former president clinton being on cold air last night? host: actually, we never really kind of talk about that topic, so we will go on to pam, dayton,

ohio. hi. caller: i agree with the decision of the eagles not to go. i think that with president trump said in his speech and he called those men out, their not disrespecting them, it was disrespecting their mothers. i don't think that he would appreciate it if somebody called his young son that word. i don't think it was disrespectful, they were disrespecting the anthem or the flag. a lot of those players have family members that have died in wars, who have fought in wars. so, if you want respect, you give respect. i dig it was ok for them. they didn't want to stand up there was somebody that had called them out, their name, and disrespected their mothers. host: there was a column this morning saying that in past

administrations you have had sports players showing up for the white house, even when they disagreed with the president in the oval office. if that took place then, why not now? -- ir: is not so much mean, not having the same opinions, but the way that he disrespected them and their mothers by calling them so be's, i never heard a president say something like that. to me that's disrespectful and if you want respect, show respect in the office and it will come to you. but if you are going to talk down to someone like that and disrespected them and their mother and you don't even know them? no, i'm not going to stand behind you with a smile on my face. terre haute, indiana. robert in terre haute? hi question mark -- high? -- hi? caller: good morning to you. first of all, most of this by people whoused

are not looking at their part in this. for the most part, i support the president counseling -- canceling for this reason. the president of the united states waved his annual fee as president because he strongly believed in what he believed it was in the best interest of the united states. he had a message and is on a mission. are protesting on the coattails of white billionaires and if they are really passionate about their belief, they will stick their hand in their pocket and they will make it happen on their own platform. that's robert, indiana. amy goldstein reporting on the state of medicare, or at least a key medicare fund this morning, saying that according to the report, less money will be flowing into the hospital care trust fund, in part because of a

tax law this year that causes the government to collect less income tax and lower wages will translate into lower payroll taxes, going on to say that the administrator for the centers of medicare and medicaid services called on congress to embrace medicare proposals in president trump hoss budget -- host: minnesota is next. lauren, supporter of the president's actions. high. hi, yeah, i support a real strongly. these players are a bunch of high paid spoiled brats. seems like they all get a lot of money and they are just spoiled brats. trump hit the nail on the head .hen he called them sob's

that is what most of them are. if they got a real job for less money maybe they would grow up and appreciate america. host: pennsylvania, mary ellen, opposing the effort. hello. it's easy for the president to put his hand to his heart and act patriotic. whenver lifted a finger his country wanted him to serve. blacks have been serving in the military before was even segregated. for him to act as if it is so important that people take any or stand up for during the pledge of allegiance and all of that, it's just very sad. you wonder why people think that trump supporters are not the thinkers. that he could switch the narrative to that and it's really about -- if this were a country where the blacks were a majority and poor black cops --

most cops in america are decent, find people, but the poor black cops were pulling out white boys and shooting them with no accountability? i bet you that white people would be taking a knee and they would think it's great. "the wall street journal" this morning profiling david coke, saying that a letter there incorporated his brothers a decision to deteriorating health -- by the way, he's retiring from both politics and the firm -- the weather going on to say that an undisclosed health issue that had put him in the hospital in the summer of 2016, we are deeply saddened and --

host: lawrence, massachusetts. james? in the nfl, taking in the is not a sign of reverence, it's a sign of timeout or injury , has nothing to do with reverence and i wish people would try to get that out of their mind. two players and a mascot showing up at the white house with the president of the united states would have been a total in -- insult and i agree that the man should not have had them there. and it was the philadelphia team that canceled out, not the president. number three, i'm very disappointed this morning that we have not heard one thing about how the fbi is in the trouble that it is in in the wall street journal and everything else. i will take the comments off-line.

thank you. in a house,eekend someday to keep an eye on as you heard the people reference this morning, the state of the just charge addition -- discharge petition, that will be an issue along with other things. stay with c-span.org for the house in the senate, but as of right now, we take you to the house of representatives. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] --sorry. the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. june 6, 2018. the honorable darell e. issa to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, paul d. ryan, speaker of the house of representatives. the honorable darell e. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker. a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to